BA Management (Split From T5 Thread)

[Airbus Unplugged]

Actually there's a lot in what you say. My preferred action would be a night of the long knives, in which the top three layers of management are summarily dismissed.

The greasy pole that is BA is characterised by syncophantic narcissists who feather their own nests on the hard work of others. Three layers of management would get down to the green shoots of comparatively competent experienced managers, who would no longer have to please the mandarin above, and would compete with his peers to get some fresh growth and inspiration back where it's so desparately needed.

I'm sure those of us in BA can identify the individuals who would feel the axe blow right across the adminisphere.

I think we should promote this idea to all who would listen. Hear, hear Skylion:ok:

[VAFFPAX]

Airbus - Unless there is empirical proof that lopping off the top three tiers of management will improve things, you may not like the results of what you do. There may be some really good managers in the levels you would love to get rid of, and some really bad apples. I guess it's a question of knowing which apples are good and which are bad.

In cases like this it's choosing between the devil you know and the devil you don't. I'm not sure which is worse TBH.

S.

[hunterboy]

I also think that part of the problem is that there is a sizeable minority working for BA that would love to see the company go under. As a BA employee myself, i do find myself wondering if maybe they are right?
Sometimes it is best to start with a clean sheet of paper.

[Hand Solo]

The conventional wisdom in BA was that Gareth Kirkwood was a really good manager. 'Good' is most definitely a relative term in this organisation. The talented left a long time ago for greener pastures.

[Sunfish]

I'm sorry Ladies and Gentlemen, unless the Board is changed, starting with the Chairman, they will hire another CEO exactly like Mr. Walsh.

Don't you understand the irony of a "people oriented" business being chaired by the former Chairman of a Tobacco company?

What does that tell you about the mindset of the Board?

What does that tell you about the people they will approve of in senior management roles?

I'm sorry, but it is not rocket science.

[Re-Heat]

Well I'm buggered if I know any. Rarer than rocking horse s%&*.
Come off it - it is totally ridiculous to suggest that as you don't know any decent managers, that there aren't any.

There are whole swathes of the organisation that are vital, but that those at the front line never meet (whether they should know about them and meet them is a different matter however...cohesion of the organisation would suggest you should know them).

Who for example manages GDS relationships & infrastructure? Outstation safety audits? Lease financing?

Last time I heard, those areas were all working very well and were essential to the operation. Chopping 3 layers of management out totally is simply living in cloud cuckoo land.

None of which rules out the benefit of the blank sheet of paper option...aside from the fact that running an airline is not simply processing passengers, loading the aircraft and flying it from A to B with customer-facing staff (which some people on here seem to believe IS the sum total of what an airline does).

[Re-Heat]

Don't you understand the irony of a "people oriented" business being chaired by the former Chairman of a Tobacco company?

What does that tell you about the mindset of the Board?
Nothing. He is also a Chartered Accountant, and has a great deal of other business experience. Being involved in an airline is no qualification for running it...

[Human Factor]

... as WW is increasingly proving.

[WHBM]

He is also a Chartered Accountant, and has a great deal of other business experience. Being involved in an airline is no qualification for running it...
I constantly argue against this line. It's like saying that The Pope does not need to be a Catholic ........

[VAFFPAX]

Just to qualify my point on the good managers... a good manager is not the one who makes his/her decisions that are popular today or tomorrow or the day after. They make their decisions based on the greater good of their sphere of influence, regardless of whether the decision is popular at the time or not. What makes a great manager is a good manager who manages to convince those in their sphere of influence that what their decision is based on/to achieve is a good thing, and gets them on board.

Of course, the limitation is either undue influence of higher-ups who see a threat, or the inability to effect that decision, and losing the confidence of those below them.

So undoubtedly you will have good managers even if they are not immediately visible. Those who command the respect of their subordinates and their peers, and occasionally even their superiors, tend to be excellent managers. Those are the people you want to keep.

S.

[Hand Solo]

Those who command the respect of their subordinates and their peers, and occasionally even their superiors, tend to be excellent managers. Those are the people you want to keep

I can only think of two of those in all my time in BA Flight Ops. One returned to line flying because he was tired of the politics. The other went to a competitor because he was tired of the politics. Bonus point for any BA pilot who can identify the latter (penalty points if you say the Sz word).

[Re-Heat]

I constantly argue against this line. It's like saying that The Pope does not need to be a Catholic ........
You might, but the reality is that if the airline world lived in a closed world with experience never deriving from elsewhere, then progress elsewhere would never be translated into the aviation world.

Which certainly seems to be what has happened to BA!

[Sunfish]

Re Heat:

Nothing. He is also a Chartered Accountant, and has a great deal of other business experience. Being involved in an airline is no qualification for running it.

I'm sorry Sir, but that's not the point. The Chairman's business experience is irrelevant, because he has no say in anything to do with accounting, and it would be totally wrong for him to get involved anyway.

The function of the Chairman and the Board is to hire the Chief Executive and perform the corporate governance and risk management functions necessary to monitor what the Chief Executive is doing with the business. It's up to the Chief Executive to do the rest. The Board does not originate anything. The CEO does. The Board pokes and prods the CEO's plans and looks for weaknesses, and they had better not find any. That is the required expertise of the Board, corporate governance and risk management skills. A business background in an airline would in my opinion help inform this process. I speak from experience as a CEO (not of an airline!).

If the Board don't like what is being done, then they may give the CEO a chance to correct matters, but usually it means finding a new CEO.

The issue to me is that I cannot think of any less "people oriented" business than the purveying of tobacco. It is therefore a risk in my opinion that in the corporate governance role, the Board hasn't (doesn't /won't) given much consideration to corporate governance and risk management issues surrounding the hapless passengers consigned to T5, or anywhere else in the BA system.....or much thought to "people issues" surrounding the staff.

To put it another way, what sort of person would want to have anything to do with a Tobacco company? What attitudes to their fellow humans might such an appointment demonstrate? How would those attitudes translate into an airline?

Business experience be buggered, we are talking character and attitudes here. If WW went he would be replaced with more of the same.

[Treetops1]

Hand solo I'll have a go,

TB
BB

.

[Hand Solo]

Correct for number two. Don't think I know number one but wasn't who I was thinking of.

[Bill of the Hamptons]

Futher to Sunfish's latest erudite submission , a brief profile of Mr Broughton's career as laid out in the "Daily Torygraph"

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/04/13/ccprof113.xml&CMP=ILC-mostviewedbox

Typical of articles from this august tome there is a fair degree of sycophancy, otherwise access to the "great and good" and associated lunches would be denied, but reading between the lines we can learn a little:

Mr Broughton was academically weak, did not get a degree so became an accountant ie knows the cost of everything but the value of nothing.

Despite this unimpressive beginning he managed to climb up the greasy pole of British American Tobacco, a company with zero interest in the wellbeing of it's customers but quite willing to kill them by the millions, presumably by getting an "MNBH" (Masters in Brown Nosing and Headkicking)

In recent times he was effectively told by St Tone to "get a grip and focus on the big picture", not exactly complementary to a guy purporting to be Chairman of a major company and boss of the CBI. Perhaps Mr Broughton rose to his level of incompetence years ago?

In another article from the "Torygraph", pilots concerns are quoted as being limited to "Sex, Seniority and Salary in that order". Sounds perfectly healthy to me!
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/04/13/ccba113.xml

I think we can safely assume that Mr Broughtons concerns are "Mr Broughton, Mr Broughton's Seniority, and Mr Broughtons continuance on the gravy train. He did not get where he is today by showing the slightest concern for others. So Willie beware, any vote of confidence will certainly mean you will be due for the high jump, if for no other reason than to save that most dear to Mr Broughton,himself.

[Re-Heat]

Sunfish - as you say, the Chairman's business experience - as in the direct industry in which he has worked - is indeed irrelevant. It is his entire business experience as a whole that is important - it is irrelevant if "the issue to me is that I cannot think of any less "people oriented" business than the purveying of tobacco."...he is, as you say, not running the company, and the bread and butter of a Chartered Accountant is risk management and corporate governance.

Whether he is any good at it is a totally different matter, but I hardly see it as relevant whether his past experience was in tobacco, or indeed environmental activism...if he has the skills.

BOTH - Can we just kill posts that sully accountants with the "knows the cost of everything but the value of nothing" brush. It is simply an ignorant generalisation that I am tired of rebutting.

[shoey1976]

BRITISH AIRWAYS STATEMENT: TWO SENIOR MANAGERS LEAVE BRITISH AIRWAYS
British Airways has announced today that Gareth Kirkwood, director of operations, and David Noyes, director of customer services, will be leaving the company.
The airline is looking to appoint a Chief Operations Officer to combine both roles.
The departures follow the airline's move to Terminal 5.
====

anybody surprised?

[Hudson Bay]

BA have sacked two of their most senior managers as a result of the T5 Fiasco.

In addition insurance companies are now refusing to insure your baggage if you travel with British Airways.

I think it is high time Walsh should hand in his resignation.

BRITISH AIRWAYS ARE AN EMBARRESMENT TO BRITAIN.

[Hudson Bay]

Well the sacking has begun. Two senior managers today have been told to walk. Not before time in my opinion.

BA are embarrassing Britain.

[Re-Heat]

What good news!

[Hudson Bay]

Surely it's time the British Government should step in and tell BA to get their act together. In my opinion this will have a major effect on the overall economy especially in the run up to 2012.

This is all a result of those psychometric tests BA put everyone through. They have employed a certain type of person, everybody thinks the same and acts the same. Not a good policy to run a company.

[Mick Stability]

Blaming junior staff for incompetent management is a well 'Round-ed' principle in BA philosophy, practised in many areas.

[Mick Stability]

Not surprised, just exasperated.

These two individuals, despite their crass underperformance, one of them in a VERY public display, are merely symptoms of a malaise that permeates the direction of this once great company.

How can they be blamed for running BA the way Walsh and Broughton want it?

[PPRuNe Pop]

This:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7348401.stm

[Ex Cargo Clown]

Goodbye and good riddance Burkwood.

I pity the next company who gets saddled with this incompetent, characterless fool.

And that's being generous to him.

[Yellow6]

Typical, Operations get the thick end of the stick, who fired the Project and Implementation Managers? Who carried out the acceptance tests and how rigorous was the testing regime?

[VAFFPAX]

Hudson Bay, it is not the government's job to look after BA.

S.

[ETOPS]

Link to BBC article

BBC News (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/7348401.stm)

[The Controlller]

Doughnuts all round

[Splodge2]

:ok:

WW, do the honourable thing and lead from the front by falling on your sword NOW for failing the airline, the airport and the country!

BA needs fresh blood to go through the entire organisation and remove the pompous "we know better than anybody" culture. Also review all expenses, overtime and allowances policies to stop staff profiteering from these draconian agreements!

Ps. WW you dont pick up any goldern handshake either and I hope the other two didnt!

:D

[slip and turn]

I sincerely hope there are good managers left at BA continuing to do good work, but these sackings of important directors without announcement of who has replaced them are just evidence of a witch hunt not evidence of the operations of a well managed airline. Can an airline remain within the terms of its AOC if it has no nominated or approved Operations Director?

Would someone care to come on here and confirm that BA do still have their eye on the ball, please, and that the CAA are still regulating this sorry excuse of an organisation?

[Capvermell]

I pity the next company who gets saddled with this incompetent, characterless fool.

He has been fired so publicly for such heinous incompetence (the immediate cause being showing complete contempt and total disregard for responding in a civilised manner to legitimate questions from the national media never mind his more general tendency towards living in a fantasy land of corporate buzz word speak denial regarding the real state of affairs at T5) that it is hard to see almost any headhunter who would actually be able to find a job for him anywhere.

However I expect someone with his general capacity for constant press on positivity in the face of all the facts might possibly find a job as a sales adviser at a downmarket chain of estate agents!

The only thing that puzzles me though is how the final line manager of these two gentleman at BA has so far avoided paying a similar price and why no one at BAA (who surely were also under a duty to ensure that BA could operate their side of the baggage chain successfully before allowing the terminal to open not to mention checking themselves that the lifts worked and that the terminal was properly signed) has also fallen on their sword, or should I say been beheaded.

[Hand Solo]

And to think Kirkwood applied for the position of Director of Flight Ops at BA. Can you imagine reporting directly to him? CFIT never sounded so good!

[Dysag]

I am not BA. So could someone please tell me what Kirkwood was good at, and what he can offer his next employer, if any.
Same question for Willy Was.

Having said that, "total disregard for responding in a civilised manner to journos" is fully in the spirit of PPrune, no?

Re "corporate buzz word speak", I fear Brits are more guilty than most.
Maybe Rod Eddington or Dame Edna could recommend some Aussies ready to cry 'Bollocks' or 'Cut the Crap' every time some half educated idiot pipes up with it.

In the end, it's the listener's job to cut the bull****ter down, or hold shut up. If you don't cry out, the c*nt will continue to climb the greasy pole. Same in politics.

[Capvermell]

I am not BA. So could someone please tell me what Kirkwood was good at, and what he can offer his next employer, if any. Same question for wee willy wash.

A google search for "Gareth Kirkwood" and "shambolic" or "Gareth Kirkwood" and "incompetent" yields quite a few hits.

So he must be highly qualified in "shambolic incompetence"!

Also several Google hits for "Gareth Kirkwood" and "arrogant" too so he must also be well qualified in that area too. Hang on though as I see that a search for "Willie Walsh" against the same words on Google seems to yield an equally significant number of hits.;)

[sanjosebaz]

Seems that BA Investor Relations are yet to catch up!... http://www.bashares.com/phoenix.zhtml?c=69499&p=irol-govBio&ID=157604

[SeLFish_Flyer]

This is the bit that got me from the BBC article.

"The company said it would now look to appoint one person to cover both roles. "

So the airline is in a mess, T5 in a mess...so what do they do? Yup they sack 2 Senior Managers and decide one person can do the job. Now maybe I am missing something, but isn't this a time for ensuring you have adequate staff doing the job and not just promoting one yes man into a position where he will be too busy to talk to staff and customers and put right the wrongs? Or maybe that is the ploy, keep him so busy he cannot speak to the staff! Maybe the BALT do now want to hear from the people at the cliff face.

[Capt.KAOS]

Interesting comments on Kirkwood here, quite different as in the Graudian: (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/apr/15/britishairwaysbusiness.theairlineindustry)

BA sources said the prevailing mood inside the airline's Waterside headquarters at Heathrow was one of "sadness" this morning, reflecting the high regard in which Kirkwood and Noyes were held by staff.

[Capvermell]

In that Guardian article there is also the following quote from Wee Willie:-

www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/apr/15/britishairwaysbusiness.theairlineindustry (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2008/apr/15/britishairwaysbusiness.theairlineindustry)

In an interview with guardian.co.uk the day after the botched opening, Walsh was asked if Kirkwood was in the firing line. He said: "I am accepting responsibility. I am not going to start trying to find someone else to be pointing the finger at." Using a phrase he repeated in a statement and a series of media interviews that day, he added: "The buck stops with me."

Has Wee Willie now changed his mind then?

[markrl]

I notice in todays Daily Mail that the British Insurance Industry is telling people this summer that if they use BA and Terminal 5 its at their own risk, they will not be paying out for lost bags or delays etc as they are only insured for unforeseen problems. People already booked will be covered but for new business - No Way :ooh:

[slip and turn]

Let's be clear that the reports on the effects on travel insurance are extremely loosely stated and that the RBS/Directline spokeswoman did the insurance industry no favours with the rubbish statements she was reported to have made.

The cute-minded amongst us might be tempted to call the future loss of a T5 bag a forseeable event, but it isn't - it's a simply an enhanced probability of a size that can be obtained from BA if someone at RBS is bright enough to pick up the phone and launch the right kind of persuasive enquiry. The risk is evidently still insurable by those insurers like Norwich Union who have bravely chosen to absorb the problem, and who have slightly more maturity as market operators than any of the RBS owned johnny-come-lately insurers.

In fact loss of a T5 bag is still insured under existing RBS/Directline etc. policies, too, and will remain so beyond renewal unless RBS/Directline clearly interrogate each of their customers and deny cover, or write it clearly out of their policy wording. If they decline any claims going forward on the basis of this forseeable event nonsense then I think they will very quickly get their collars felt by the Financial Ombudsman.

RBS/Directline are quoted as suggesting that their renewal and new business customers are obliged to declare any intention to use T5 as if it is a material fact. The enhanced risk at T5 isn't a material fact. It is public domain information so it is the insurer's lookout and they must clearly exclude it or not exclude it or ask a specific question and charge extra for it right from start of policy or renewal. RBS/Directline absolutely must not be allowed to bastardise well tested insurance principles for their own dubious marketing ends.

[Hand Solo]

I wonder if slip and turn works in the insurance industry.:ok:

[slip and turn]

Ha! Keep wondering HS :ok:

[Capvermell]

Let's be clear that the reports on the effects on travel insurance are extremely loosely stated and that the RBS/Directline spokeswoman did the insurance industry no favours with the rubbish statements she was reported to have made.

This lady is clearly another unthinking corporate yes person who will shortly be asked to fall on their sword I would suggest. What about passengers who unexpectedly have their flight diverted from Birmingham to T5 or whatever. Are they still not covered even though they could not have foreseen travelling through the Terminal when they effected the policy?

Surely the government itself will be leaning on the insurers over this issue as if RBS and co are allowed to get away with it then it effectively threatens total disaster for BA in particular and also to a lesser extent for the BAA. The appropriate response by insurers here is surely to raise premiums for travel insurance policies that include baggage cover sold to those living at postcodes within a so many mile radius of Heathrow airport.

[Hand Solo]

Dysag - your theory is built upon the massive assumption that the management listen or care when BOLLOCKS is shouted.

[Southernboy]

Just heard on BBC Gareth Kirkwood is leaving BA. Along with the customer services manager.

[Capvermell]

Workers get the managers they deserve. Having been witness to highly educated (à la French business school) managers being cut to shreds by typically frank Aussies, I repeat my point.

That usually only works if you are acting in unison with all your fellow employees and preferably with a union behind you.

Alternatively you can only take such action on your own if you wanted to leave the company anyway and are happy to depart in a final blaze of glory. It also helps to have lined up a job with a new employer first so that any references from your old employer will have been written and taken up before you chose to defy your superiors.

[FlyingTom]

RBS are a big corporate customer of BA. Hope they are going to fry Willie at their next meeting.

Probably looking for a discount on their BACF LCY-EDI shuttle. The banking world is a towering example of competence to us all at the moment too.

[Hand Solo]

Dysag - the passage of time revealed that most of the protestors in Bucharest didn't actually realise they were protesting. They had simply heard others chanting and assumed that it must have been officially approved so they had better chant to or they'd be for the high jump. Now unless you are suggesting all BA staff skip their shifts, assemble chanting outside Waterworld then hunt down and kill the executive management I'm not really sure what relevance the fall of Ceaucescu has. I've personally told the CEO and the Chairman, not to mention more junior managers who have solicited my opinion, of the flaws in the business we see exposed every single day. I'm not the only one. Did it change anything? I'll let you guess.

[marlowe]

Is he actually leaving BA or is he being withdrawn from the frontline of T5 and sent sideways?

[AtoBsafely]

Maybe he just went downstairs looking for his bags.....

[HZ123]

Please be assured that both will be leaving with a tidy sum in the bin. I very much doubt that it will cause them to lose too much sleep. I feel sure all pruners will join me in wishing them every success with their next airline.

[3Greens]

i hope that last post was tongue in cheek; this ppruner certainly does not wish those two tossers every future success :mad: these two are largely responsible for the complete balls up of the last couple of weeks. As far as i'm concerned they aren't fit to sweep the streets. :mad:

[Southernboy]

Not just that balls up either. The surprise is GK lasted as long as he did. says something about the way BA's been run over th the last few years.

[evenflow]

3Greens - you offend street sweepers everywhere

[Ancient Observer]

Looking at all the posts on the various BA sites, it would seem to me that BA managers and staff deserve each other.
They do not deserve paying passengers/customers, so will go the way of the dodo......like GEC/Marconi.

[Terminal 5]

One reason that they could have gone is that they knew about the T5 problems before it opened and failed to pass it upwards, or that they didn't know as it had been kept quiet from those below, but they are the public hangings.

I guess there will be more axe swinging to come as all those directly below now report in to the CEO!

A lot of BA's problems also come from the bottom, the immense powers of the unions are testimony to that. BA needs a top to bottom clean out.

To the unions, and managers, evolve or die, or there will be no BA as we know it, you have seen what the CEO will do and I don't think he, if he lasts, or his successor, will have any hesitation in swinging the axe again!!!

And to clarify by criticising the Unions here I am not having a go at the frontline staff, it is some of the 'reps' who claim to represent you, some who haven't done a days work in years while raking in stupid amounts of money for the job they should be doing!

BA needs a massive culture change from both sides, staff and management.

[RAT 5]

What you should be really worried about is having a CEO who thinks that the same peson can be in charge, organise, and be responsible for Ground Operations AND Flight operations. That is a disaster waiting to happen. They are different worlds and need different skills & knowledge. Every airline I've worked for who has put a Ground person in charge of Air Ops has been an unmitagted complete total catasrophe. That's the trouble when most Airlines (airborne services) employ ground people to be CEO's and expect them to understand how it is done. You don't employ a physio to be a football manager. I agree that not all footbalers make good managers, but find me a good manager who was not a footballer at some level.
OK, not all pilots make good CEO's, perhaps because they haven't had the complete bean counters' education, but in the back ground, and as chief advisor there should someone who knows about aeroplanes and what they need to make them tick. That, and the crews, engineers, ops staff etc and what makes them tick. Then you have a chance. Bean counters are interestd in short-term profit and share price. No long-term thinking. No experience.
Where's the Alex Ferguson of airline management? Success and longevity, plus a no B.S. attitude.

[747-436]

What you should be really worried about is having a CEO who thinks that the same peson can be in charge, organise, and be responsible for Ground Operations AND Flight operations.

To clarify the Director Of Flight Operations is in charge of flight Ops, WW is now in charge of the department that looks after the cabin crew, not the pilots and the associated bits of running Flt Ops.

[Capvermell]

The main question is how much have they been paid to go without a fight and to not talk to the press by slagging off Willy Walsh and the rest of the Board (although we know Kirkwood hates talking to the press).

Given how long Kirkwood has been at BA and subsidiaries (basically all his career) he would obviously go to an Employment Tribunal unless he was being offered a huge payoff or other guarantees. If they are being asked to take the blame and go without a fuss if I were them I would want at least three years salary and my pension contribution paid for the same period.

If they went to an Employment Tribunal I am sure they could prove that the malaise leading to the T5 problems extended much wider and went as far as the CEO and the Chairman themselves. They would point to huge corporate pressures from the two top men (CEO and Chairman) to say the Terminal would open on time no matter what and their, in effect, having no option but to go along with this and make the best of it.

They must have already been offered a cosy well paid transfer to somewhere else in the airline industry or massive payoffs not to fight this all the way. Especially when Walsh had previously said the buck stopped with him. Can you imagine the chairman of an Employment Tribunal questioning Walsh on that buck stops here point. The media would have an absolute field day.

By the way they obviously have not fallen on their swords. They are merely accepting an apparent public beheading in return for some kind of secret deal to protect their future if they agree not to go to a Tribunal hearing.

[VAFFPAX]

Capvermell, that is usually the case yes.

"Leave quietly and without a fuss, and we'll chuck enough money your way that you're well off until you find some other company to pay your way" sounds all too familiar.

Please VA/BMI boys and girls... let us know when he arrives in your offices as the new something or other, so that we can at least send our condolences.

:*

S.

[DozyWannabe]

To be fair, if what I've been reading is right, this isn't an issue that is restricted to BA, or even British businesses - in fact it's a phenomenon that started in the States.

Relying on theoretical training in business is fine to actually pass the MBA, but the assumption on the part of a subset of management is that it does away with the need for practical experience, which is a load of ****e. Working in isolation using charts and figures is one thing, but by reducing the people your workforce to resources that can do measurable units of work means you miss out on a very important layer of detail - so you could be merging two groups of people who have an animosity to one another, but you won't know about it, and expect them to work together flawlessly when you take them out of their comfort zone.

Another symptom of this management style is that you'll do whatever it takes to present a rose-tinted picture to those above you, rather than being honest about any problems you may be having - this just stores up problems that end up exploding at the time you really should be doing nothing more than dotting the 'i's and crossing the 't's at the end of the project.

There needs to be a culture of honesty at every level, from the shop floor through management right up to the senior and executive level and this means there also needs to be a non-punitive attitude from the top down, at least at the beginning of a project. If you tell the people working for you that heads will roll if there's the slightest bit of bad news early on, then they're not going to be honest with you when they and their staff are struggling and you're going to sail on in blissful ignorance until you're left with a huge steaming pile exposed to the world, wondering what the hell happened.

Fundamentally the culture among executives in the West is completely backwards. At the very top, even if you screw up completely, you'll be sent on your way with a lucrative golden parachute. OK, your reputation will be in tatters, but the money means that you'll be able to cushion that and still live extremely comfortably with some canny investments (and you'll be able to afford the accountant to do that for you). This is where Asian businesses have it right. If an executive fails, there are negative repercussions for them as well as for the company and shareholders.

I'm reminded of the story of the groundie who messed up and nearly killed a very skilled and famous pilot. The following day, not only did the pilot tell the foreman not to fire the groundie, but he personally requested him to work on his aircraft the next time out, because after making such a huge mistake, he'd work much more carefully in future. If it were up to me a failing executive would have their bonus for that year nullified and their pay reduced, then have them put them in charge of cleaning up the mess they made, along with someone competent to co-operate with them and point out where they went wrong. If they refuse this, then off they go, with no incentive.

Of course in today's climate where a CEO will refuse to sign on unless they have ****-up insurance in the form of a golden parachute such a thing would be impossible, but it's nice to dream.

[Nigel_the_Normal]

Come on "900".

What have you got to say then? Let's have your management bullsh1t about this.

Unless you are Noise or Deadwood of course.....

[saintjoseph]

Bean counters are interestd in short-term profit and share price. No long-term thinking. No experience... to quote RAT5


just commenting on your quote. short term profit at what price? share price predicted to hit 170 on the LSE site this afternoon. no one's winning here. what does it take for the board to smell the coffee? are they even aware that they're about to be hit by a double whammy from both balpa and then cabin crew? what the hell is going on in this company? has anybody got their finger on the pulse? only a total overhaul will repair the damage done. and yes, that includes unions as well. i think it's possible jim, but not as we know it!:8

[PAXboy]

My congratulations to WW. He has saved his job for now. By doing the standard 'Axe a couple of them and take personal control', he has bought himself six months. He might still lose but not by as much.

The Board do not want to see him go - whatever they might think of him - because the instability in front of the shareholders would be very bad. If they drop him earlier than planned, they will all get away with it. So, Well Done Willie. :D

[Sunfish]

There is an old joke about the life cycle of projects. They go through six stages:

Enthusiasm

Disillusionment

Panic

A Search for the Guilty

The Punishment of the Innocent

Praise and Honour for the Non-Participants.

I think various bits of each stage get mixed up. We have seen a bit of all of these. But there is much more to come. A few observations below:

Firstly, I think the two that have left are sacrificial lambs. I don't know them, I don't work for BA. I saw a picture of Mr. Kirkwood on Pprune, and my immediate thought was "this guy is way too young to have the life experiences (especially of failure) necessary to do that job". I've still got the scars from learning what "sending a boy to do a man's job" actually means.


T5:

One reason that they could have gone is that they knew about the T5 problems before it opened and failed to pass it upwards, or that they didn't know as it had been kept quiet from those below, but they are the public hangings

As for either of these people telling (warning) their boss that there were problems that needed to be attended to, that is impossible. All I can say is that if you try and tell a narcissist that their plans are flawed you will earn their undying hatred and be sacked as soon as it is convenient - I've seen it happen. I would also expect that Mr. Walsh sends out very strong signals about what he wants to hear and doesn't want to hear. That of course assumes that the Gentlemen concerned had the experience necessary to know that there were problems.

Direct reporting to Mr. Walsh

That tells me three things.

1. The managers were fired, not for bad planning, etc., but because they couldn't make T5 work as advertised right now.

2. Mr. Walsh has yet to panic. He does not yet know enough to panic.

3. I fail to understand how direct reporting to Mr. Walsh is going to do much to solve the problem. I expect that the poor schmucks who are the deputy managers will spend half their day writing daily progress reports and the other half on Mr. Walsh's carpet being berated.

Appointment of a Chief Operations Officer

Mr. Walsh will no doubt think that this is a blessing, since in theory it insulates him from any operational responsibility and of course, the T5 fiasco.

If I was Mr. Walsh, I would be rather worried, since my guess is that the COO is going to replace Mr. Walsh as CEO, perhaps rather quickly, once they have their feet under the table and can demonstrate performance and impress the Board by doing something about T5.

If Mr. Walsh is very lucky this might happen by giving him a seat on the Board, but I doubt it.

As for the COO him(her)self, that appointment is going to be one that is often advertised under the byline "Make your Mark" and the blurb describes the job as "challenging". The phrase "cleaning the Augean stables" comes to mind. I don't think I'll apply.


However, we are not yet at the stage of "full blown panic" over T5. Mr. Walsh does not yet realise that the problems of T5 are likely systemic, at which time new consultants will be employed. It is only when their report is received and the scale of the mess becomes clear, that the Board will panic and Mr. Walsh will leave.

Praise and Honour for the Non-Participants.

When it becomes clear that the T5 debacle has the ability to negatively affect the Olympics, I suspect that a certain Chairman will receive a peerage and depart for greener fields, to be replaced by someone to preside over a "business transformation program" (with lots of money for the consultants) to clean up the mess. Yes, BA is a private company, but it's not that "Private" if you know what I mean.

Dozywannabe:

Of course in today's climate where a CEO will refuse to sign on unless they have ****-up insurance in the form of a golden parachute such a thing would be impossible, but it's nice to dream.

I share all your Pollyanna-ish sentiments expressed in your post except this one. Yes management should be leading by example from the top down and truth and honesty should be the coin of your corporate culture.

However.....Let me say that nobody is going to take on the thankless task of running and fixing BA without a golden parachute and spectacular annual emoluments for a number of reasons.

(a) The job is 24/7. You are investing all your energy in such a project. People who can successfully do this stuff do not grow on trees, nor can any "wannabe" walk off the street and do it.

(b) Success is not certain, even if you are highly competent and make zero mistakes. At some point, whether you succeed or fail, the Board will tell you to leave. You face public humiliation if you fail.

(c) If I work my @rse off, as a result making billions of dollars for the shareholders, then I expect some of it to attach itself to my sticky fingers. It's only fair.

(d) If you want me to work my @rse off, then it's better that I'm not worrying about my mortgage or school fees isn't it? (Same applies to pilots)

[windytoo]

Gordon Brown has said that he "will have to take some difficult and unpopular decisions to try and ease the problems with the UK's economy". I guess he is going to be employing Mr. Kirkwood in the near future then. They should work well together!!

[Capvermell]

just commenting on your quote. short term profit at what price? share price predicted to hit 170 on the LSE site this afternoon

Got to be a buying opportunity here as although this is a mess I suspect it will be turned round in the end and T5 will be running smoothly by some point in 2009. Don't forget that when this does happen connecting through T5 for BA's regional passengers and passengers originating in Europe and changing to long haul at Heathrow becomes a much smoother and easier experience than T1 to T4 transfer was.

What price to buy at - 150 or 130 or could they go as low as nearly 100p per share? Remember how fast the share price recovered in the end after the 9/11 crisis. The oil price is going to continue to rise but may be the worst is over for now.

[Sunfish]

Cappy, I think you are right, at some point BA is going to be a buying opportunity, but the difficult point is determining when.

Are the problems of T5 systemic or transitional? What is going to be the effect of oil prices?

"Buy in gloom and sell in boom."

[rebellion]

You get better service with Ryanair.

I never thought I'd say that.

[TartinTon]

Perhaps it's not just the w*****s drinking cappuccinos at Waterside but also the 1960's work practices and petty T4 vs T1 arguments that go on amongst the airside living organ donors? BA needs to sort out the whole operation and stop being dictated to by the moronic union reps who still think old shredded wheat head Scargill was JC reincarnated.

[saintjoseph]

capvermell/sunfish
seem to recall post 9/11 low point shares hit the 90's. takes a year or so to really turn round an oil tanker! especially keeping the same skipper on board. with mega mergers, klm, delta etc, are ba really ready to step up to the plate. it looks like chelsea at the moment. front line/players stumbling along while the backroom boys haven't got a clue. and yes united (mufc) deserve team/airline of the year!!!:ok:

[Sunfish]

ReHeat, speaking of the Chairman of BA:

Whether he is any good at it is a totally different matter, but I hardly see it as relevant whether his past experience was in tobacco, or indeed environmental activism...if he has the skills.

ReHeat, the Chairman has the final say in who the Directors are, and perhaps more importantly, who the CEO is, and they will hire people who "mirror' their own values and behaviours.

To put it another way, someone who is quite happy Chairing a Company selling a toxic addictive product that kills millions of people each year is going to hire a Board and a CEO that mirrors exactly these same values and behaviours.

That is why you have got WW You wouldn't have him if the Chairman didn't get on with him, and WW wouldn't have accepted the job unless he was happy working for someone with that background. It's as simple as that.

Would you work for the Tobacco industry or for someone strongly associated with that industry? Sorry, I won't, because at some point the nasty rotten personal qualities possessed by someone associated with selling that product are going to show through.

To put it another way, the Chairman ain't no saint, and if you work for him, then you are no saint either, and so on and so on..

The trouble Reheat is that the attitude of the Board and CEO then cascades down the management of the business because managers hire and promote people who mirror their values and behaviour. The arrogance starts at the top, and by all accounts now has cascaded down to all the lower levels of BA management.

[Lord Bracken]

Capvermell two points. First, the Guardian reckon that Kirkwood and Noyes have gone straight on gardening leave which would indicate that terms and conditions of their departure have yet to be finalised. If so, the resulting "discussions" could be an interesting management diversion in the months ahead.

Second, I flew back from Lisbon on BA a couple of days ago and we were an hour late leaving Lisbon due to "late arrival of the aircraft incoming into Heathrow from Madrid and also heavy rain at Heathrow."

Since March 27, all BA's 757 fleet are now running the LIS, BCN, MAD, NCE and HEL services out of Terminal 1.

Now, how can you tell me that in 2009 T5 will be perfect, when at the moment BA can't even run a single-fleet operation to five destinations out of one half-empty terminal with any degree of robustness in the schedule? Hint: the answer begins with H and ends in W....

Regards, Bracken.

[Capvermell]

Are the problems of T5 systemic or transitional? What is going to be the effect of oil.

The T5 problems are transitional I would say, largely caused by opening the Terminal before it was finished or properly tested. The bag store part of the baggage system does sound like a bit of a vastly over ambitious technological black hole that may be wildly unrealistic for the amount of baggage it has to store. One computer glitch and it all goes pair shaped with no apparent manual fallback position. Somebody also needs to challenge the complete obsession with security that makes manual fallback arrangements such as passengers moving their own bags to and from the gates as a last resort prohibited.

This seems to be a failing though of modern airport terminals that are too big and spread out for their own good. At ludicrously sprawling single terminal Palma (Majorca) airport if the computerised baggage season goes U/S in peak season then all check in also has to stop because the distance to the gates (up to 1km) is so ridiculously large that passengers are not thought to be able to cope (also the security scanning arrangements designed for hand luggage probably could not cope). In high season in July and August Palma can be significantly busier in terms of passenger numbers than Gatwick. The total annual passenger throughput of single terminal Palma (two old terminals tacked together by a monstrous new central building now handling all checkin and baggage reclaim and with numerous additional highly remote gates involving very long walks added) is about the same as the projected final capacity of T5. Terminals this big with a single baggage system mean disaster on a much bigger scale when things go wrong. The only reason Palma does not regularly implode is because almost no one changes flights so the consequences of bagage system failure are less disastrous and vast amounts of baggage are not kicking around in the system waiting to move from one flight to the other.

Not so sure about the oil price outlook. However BA is not based on a fast passenger growth model like Ryanair or Easyjet and the world as a whole is getting richer so they ought to be able to sustain current passenger numbers barring a total global economic meltdown. If air travel becomes vastly more expensive in real terms due to oil pice then those who can still afford to travel at all may prefer a quality operator like BA. Ryanair and Easyjet have far more to fear from plans to curb growth in total passenger numbers and airport capacity by western governments for environmental and global warming agenda type reasons. If passenger growth stops and their ticket prices double or treble due to higher oil costs then their business models (with huge commitments to new aircraft deliveries) may implode.

[AC-DC]

Don't know what they talk about.
I am a PPL and when my destination is more than 7h flight (@160KTS true)I fly as a '.Self Loading Cargo'. I stoped using BA 5-6 years as I don't like to be treated as a 'Loaded Cargo'. No one can harm BA reputation, it is non existent.

[marlowe]

I would imagine that Willy would not want these guys outside peeing into the tent so i reckon that Cityflyer and/or the openskies operation might be seeing some new faces. Then theoretically they have been sacked by BA but are still controllable by them.

[vanHorck]

It s time to close this thread.... nothing new under the sun, except the new thread about Kirkwood.

We re in the next phase now. It s an illusion to think that ranting here will get WW out. This is now in the hands of the shareholders

[118.70]

I see in the Telegraph that Noyes "supervised staff training". Is this true ? Was there any ?

Directors share dealing reports show that Broughton and Walsh bought shares around 460p in May 2007. What price can be expected in May 2008 ?

I found "Lessons learned from Terminal 5"

http://www.smeweb.com/management/features/lessons-learned-from-heathrow-terminal-5.html

interesting and wondered how many really applied.

I happened on a remaindered copy of "Go" by Barbara Cassani last week and was impressed by the story. Key for me was Jane Willacy with proper project planning and an understanding of task dependencies ; a deliberate ploy of getting a team of different people who could complement each other in skills and personalities (not perhaps the clones who have the same psychometric profiles someone mentioned) ; a regular open review of the Opprtunities and Risk list with encouragement to raise worries and report successes..................

[Magplug]

Shoey.... Perhaps you should ask the BA Press Office what the terms of departure of these two morons will amount to ?

I'll wager it will be a handsome reward for f***ing up the opening of T5 and making a laughing stock of UK & BA all the way around the world.

[Capvermell]

I happened on a remaindered copy of "Go" by Barbara Cassani last week and was impressed by the story. Key for me was Jane Willacy with proper project planning and an understanding of task dependencies ; a deliberate ploy of getting a team of different people who could complement each other in skills and personalities (not perhaps the clones who have the same psychometric profiles someone mentioned) ; a regular open review of the Opprtunities and Risk list with encouragement to raise worries and report successes..................

Yes Go was a wonderful success story of good management and good quality customer service just like GB Airways but unfortunately in each case they have been swallowed up by the more muscular corporate forces of Easyjet and faced with the inevitable the management of each company decided it was time to ride off in to the sunset with their piles of lovely lucre rather than settle for rather less financially and preserve the high quality product they had created (by selling to a higher quality operator who could not offer them quite as high a price). Unfortunately in business these days size and financial brawn seem to be far more important than offering top quality customer service and a top class product.:sad:

[BEagle]

Perhaps Kirkwood and Noyes are leaving ba so that they can turn their undoubted skills to running 'Open Skies'?

OK, OK - I'll get my coat......

[Capvermell]

I am a PPL and when my destination is more than 7h flight (@160KTS true)I fly as a '.Self Loading Cargo'. I stopped using BA 5-6 years as I don't like to be treated as a 'Loaded Cargo'. No one can harm BA reputation, it is non existent.

OK but that means you mainly avoid BA for long haul where there are better choices available on many routes.

If we are talking short haul then due to your PPL I take it you never travel with Easyjet or Ryanair. If you had ever done so then you would have learned what travelling cattle class by air is really like. The charter operators actually pack you in tighter than EZY or FR do but in most cases their staff act with both professionalism and reasonable courtesy.

It is hard to known which of these two "low cost" carriers is worse. Ryanair is undoubtedly worse on the ground where they treat with arrant contempt and total inhumanity any inmate who doesn't follow the prison camp rules to the precise and frequently unreasonable letter (and in many cases they don't stick to those rules either but pretend they have and you the passenger are at fault). On the other hand Easyjet is significantly worse than Ryanair in the air with their kiss me quick ex Dan Air cabin crew approach where no attempt whatsoever is made to show any culture of professionalism or respect for the passenger - catering choices are also worse than Ryanair. Unless they have changed (after various bad experiences I finally vowed never to travel with them under any circumstances) Easyjet is significantly better than Ryanair on the ground as they will at least transfer passengers who show up a few minutes late to the next available flight free of charge (unlike Ryanair who will always charge you a rebooking fee and show total inhumanity about your already totally ruined day) although like Ryanair they still inflexibly and unreasonably always refuse to board passengers who are late for check-in, even when the flight is running 45 minutes or an hour late and your day is already ruined.

BA may not be Singapore Airlines, or even Virgin, but shorthaul it is most definitely luxury class compared to Lousyjet and LyingAir

[raveng]

Well said TartinTom, T1 vs T4 staff and the atiquated work practices there need to be sorted. As for other posts, alot of these Waterside coffee drinkers have volunteered - YES that's right vounteered to help our customers and try to take a bit of the strain from our colleagues at the coalface -NO OVERTIME. These Waterside coffee drinkers, so easily dismissed by numerous mosts on various threads, haven't always worked behind the scenes. Alot of us have worked in the terminals in previous roles at BA. The them and us bit:mad:hing doesn't help!!

[slip and turn]

Capvermell, I think you are living in a make believe era of days gone by.

Five years ago you were right and I said so in BA surveys. Today I would quite seriously be more worried about a flight by BA than a flight by EZY or FR. Because I no longer know who is committed to excellence and who is not. I am no supporter of FR or the way they do things, but they do have an amazing reliability record, an amazingly cheap fare structure, and because they largely use small airports in Europe grateful for their business, the baggage handling (if you bother to use it on top of your gratis 10kg cabin allowance) always seems problem free apart from some mid-winter midnight bunfights coming back into BAA's Stansted on a bad weather day.

FR's cabin crew were wobbly for short periods over the last five years, but the current batch seem quite smart and committed. Not perfect, and you have to wonder about how effective some of the youngsters might be in an emergency when you see them receiving training mid-flight on such things as where the galley light switches are when its dark and they need to find something...yes I'll admit I watched that the other night...

EZY's cabin crew today are as almost as good as BA's five years ago. They are smart, authoritative and I believe I would trust them to command me on an emergency evacuation.

The problem with BA today is that it is has these past few weeks been skirting meltdown, worse than any of the other times we remember on WW's watch. Earlier I asked who is Operations Director now? Is this currently a properly regulated airline? WW himself seems to have assumed responsibility for all operations?? How can he do that and the CAA let him?

I see the man on tv and I don't think he can cope with all that he has now taken on, principally because I do not believe he can even get his hands around it. He is winging it and that worries me in an airline.

[Capvermell]

Five years ago you were right and I said so in BA surveys. Today I would quite seriously be more worried about a flight by BA than a flight by EZY or FR. Because I no longer know who is committed to excellence and who is not. I am no supporter of FR or the way they do things, but they do have an amazing reliability record, an amazingly cheap fare structure, and because they largely use small airports in Europe grateful for their business, the baggage handling (if you bother to use it on top of your gratis 10kg cabin allowance) always seems problem free apart from some mid-winter midnight bunfights coming back into BAA's Stansted on a bad weather day.

I have always historically felt Ryanair was worth it despite the erratic service (especially on the ground rather than in the air) because some of the fares were so absurdly cheap. Easyjet never seemed worth it because I only ever book with less than 6 weeks to go and they never have cheap fares that close to departure. Ryanair still have very cheap fares in their regular sale offers as long as you are not below 2 weeks to departure. In January they were even offering cheap fares as long as it was over 1 week to departure. Marrakech for just over £20 each return including taxes as long as you took no hold luggage!

The Easyjet brand is for me totally destroyed by their historically rigid fares structure of never having offers nearer departure and what used to be the total contempt of their cabin crew for anything approaching customer service. Also the fact that no customer service correspondence was ever replied to by Easyjet in Stelios days.

My short haul experiences of BA in recent times have mainly been through Gatwick with the GB franchise operation which used BA colours but was a whole lot better than BA. Sadly this is now subsumed in to Easyjet. I suppose many of the staff have transferred but I bet many of them leave in the longer run due to the "you are just a number" approach to staff at Easyjet compared to the warm family like approach of GB management.

I lost patience with Easyjet when no member of senior management ever responded to a single one of my emails at any time and they also lacked any imagination regarding fare structures for those who travel regulalry on their leisure routes but cannot book 6 or even 3 months ahead. If they have now changed well it is news for me because they destroyed the brand to a point where I would no longer ever travel with them. However that is clearly a very dangerous lesson for BA in the light of recent events.

[ICEHOUSES]

CAPVERMELL

Not sure how you mean that BA short haul is luxury class..I myself am a regular user of BA short haul at LGW and think the service is terrible compared to EZY, old aircraft, dated interiors, poor customer service and lost baggage issues, recently travelled to TLS and BA lost my bags for 48hrs (I checked in 3 hrs prior) , the aircraft I travelled on had many cabin defects , broken seats and trim etc, and not too clean either, I used EZY 319 on the same route a few weeks later and could not fault them, and will in future..

[Tight Accountant]

Just wading into the debate to protect my kith and kin. Not quite sure what the bean counters have got to do with the T5 debacle. On the face of it, the failures seem to be the classic mistake of lack of sufficient user testing to identify potential problems. Or in short, poor planning. I doubt the BA accountants would have turned around to Mr.Kirkwood and said "we don't have enough working capital for detailed testing, guv'". Maybe there was a tight budget, I don't know. Sure, the Bean Counters may say the 'economics don't add up' but ultimately it is senior managers or the Board who have the final say. (Admittedly, the Director of Finance will have a lot of sway, depending on how savvy they are).

As for the dip in the BA share price, given the record high in the oil price, $113 a barrel, and the dent in customer confidence T5 has had, I not surprised it's gone south.

[BAMANAGER]

As I said earlier in this thread, this week would be interesting. These two resignations just the first news in the restoration of this once great airline. I suspect by the weekend we'll be getting some more welcomed news. The call for WW's resignation is reaching fever pitch. How long can he brazen it out?

[BAMANAGER]

I see that Dear Gordon didn't use BA on his trip today to the United States, completely avoiding T5. Was this as a result of his need to arrive as planned with bags? I suspect so, with the head of goverment avoiding BA that's another great message. Avoid them like the plague!!!

[yes.way]

just a thought.

Why is everyone blaming BA? Surely the BAA own and are responsible for the infrastructure of T5?

They admitted it was there fault over the baggage yet because of the media everyone still blames BA for all that went wrong.

Yes BA have to learn from what happened but they are not fully responsible for baggage belts, air bridges, trains, esculators etc that don't work.

Maybe it is time for people to realise BA is restricted by LHR. Check the preformance at LGW it is vastly different. Much better baggage delivery and 83 percent on time!

The government should take some responability for not supplying a premier gateway to our country, instead they worry they will lose the green vote! Industry and tourism musn't be worth anyrhing?

T5 wll be good in time, sadly its been tarnished.

[Capvermell]

Not sure how you mean that BA short haul is luxury class..I myself am a regular user of BA short haul at LGW and think the service is terrible compared to EZY, old aircraft, dated interiors, poor customer service and lost baggage issues, recently travelled to TLS and BA lost my bags for 48hrs (I checked in 3 hrs prior) , the aircraft I travelled on had many cabin defects , broken seats and trim etc, and not too clean either, I used EZY 319 on the same route a few weeks later and could not fault them, and will in future..

As I said my main short haul BA positive experiences from LGW were the GB Airways routes (Southern Spain, Canaries and Gibraltar) and I suppose that was really a different and superior Airline flying in BA colours.

I must also confess to being bothered by who my fellow passengers are. BA passengers short haul are all business persons and nice middle class people. Easyjet passengers are usually much more largely a contingent of oiks (especially PMI where we have a family apartment in the nicer part of the island).

Have Easyjet got rid of not having an allocated seat yet thus forcing you to scrum at the gate for an overwing exit seat or at least an aisle seat in the forward part of the cabin (hate travelling at the back on any aircraft)if you are tall like me on a full flight. And like I say they always resisted any cheap fares under 2 months to departure even if they were undersold. When I looked in January at some offer fares (leaving in the next few weeks) it did look like they were finally starting to bin that dogma (they are big enough now to need to do that though) on routes that were not selling as well as they would like. But then again those were winter fares.

Do Easyjet yet serve anything other than inedible brown bread hovis sandwiches on their new longer haul routes. Also have they stopped charging £3.50 for wine while BA provide it free. I think not. I agree that BA has brought in catering that is not much better than Easyjet on the food side short haul but at least you don't have to take decisions about whether to pay an exorbitant amount for it or go hungry. Or have they shifted to no included food in steerage like BMI?

I agree it does sound like the main BA operation is going down hill from what you say. Perhaps all the decent BA managers went to Easyjet if they are now improving the quality of their operations. Getting rid of Stelios the Greek could only have improved matters on the quality front.

[exeng]

I and many others had said that heads would fall. They have, but believe me it is not finished yet.

The BALPA open letter will run and run - the large investors will have read it and be knocking at Mr. Walsh's door - going to be a lot more blood yet.

Now Mr Walsh cannot even contemplate a Pilot's strike - please try and find a compromise.

The BACC and Mr Walsh need to sit back and contemplate how they can recover an airline from this; because where they are (and going) is disaster.

'Open Skies' needs to be looked at from an entirely new angle - i.e. compromise. Please do not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

BA can again be the great ICON of the airline world. To be frank it just needs some common sense knocking into both the 'leaderhip team' and the BACC.

If you don't sort it you will all be history.


Regards
Exeng

[Capvermell]

ReHeat, the Chairman has the final say in who the Directors are, and perhaps more importantly, who the CEO is, and they will hire people who "mirror' their own values and behaviours.

No he doesn't. The shareholders have the final say who the Directors are if they overstep the mark as they can vote not to re-elect them at the AGM when their terms come to an end. However the Directors do have the final say as to who the Chairman is and can immediately sack the Chairman if he is not performing at any time. Of course the Chairman gets the say about new replacement directors (following resignations etc) between AGMs providing he has the support of the Board.

[aidey_f]

Further to the point about BAA, was I the only one to notice that, last Friday, when they announced the postponement of the move of the rest of the T4 flights, Radio 4 was asking BMI what BAA were saying, because BAA were refusing to do any interviews.

[Capvermell]

Maybe it is time for people to realise BA is restricted by LHR
But it was surely BA's choice to make Heathrow their only major international hub airport and to heavily pull out of Gatwick and never bother with Stansted and/or Luton in the first place, despite their obvious long term potential.

Surely Easyjet's success in running out of three different London airports and BA's decision to shun the growth of any lower cost short haul routes on the basis that their cost base was far too bloated to ever operate efficiently in that sector shows that it is BA who has chosen to make its corporate fate inextricably linked to the state of Heathrow?

BAA has had a cock up at T5 but because it also operates the rest of Heathrow and Stansted and Gatwick too (both of which are going from strength to strength) the incident has not left it irretrievably holed below the waterline. Unless of course recent events persuade the government to let the Competition Commission break up its monopoly control of the majority of UK airport capacity (especially in London).

[ICEHOUSES]

CAPVERMELL

Agree with you re GB airways, newer aircraft , better service etc on the routes down to spain, as for EZY boarding, this is split into several boarding groups A to C I think, if you check in online your usually group A, and first to board after the priority group have boarded, the overwing exits with leg room have grey seat covers, so head for there. Inflight catering on EZY is not much diff to BA, although you have to pay, at least you dont have to eat a free packet of birdseed as chucked at you by a BA flight attendent as I've experienced,...Sorry for this thread creep, just thought I'd point out the crap BA shorthaul I've experienced at LGW recently.

[Hand Solo]

Earlier I asked who is Operations Director now? Is this currently a properly regulated airline? WW himself seems to have assumed responsibility for all operations?? How can he do that and the CAA let him?

If the CAA believed WW was trying to run BA single handedly I'm sure they'd take a close interest. As it is WW has done more no more than take on a focal role until Kirkwood and Noyes are replaced. The people who actually do the real work are still in place and I doubt the CAA will worry too much the change. After all, if Noyes and Deadwood had resigned last year they wouldn't have shut the airline down.

[Landing Drinks]

Re the appointment of new Directors, this will be a WW man who has the strength to support the business through the changes needed to achieve its longer term business aims. i.e take on the unions and unfavourable work practices that prevent BA from being competative.
The T&C's ruined EI, a National airline that is now regional with "few long haul sectors".. The low cost heathen at DUB we too entranched for EI to recover there mis managed position..

Take this message and apply to BA!!. The low cost boom at LTN, LGW and STN.. these three airports strangle LHR.. So BA can only ever hope to focus on Long Haul... They missed the chance to dominate the regional market by screwing up GO, BCal and Dan's and giving up on LGW... How many atempts do they need... Hardly anyone had heard of FR and Ezy when GO came about... T&C's and greed of the few screwed it for all... :=

The T&C's saw to this... unless these alter.. Then the demise which came to DUB will arrive in LHR...
Same as on carriers with T&C's that drowned them...
SN in BRU
SR in ZRH
AF in CDG
AI in CIA

The CAA will not interfere with the running of BA.
The AOC requirements are for an Accountable Manager (WW) and the Directors of Flt Ops & Engrg. "Operations" is not something the CAA require as mandatory, although they will be aware of the changes and expect BA to furnish them with thier plans going forward.. This has already been done in the annoucement of a new combined role.. The CAA will support WW & BA during this transition...

Hey ~ "If you can't change the people, CHANGE THE PEOPLE !":ugh:

How "punctual" the departures of two yesterday!!, were they on time and allowed to depart accompanied by their "luggage"..
One has to make this joke based on the operational performance since Day 1. Wankers, and one of them should have gone after the TV annoucement..
There are characters on the apprentice who could brief hungry punters and media in a more appropraite way than that...

Have the construction teams and project management firms had anything to say about all this??????????
During my last LRC I hear the trials for the baggage system were only tested with a few hundred empty bags, nothing like peak throughput of a busy week day morning check in.
Also heard was the passenger flows and throughput (signage etc) only tested by staff... The guys from MUC must have some stoires to tell...

What about the BA project team taking two days off before the opening as "all was going to plan".. Is there any truth in this..?

Adjure........ GMT - 6hrs so its rude not too... :ok:

[Sunfish]

I am not going to contribute any more unless there are new developments because this thread is veering off topic.

The only thing I would add is that management get the union behaviours they deserve in my experience.

[DarkStar]

[QUOTE][/[For the record, the waste at Waterside does not include the fine Ops staff who try against the odds to keep the show on the road and should be in their own Ops centre not Waterside, without a canteen, gym, hairdressers and Waitrose at the weekend, as the 'office' is technically closed]QUOTE]

Sadly, even Ops suffered the old v new BA Management style. Experienced Ops Managers and staff who actually knew what they were talking about and could resolve complex issues were seen as 'dangerous' and 'a threat' to the new breed of BA Ops Managers who were brought in without any Ops experience. So many good staff were encouraged to leave, shameful. There is a famous incident when BA planners were trying to 'design' Project ICEBERG - the move of some L/H flights from T4 to T1 and an Ops Control staff member was asked to attend a planning meeting towards the end of the process, only for him to flag up basic crass mistakes and assumptions. A phone was made to the new Ops Manager asking the 'awkward' Ops Control staff member not to attend further meetings :E.

This is how the Airline has eroded its experience and T5 sadly is the flagship for failure, but WW will survive :*

[Capvermell]

This forum is for those with an interest in avaition, not someone who is reassured a £20.00 trip with FR to Billund demostrates the way the industry must develop to encourage consumer support... Oh please, if you only knew the operating costs.. its not a latte and fag to get a juicy piece of gossip..

BAEngineering/WillieWalsh we can spot you a mile off no matter how many new identities you create.

Perhaps if you picked a location that was not an empty piece of sea off the cost of the Western Isles you might then appear to be a little more credible? Or is your Engineering base for BA an underwater one?

I presume that -6 GMT is a reference to the number of hours you have left before this forum identity is yet again terminated by the moderators?

[Dick Deadeye]

Perhaps Kirkwood and Noyes are leaving ba so that they can turn their undoubted skills to running 'Open Skies'?

That would be the dream win-win situation for BALPA! :E

They could withdraw the strike ballot, and watch from the sidelines as Noise and Deadwood performed the same management wizardry on OpenLies that made T5 such an outstanding success.

Twelve months would be my guess, with those two at OpenLies, before BA pulled the plug!

No, BALPA couldn't be that lucky.

[L337]

I hear the trials for the baggage system were only tested with a few hundred empty bags, nothing like peak throughput of a busy week day morning check in.

I have heard exactly the opposite. The system was tested with more bags than it has yet had to cope with. The "rumour" is that the people who program the software, the BAA, never changed the codes for a "real" day, and the system failed to recognise any bags at all. Despite repeated asking from BA to the BAA, they denied a software problem. Eventually after 3 days the BAA admitted the mistake.

Just one of many many stories circulating.

[PartickThistleNil]

Armpit,



"It does beg the question that if you have spare time to 'volunteer' then perhaps you aren't working hard enough! or your position is over subscribed in the first place."


What an offensive statement. Whilst I agree that there shouldn't be a need for volunteers, the operation should be adequately staffed, many people are working in offices through the day and then volunteering to do late shifts and weekend shifts in the terminals.

Your statement is akin to me saying if you only fly for 900 hours a year you are not working hard enough. Don't make assumptions about other people's roles.

You are merely perpetuating the stereotypes and 'them and us attitudes' that exist within the company.

Not everyone who works at waterside works 9-5 four days a week. Many work 12 hours a day, 6 or 7 days a week and more.

And for the record, I'm not management (the word is fast becoming an insult in its own right sadly).

And I used to work on the ramp, so I have been down there. And I drank a hell of a lot more tea and coffee when I worked down there than I have time to now.

[SeLFish_Flyer]

Unbelievable. With everything that BA has to worry about at the moment (Oil, T5, potential strikes) still we see the old them and us culture that has been at BA for so long.
I am ex Waterside staff.
I was one who volunteered in the past to help out in the Terminals (e.g. terror threats) as well as being part of EPIC and OCIC. Does this mean that I didn't have enough work to do?? Nonsense! It meant that I would volunteer to do either early or late shift to assit my COLLEAGUES (yes we are all one team) in the Terminals. If it was an early shift I would start at 6am, and then at 2pm go back to my office where I would often stay until 22:00. If it was a late shift then I would get to the office at 7am and stay on in the terminals until told to go home (and on occasions this was after 2am). It meant that I sometimes worked weekends either volunteering to help in terminals or catching up on my work. Why did I do this? Because the passengers were essential to me. Without them there was no job.
What did I find in the terminals? Well I was there to cover absence once (I gave up a Sunday). Thie minute I started i was asked if I wanted a tea break, I was shadowing 2 other staff members (permanent T4 staff). I declined, and said I would take a half hour in the middle of my shift if it was OK, they told me no, as that was when they would go and move their cars. They created a tea rota whereby one of us was scheduled to be at break while the other 2 worked. This lasted the whole shift, apart from them both needing 90 mins to move their cars! But did I complain, no, I got on with the job of helping our customers. But I loved it, no other job at BA gave me the buzz that helping out those passengers did. And I dealt with my fair share of irate passengers, including one who was flying to their fathers funeral.....and we cancelled his flight! There were aggressive punters, upset even distressed punters and some of them threatened me. But heleping them get away gave me a real pleasure. I received a number of thank you letters from passengers after these shifts.......which I read while drinking my latte at Waterside :oh:

I think it is time (still) for the staff of BA to all remember that, actually, you all have your own jobs to do, but depend upon each and every department to do it. You all need to rally round, remember that first and foremost you should be pleasing your passengers, and make the once great ariline great again.

But what are the chances of that?

[VAFFPAX]

SLFF - Thank you for being a professional. Thank you for being there for pax when they need support, without complaints, without a demand for recognition. Pax really do appreciate staff who are happy to help, and no doubt you are happy with pax who try to make your life easy as a human in a difficult job too.

In the past I've always been very vocal about my appreciation of beleaguered staff members, especially when they have some difficult (and sometimes selfish) pax who pretty much make their day miserable.

:ok:

S.

[WHBM]

What did I find in the terminals? Well I was there to cover absence once (I gave up a Sunday). The minute I started I was asked if I wanted a tea break, I was shadowing 2 other staff members (permanent T4 staff). I declined, and said I would take a half hour in the middle of my shift if it was OK, they told me no, as that was when they would go and move their cars. They created a tea rota whereby one of us was scheduled to be at break while the other 2 worked. This lasted the whole shift, apart from them both needing 90 mins to move their cars!If this is the case the management layers must be useless, as in any other reasonable business this would/should have been eliminated long ago. Possibly explains why director level people have to go.

What is all this "move their cars" stuff ?

[42psi]

A while since I worked at LHR (not for BA) but at that time you could park in the central area car park with a N/side pass after about 18:00 or so.

So if on a late shift it was fairly common to use your break to move the car so you save the staff bus trip at the end of the late shift.

[BAMANAGER]

SelfishFlyer, L337 and PartickThistle, your committment to the company makes me weep into my Latte. Rock on, there is at least 3 of you working to save the mothership. Give me a nudge when it's all over, you'll find me skiving at one of our many coffee shacks in waterside. You see I've borrowed all these books from the quest centre on writing a great CV, very busy planning my escape!

[slip and turn]

I don't quite know what to make of your sentiments overall, BAM, because when I saw SeLFish's very telling observations from his Sunday working in T5, I instantly thought, yep, there's some old-stager / supervisor-level-little-Hitlers in there that are evidence of rotten tails wagging dogs. I don't think I even mean people as high as junior management, but I wouldn't be surprised if some have made it that far over the years.

Now if I am right, it is evidence of a lot of (not just some) poor management higher up too.

In all your different guises in this thread and the others, I do still think that once or twice you have done the aviation industry a service by keeping the threads afloat, but nevertheless I am assuming you might be one of the rotten tails I am talking about.

I am not sure it is a good defence for a rotten tail to say well it was my dog's management that made me feel the way I do, although I can sympathise to a large extent. But it can't go on. Are you part of the problem or part of the solution or have you abdicated but are still taking the salary and letting others not in your clique take the strain as it appears you are saying in your last post?

Trouble is, you see, BA is in such a mess right now as a result of so many transparently exasperated staff and customers that I am not sure anyone can fix it except teams of staff who can be trusted a little bit further than to organise their own tea breaks fairly and sensibly and to make sure their carpark manoeuvres are not an excuse just to slope off for 90 minutes, rather than create nice little tickles for their clique of mates.

I sincerely hope no BA Engineers (which was one title I believe you assumed on PPRuNe) are acting like that, because if an engineer sloped off or buggered around with what should largely be a self-organised self-disciplined day, then I wonder what else he couldn't give a FF about when no-one is holding his hand or has a ring through his nose and a rope on it to remind him who's in charge?

It's so bad, that there seem to be a lot of staff that I would not trust to be part of my aviation experience right now. From what I read about moral, and internal bitching, BA pilots arguing for goodness knows what via BALPA, all coupled with the overall T5 Project disaster-recovery pressures, I do not believe that all the necessary work can possibly be still being done to keep every aspect of this airline safe.

And I seriously wonder what the CAA are doing about it.

Or maybe there's plenty of slack in everyone's day to argue, slag off, slope off and play musical chairs with cars in the car park, as well as actual work?

[Sunfish]

This thread appears to be degenerating into a "management versus entrenched unions." thread. Frankly, passengers don't care which one of you it was that messed up T5. The outcome is the same no matter who is to blame.

Frankly, I blame management because I find the allegations of union demarcation mess ups and feather bedding extremely weak. For one reason and one reason alone. You have had five years to plan the composition of your T5 workforce, their tasks, duty statements, job rosters, rotations, work practices, new technology, training, the lot, and you have had five years to negotiate any demarcation issues and work practice issues relating to your T5 workforce with the associated unions.

To put it another way, by blaming unions you are opening yourself to a charge of incompetence as managers, for you had ample time to negotiate changes. I am, by the way, speaking from experience.

To put it another way, your idea that the T5 debacle involves "Union sabotage" is fanciful, and in any case you had five years to prevent it.

As for preceding comments about experienced managers criticisms being sidelined, I've seen it all before. I now know that the smart thing to do when your criticism is rejected is to sit back and watch the young managers fall flat on their backside, then either move in and take their jobs or wait for them to humbly ask for your assistance.

[hunterboy]

It does make you wonder what they have been doing for the last five years...apart from trousering close to 250K a year each as Directors . Actually, that is a rhetorical question. I have a pretty good idea what they have been doing.

[Joetom]

A little drift, but interesting about the car parks.

In terminals 1234, approx 80% of airline staff park outside the airport (remote parking) the other 20% use the terminal car parks due lenght of service or job T+Cs allow them to.

At about 18.00 every day, all staff can then use the terminal car parks, this means when they finnish work, they can get to their car quick and save 15/25mins of their own time and get home to walk the dog.

Problem is, when all these staff move their cars during shift time, they are not doing their job and they help clogging up the roads and terminal car parks.

T5, all staff park remote and they can't get their cars into the T5 car park unless they pay, so the company is very happy now, many staff will be unhappy with this set up.

[VAFFPAX]

Just FYI - You can plan all you like for five years, but if your planning's wrong, then it won't save you from a fiasco when your shiny new terminal opens. Then it comes down to flying-by-the-pants, i.e. being pro-active and being able to take charge and come up with a plan on short notice.

S.

[CHINOOKER]

If anyone wants to know what has happened at BA to make it such a shambles of late,perhaps this will give you an idea of what most of us have to put up with on most days......Today i was one of a team of engineers at base awaiting the tow of a B777 from T4. The aircraft in question was due a pre-input "engineering wash" on the stand designated for this work. As we sat there awaiting it's arrival we suddenly realised that the towing crew were actually starting to position it on an adjacent stand!......Que my AMS,(supervisor),leaping around,arms waving in the air trying to get the tow crew to stop and reposition the aircraft onto the correct stand....All to no avail.
On walking over to the next stand,we were approached by one of the tow team...."the computer tells us that this a/c has to go on TA3 mate,so that's where we have to put it". "Well we need it on TA4 says our AMS,as thats the only stand that an engineering wash can be done"......."no problem says the tug driver,we can put it there for you,but ONLY when the computer says we can"!!. Now que the wash team supervisor running over to the a/c..."what the **** you parking this here for,this has to be washed....it has to go on the stand next door". "Sorry mate says the tug driver,(computer in hand),it says on here stand 408 to TA3....we have to work to the computer or we get a bollocking". By now 10 minutes has elapsed and six engineers and a complete aircraft wash team,(8 men and 4 wash trucks), are sitting around "twiddling thier thumbs".....Now que our boss,running around doing his daily "headless chicken" impersonation......."what have you parked that there for,...it has to go on the stand next door"!!........."Computer says nah" says the tug driver,"you had better get back onto the TRM to have the stand changed"...que our boss now legging it at speed back to his office to make the call........after about another 15 minutes "hey presto",the computer says "yes" and the tug crew reposition the a/c,(in about 5 minutes),to the correct stand!!.
On talking afterwards to the tug crew,they complained bitterly that the introduction of the computer system has taken "all flexibility" out of thier operation,so they now "just do as they are instructed" until instructed otherwise!!.......The same seems to go for many front line staff nowadays who are constantly becoming fed up /dissolusioned by constant change most of which is bought about by managers etc who "have to make changes" in order to meet thier own KRA,s KPI,s etc etc
This little episode today equates to 16 people sitting around for 30 or so minutes each awaiting for one persons decision.....If this sort of scenario is enacted right across the airline on a daily basis,god only knows how much time and money is wasted!!.......If only BA could get it's act together and stop putting "idealogical obstacles" in everyones way,then forget 10%......we could get that with our eyes shut!!

[r75]

Ews + Sap = Chaos?!

[Sunfish]

Chinooker the reason for your frustration (absent some purely technical trouble like failure to update a database etc.) is an anomaly in what's called the "business rules" in IT speak, to whit, there should be a business rule that says that the aircraft can't be in two places at once, nor destined for two different destinations at once.

Of course the best part is that when this apparent computer anomaly is brought to the attention of the IT people, some very well spoken consultants in very nice suits and pastel ties will tell BA (or BAA) firstly that its their fault because they specified the business rules, and that fixing this "undocumented feature" of the system will cost a minimum of 750,000 pounds and take a minimum of six months (to allow for testing of course) to fix.

Of course that's if it doesn't require a complete redesign of the system.

The beauty of delivering large complex computer systems to companies and Governments is that the business rules will change faster than the software people will deliver (they like it that way), so with a bit of nifty footwork, there are always a string of changes necessary to accommodate changed work practices and the software firm is on the gravy train for life.

I've worked on both sides of one of these types of deals and I have the scars to prove it.

[slip and turn]

If what CHINOOKER has said is true then it makes me want to cry, and I have nothing to do with BA or the aviation industry. I just hold a British passport and enjoy old Ealing Studios type movies for nostalgia's sake.

That means I still smile at Peter Sellers in "I'm All Right Jack", and I still smile when I think of how it was when my father used to come home 40 years ago and tell us what a foul-up the new computer system had caused at his blue chip employer's premises , but frowned when he told us when he was most likely next to not be going to work because so and so and the shop stewards had called another strike ...

But now, in 2008, it just makes me want to weep for this country.

...I'll get my coat.

Would the last one leaving please turn out the lights.

[Blink182]

Can concur with Chinooker.........

Many, many, many hundreds of engineering manhours lost just waiting for aircraft to be towed to base . One time we investigated, the slowness was due to "shortage of towing crews ".............a quick look in their crewroom revealed plenty of 'em !

Of course, in the dim and distant past , we were allowed to go get the aircraft ourselves with an Engineering tug crew .....or even more bizarely we used to Taxi the aircraft back to the Hangar ( this is LGW , mind )...

Don't do this anymore .....it upsets the tuggies......:=

[CHINOOKER]

Sunfish,I hear what you are saying,but it's not rocket science were talking about here....the daily a/c fleet position sheet,(which is basically our guide to what arrives and when and what time it's due out again)is available to all ramp planners etc...these people also have an insight to any maintenance that a particular a/c is due and so a simple mistake,(if that is what this was),should not happen!
It's just not occurences like this one that tend to get the staff,(and to some extent our local managers),scratching thier heads in total dis-belief on a day to day basis......If anyone could explain to us why almost every hangar input my section handles,be it 747/777,the aircraft comes in with the cabin "dressed ready for service",...when everybody in the loop should know that we are going to have to inspect all the seating/ife.......We have no option but to place everything in the overhead bins only for the cleaners to do it all over again!!
In BA's new world,where it seems everybody has to be "tracked/monitored and directed" by computers etc,we seem to have lost the simple ability of communicating with each other! What,s wrong with the good old..."hey guys,park that a/c there......don,t bother dressing that one,as the engineers are going to rip it apart"!! This simple approach to communication has worked fine for hundreds of years...If it aint broken,why try and fix it!!

[Sunfish]

The cause of this Mr. Chinook, is that your management doesn't have detailed knowledge of that which they seek to manage. Therefore they design systems and procedures they way they think the system should work, not the way it actually works.

Any challenge by you will be dismissed as special pleading. Haven't you ever seen the knowing looks exchanged between managers when someone gets up and says "We've tried that before and it doesn't work"?

But it's worse than that. If you challenge their theoretical knowledge with practical experience, at best you are ignored, at worst you are fired for "being part of the problem." People with hands on knowledge are frequently seen as a threat to them by management who only have an MBA to hide behind. Please don't try and point out the absurdity of what is happening to management, you will not be thanked and may instead be marked for retribution for your temerity.

P.S. Of course I didn't mention that other addictive drug Managers dream about - total control and surveillance of all workplace activity. This is usually peddled by consultants who do wonderful presentations about how their systems allow you to "drill down" and see exactly who is doing what to whom and where and when during working hours. I call it keyboard voyeurism. They think it absolves them from the necessity of contacting lower forms of humanity to find out what they are actually doing. I'm amazed that you are not yet all issued a GPS suppository.

[WHBM]

"Computer says nah"
This is all very disappointing. Because as one of those
IT people, some very well spoken consultants in very nice suits and pastel ties it is apparent that here were a group of guys, the engineers, the tug driver, etc, all actually wanting to do a good and sensible job, yet who were frustrated by the quite counter-intuitive "procedures" they had been told must be followed.

Now if I was designing it I would have a repeater of the information at the engineering base so the team could see, in advance, what was coming where so they could jump in and get errors sorted out. People not envisaging errors, clashes, etc, and how to overcome them immediately are one of the banes of the business world. I am afraid many such projects suffer by being put out to the lowest bidder, someone higher up the chain feeling that is all that is important.

[pasoundman]

Sunfish
The cause of this Mr. Chinook, is that your management doesn't have detailed knowledge of that which they seek to manage. Therefore they design systems and procedures they way they think the system should work, not the way it actually works.

And THAT is very much what I associate with the dreaded MBAs. They are AIUI taught that they don't NEED to know such things in order to manage. The craziest concept ever in my simple little mind.

[VAFFPAX]

Now if I was designing it I would have a repeater of the information at the engineering base so the team could see, in advance, what was coming where so they could jump in and get errors sorted out. People not envisaging errors, clashes, etc, and how to overcome them immediately are one of the banes of the business world. I am afraid many such projects suffer by being put out to the lowest bidder, someone higher up the chain feeling that is all that is important.
Well, the people on the ground are usually the last people asked about how things should work. Because after all, all they'd want is for the system to continue working the way it does, inefficiency and all (not my words). That's one thing that has always frustrated me in a consultative role - Being prevented from talking to the people who are actually supposed to USE the system. Instead everything is streamlined to be as efficient as possible for backoffice or managerial staff instead of those who are exposed to it on the proverbial coalface. That's why several government projects have been utter fiascos - No input from the boys and girls working the phones and working in the offices, or, worse, input from them blatantly disregarded because after all "what do they know".

*UGH* :oh:

S.

[Curious Pax]

Aren't you missing the point by blaming the IT systems? Would I be right in thinking that in the example given, at some point someone somewhere has input stand TA3 instead of TA4 into the system? In many ways the fact that it was an IT system is irrelevant, as it could have been hand written on a piece of paper.

The problem is that the managers of the tug drivers have hammered home to them (bullied?) that any deviation from the instructions they are given will result in a b*llocking, which the tug drivers naturally wish to avoid. The problem can only be solved by someone with the authority to change the stand in the system Chinooker's manager it seems), which then results in a revised instruction to the crew, which they are then happy to carry out.

As has been said previously the management method generally in BA seems to be to robotize their workers as far as possible, which is probably why as soon as anything unusual happens (fog, snow, T5 etc) the whole thing falls apart, because those lower down the food chain aren't allowed to improvise.

Having read Gordon Bethune's book 'From Worst to First' it all sounds very similar to the dark days at Continental that he was instrumental in overturning - perhaps the BA board ought to give him a call and see what he is doing these days!

Things will never be perfect at a large company, as you will never get perfect top-to-bottom communication, but there are ways of making it a lot better than it seems to be in BA at present.

[Sunfish]

WHBM:

Now if I was designing it I would have a repeater of the information at the engineering base so the team could see, in advance, what was coming where so they could jump in and get errors sorted out. People not envisaging errors, clashes, etc, and how to overcome them immediately are one of the banes of the business world. I am afraid many such projects suffer by being put out to the lowest bidder, someone higher up the chain feeling that is all that is important.

"I would have a repeater of the information at the engineering base so the team could see,"............

But no! Then they might challenge my authority!

"what was coming where so they could jump in and get errors sorted out. People not envisaging errors, clashes, etc, and how to overcome them immediately are one of the banes of the business world...."

What errors? I don't make errors, if I did I'd hide them from you anyway! Nothing can go wrong, go wrong, go wrong.

"I am afraid many such projects suffer by being put out to the lowest bidder,"

There is no way this project went to the lowest bidder...at least not when the variations and customisation is added tot he cost. I've watched the boys and girls from Accenture turn a low bid of $20 million into a $40 million project.

Vaffpax:

Well, the people on the ground are usually the last people asked about how things should work. Because after all, all they'd want is for the system to continue working the way it does, inefficiency and all (not my words). That's one thing that has always frustrated me in a consultative role - Being prevented from talking to the people who are actually supposed to USE the system.

No, No, No, Vaffy, the people on the ground will only tell you how things work now, they won't tell you how things should work once we have had a bit of business process re-engineering in our fevered dreams. Only management can tell you that.

....Of course they don't have to make the system work in a rainstorm at 2.00 am in winter.

Curious:

Aren't you missing the point by blaming the IT systems? Would I be right in thinking that in the example given, at some point someone somewhere has input stand TA3 instead of TA4 into the system?

I'm not blaming the IT systems. I'm blaming the prats who didn't test for the absurdity in the IT system that Chinook pointed out. Then there are the prats who established the business rules for the IT system concerned. If it was finger trouble by someone, somewhere, Why didn't the IT system flag the absurdity of an aircraft being required in two different places at the same time? That's what IT systems are good at.

The reason that these foul-ups always happen is always the same - managers viewing their staff as part of the problem and not part of the solution. Hence when they voice concerns or try and contribute their experience to the design of a new project it's regarded as "special pleading' and their input is then ignored.

How do I know this? Because as a young and impressionable MBA, I was hired as a Group General Manager for a reasonably large software solution provider because I had no experience of mainframe computer systems - and was not "contaminated" by mainframe/cobol ways of doing things - this was seen as a big plus by the Directors of the company!........Needless to say I was out of there in 18 months with my tail between my legs, when it became obvious to all that I hadn't the faintest idea what I was doing and the Directors view of what the business required was a fantasy..

[WHBM]

I've watched the boys and girls from Accenture turn a low bid of $20 million into a $40 million project
Only double ? Gosh, when they were part of Arthur Andersen it would usually be four times at least. Lost their touch, I suppose.

[BAMANAGER]

WILLIE WALSH QUOTE: (FROM TELEGRAPH 3MAR2008)BA has exclusive use of T5 and it is the new terminal’s almost completely automated baggage system that has really engaged Walsh’s attention. His staff have been testing the system continuously since August 2006 and he admits to having “spent more time on the ramp-side looking at the baggage infrastructure than I did out here in the main terminal. Really, what we have here is an extremely sophisticated baggage system with a terminal built around it. Believe me, what we have is a big step forward.”

[BAMANAGER]

How can the CEO of a company say the above, 1 mth in advance of opening, and hope to keep hold of his job. He states he actually spent much time with the baggage system, that the staff are all well trained. He lied, pure and simple and must go..... Keep this on thread till he does.

[bermudatriangle]

The T5 fiasco,chopping of kirkwood and noyes,does the demise of those two sort the inherent problems of management within BA ? i think not.the whole structure needs a complete shake up,the airline needs a charismatic leader who can get the demotivated workforce back onside.for years employees have been treated as a cost which needs to be reduced,rather than a well trained,professional workforce,vital to the prosperity of the company and it's long term future.T5 is a shining example of replacing humans with self service machines,fine when things run smoothly,utterly useless when the operation falls apart,have you ever tried asking a machine for help or assistance ?the current leadership team has based it's whole strategy on cost cutting and technology,sadly the technology hasn't worked and the cost cutting left no backup when it was needed.that decision, to me should decide their fate.airlines are a people business,passengers expect to talk to people and be assisted by caring,well trained,professional employees,not stranded in a check-in hall with a machine for company.creating the climate for real success doesn't mean extra cost,just treat your workforce with respect,let them know they are valued and listen to the people that actually do the jobs day in and day out.it's so simple,yet BA seem to get it all so wrong.i wish i could run BA for 12 months,it would be a totally different operation!

[Sunfish]

Bermuda, you have to start with changing the Board, because no "charismatic leader" is going to work for that shower unless he has a free hand, and that won't be forthcoming.

[Tiger]

* Business
* British Airways

Walsh hits heavy turbulence

T5 is not the only problem facing BA's beleaguered chief - his staff are angry and his competitors threatening. Tim Webb reports

* Tim Webb
* The Observer,
* Sunday April 20 2008
* Article history

About this article
Close
This article appeared in the Observer on Sunday April 20 2008 on p6 of the Business news & features section. It was last updated at 00:03 on April 20 2008.

Not many chief executives have a computer game named after them, but players of 'Wee Willie Walsh' can manoeuvre the beleaguered boss of British Airways around a baggage carousel, scoring points by getting him to place bags on to the conveyor belt safely. The creators of the online game insist they are fans and say Walsh is going a 'great job turning round the problems he inherited'.

Walsh, who has endured a torrid few weeks since the shambolic opening of BA's flagship Terminal 5 at Heathrow, might not appreciate being the laughing stock of the online gaming world, but he needs all the support he can get. A mountain of problems - and not just the thousands of lost bags - are piling up for him. Unions are threatening to strike, the airline's fuel bill is rocketing and the economic downturn is hitting bookings.

Competition with rival carriers is also hotting up with the opening-up of flights last month between Heathrow and the US, a route BA has traditionally dominated. These same rivals are getting bigger - and more powerful - through mergers and takeovers. But Walsh's attempts to do the same have been frustrated by protectionism and his rivals. It all paints a bleak picture. Is BA, like Terminal 5, broken? And can Willie fix it?

To recap, more than 350 flights have been cancelled since Terminal 5 opened at the end of March. BA has lost an estimated 19,000 bags, most of which were driven to Milan for sorting. Many have yet to be returned to their owners.

The terminal is now running more smoothly, though BA is anxious not to tempt fate and pronounce the baggage system fixed. But the disruption is set to continue, with BA admitting that the transfer of most of its long-haul services from Terminal 4 to the new building may not be complete until October. It is fair to say that, among passengers, BA is currently not, as its Nineties' slogan told everyone, 'The world's favourite airline'.

BA has estimated the cost of the Terminal 5 shambles at £16m in lost revenue and compensation. But the damage to its brand - and popularity - is already worrying the City. Morgan Stanley analysts estimate total costs could be more like £150m.

The first indications of how badly the Terminal 5 chaos has affected BA's bookings will be revealed in its April traffic figures next month. One top 10 shareholder says: 'If this goes on too long it would damage the franchise and the value of the brand. If the transfer of the rest of flights from Terminal 4 to 5 is a complete horlicks, you may get people saying "I will not fly with BA".'

Walsh has come in for criticism for his handling of the chaos. Last week, Gareth Kirkwood, BA's director of operations and David Noyes, its director of customer services, were fired. This was despite Walsh, a day after the opening of Terminal 5, insisting: 'I am not going to start trying to find someone else to point the finger at ... The buck stops with me.'

Peter Knapp, a creative director specialising in aviation at branding and design agency Landor Associates, says the damage to BA's brand will 'linger for a long time', and believes that executives need to be seen to be doing more to sort out the mess. 'The public's impression is that BA is sorting out the problems with Terminal 5 from a distance and in an aloof way. Executives should go meet passengers on the ground to apologise to them personally as a gesture of commitment to the problem.'

Like many of his predecessors, Walsh also faces another battle on the union front. Pilots' association Balpa is going to the High Court next month for the right to strike over BA's plans to set up a new airline this summer.

Called Open Skies and flying between Paris and New York, the carrier is BA's way of trying to embrace the competition forced upon it by the liberalisation of the market in flights to the US. The airline wants to recruit new, non-unionised pilots, whom Balpa believes will be paid less, leading to an eventual deterioration of conditions for mainstream BA pilots. BA argues the subsidiary would not be economic if the new pilots had the same terms and conditions as Balpa's members. It claims that European legislation prevents Balpa striking over this issue.

If Balpa wins the court case, Walsh would be left with an impossible situation. After Terminal 5, he can't afford a mass walk-out that would bring more disruption and cancelled flights this summer. Neither can BA, already being squeezed by a soaring fuel bill and low-cost competitors, afford to cave in.

Relations between pilots and management appear to be at an all-time low. According to Jim McAuslan, Balpa general secretary, pilots are very unhappy with BA: 'Balpa has not sought to capitalise on the T5 chaos. But they are deeply ashamed of this debacle and what their airline is becoming.'

He adds that pilots are becoming disenchanted with what they perceive as wider, deep-rooted management failings. 'BA is no longer focused on its core business - getting customer care right. There is a feeling among staff that the only thing that matters is the margin. You get a feeling that the company is more aggressively run. Maybe this is required to be more competitive, but it has gone too far.'

He also suggests that the management culture has made it difficult for employees to speak up. 'There is a climate of fear. We are no longer prepared to stay silent, like the senior managers who kept silent about the impending disaster in the run-up to the opening of Terminal 5.'

The City is not enamoured with BA either: shares are down by almost a third since February. Last month, BA warned that fuel costs would rise by about a fifth in the current financial year because of soaring oil prices. As a result, Morgan Stanley has downgraded BA's earnings estimates for the year by almost half.

Analysts also say the airline is more exposed than most to the credit crunch. Passengers travelling in first and business class generate about half its revenues, but about half of these passengers work in the financial sector, making them among the worst hit by the crunch. Such corporate customers are the most likely to start cutting back on flights.

Because of Open Skies, airlines - including BA - are increasing flights to the US in the race for market share on the new transatlantic routes. With the economic downturn, they could not have chosen a worse moment. Andrew Lobbenberg, an analyst at ABN Amro, says: 'Demand on North Atlantic routes is softening for economy class and holding up for premium class. It's not clear for how long this can continue.'

A lot of BA's woes are not of its - nor Walsh's - making and are common to other airlines. The former pilot, who became chief executive in 2005, has got a great deal right: he has ditched the loss-making short-haul subsidiary BA Connect, halved the pension deficit, started to modernise the fleet, and slashed levels of debt. But whatever the outcome of its current travails, in the longer term the future for the airline is uncertain. Joe Gill of stockbroker Goodbody says: 'The big question for BA and Willie Walsh is: where will the airline be in five-to-10 years' time? Will it scale up, or will it get gobbled up by another carrier?'

The Open Skies agreement and the worsening economic climate have triggered a wave of consolidation by airlines. Scaling up gives an airline greater operational efficiency and more clout in bulk-ordering aircraft. So far this has passed BA by; there are not many airlines it can buy. Lufthansa already holds a blocking stake in BMI, BA's most likely takeover candidate. Competition issues would prevent a takeover of Virgin Atlantic, while the Spanish government seems to have put paid to its attempts to buy Iberia. The much-rumoured merger with American Airlines also seems unlikely to happen, as long as American protectionist sentiment holds sway.

Walsh may not attract much sympathy from passengers still waiting for their lost bags to be returned, but calls for his resignation are premature. Shareholders and Balpa have made clear they do not want his head on a plate. None the less, patience - and goodwill - is evaporating fast. As Gill says: 'If Terminal 5 is in the headlines for three weeks, it's not a problem. But if it is still in the headlines in June or July, Walsh has a problem - and it could cost him his job.'

[M.Mouse]

The airline wants to recruit new, non-unionised pilots, whom Balpa believes will be paid less, leading to an eventual deterioration of conditions for mainstream BA pilots. BA argues the subsidiary would not be economic if the new pilots had the same terms and conditions as Balpa's members.

I have yet to see an article which does not talk about OpenLies pilots and similar Ts and Cs to those enjoyed at BA Mainline. It has been repeated at every opportunity by BALPA and BA Mainline pilots that Ts and Cs at OpenLies is NOT the issue.

[mercurydancer]

As a PAX I watch the BA T5 fiasco with a certain amount of detachment, but not as much detachment as I'm comfortable with, and when names like Accenture are mentioned and MBAs I get a sense of deja vu. I work for the NHS which is a less regulated but structurally more complex organisation and the morass where the NHS is now looks to be where BA is heading.

I was involved in the NHS cock up with Accenture (with others too) and thier set of assorted letters and numbers in random order that was presented as a computer system for the NHS. Blaming computer systems is old hat... as a user of that system you should make sure it (censored) well works otherwise throw it back at the company that supplied it.. and test it first! There is a problem, however, and that is if a manager's meteoric career depends on the system working and hasnt worked with the people that are going to use it. Cognitive dissonance can be deafening when things arent going smoothly.

NHS management is not there to manage (ie run an organisation that works smoothly and to be fit for purpose) but to advance thier own careers and shareholder/stakeholder/Government interests. The division between the two standpoints is widening and absorbing resources as well as compromising safety. I can expand on this ad nauseam but I dont think its necessary as I beleive that most posters here understand the parallels between the NHS and BA.

This mangement/workforce division is a long way from the mliitancy of the union workforce of the 1970s. Many of the comments I hear on this site are reflected in the comments from my own organisation in the terms of "We would love to do a first class job but we cannot due to management" With the NHS things are so bad that I cannot see them ever being recitifed. I fear that BA is headed that way too.

As SLF could I also comment about MOL and Ryanair? I am not a business account traveller and therefore cost is important. I know I'm gonna be treated like shyte but I pay less for the flight from a local airport than than i ever could with BA by a huge margin so it means I can go places by air - I simply cant afford to travel BA as I have to go to London (expensive and hassle - baggage problems and T5 aside)

Ryanair, (BMI and Easyjet too for that matter) gets to where I want to go safely and competently. I can put up with being livestock for 2 hours or so. I'm not so sure about long haul but I use European routes about 5 times a year to long haul about once every two years.

[markrl]

For all of BA's present management troubles I don’t think it's anything like as bad as the NHS. :eek: At least BA isn’t killing its customers (at least not yet), losing their bags maybe but no ones leaving with C-Diff or MRSA. The big difference of course is that BA is a private company and will eventually go bust if it doesn’t deliver. It will be punished by the market. The NHS is in the public sector, can’t go bust and just gets propped up by the Government and hosed down with ever more public cash. I don’t expect anytime soon to here that Rose Gibb is the new BA Customer Service Manager.:eek: Now that would be a nightmare.;)

[Dave Bloke]

At least BA isn’t killing its customers (at least not yet)...

They're trying though. Try doing a "Pan Pan" into LHR with a medical emergency. Speedbird Airport Centre, or "55" as they're known, would seem to be incapable of organising a suitable reception committee without a significant wait. If I were you, I'd divert.

[fat'n'grey]

I had cause to pass through T5 last night following a diversion to LGW and a brief, but very pleasant stroll in the sunshine following our evacuation on TWY E.

Coach chartered to take us to LHR (T5). On leaving the M25, where do we go? No signs to indicate the correct route for coaches (i.e. we were not a scheduled service) but plenty saying don't go this way (height restrictions). Our driver followed a National Express coach on the premise that if he could fit, so could we!

Parked, and a very "nice" man told us to move on. No discussion, no advice, just move! Eventually after much pleading we were told to leave the airport and come back in and park in another place. He suggested upstairs at pax drop-off. He may well have been correct, but all the signs we saw for upstairs mentioned height restrictions and therefore decapitation for coach drivers and their pax. He also said we could park in bay 17 in another bus lane which is what we eventually did.

Got to bay 17 - no baggage trollies.

Went inside T5 and took the lift to the departure level. V. few staff and most positions closed. Those staff that were there were helpful, but gave conflicting advice so we were bounced from customer service to check-in to customer service.

Through to security. This was very disappointing. A brand new terminal and no "lessons learnt" seem to have been applied to security screening. Very cramped and inefficient, And where may I unpack my laptop, take my belt, and jacket and shoes off and then where do I go to reverse this process? Easy, just leave all my bits on the conveyor belt until I get round to them thus blocking the flow of pax. Great! I do wish more airport operators would see how this is managed at Brussels National (BRU).

Once through security I had time to visit the gents. I turned right after security, walked for 5-10 metres, then started to look for signs to the toilets. None to be seen. But did soon find toilets on the right. So, T5 has been open for 4 weeks and hopefully nice and shiny new toilets? No chance! The toilets and floors were dirty. It was obvious from the general dust and fluff from clothes/the atomsphere that clung to the porcelain (to say nothing of other.... I'll leave it to your imagination) that they had not been cleaned for some considerable time. Five, or was it six handbasins? No soap in any of the dispensers.

The colour of the floors in T5 seems a bad choice. The tan coloured tiles naturally look dirty. Mind you, they are! On every level and in every area, the floors were scuffed, dirty and covered in rubbish. Sweet wrappings, screwed up baggage labels, etc. To me it was impossible to believe this "show case" facility is just one month old. And when all the longhaul flights are eventually transferred? I do hope arrangements are set in place to ensure basic cleanliness and hygenic conditions exist. As for the present, they most certainly do not!

And finally, our flight had a minor (<20mins) delay. So time for a snack. Went to the Giraffe??? fast food outlet. Lovely staff. However, bearing in mind no soap in the toilets (and some people's complete antipathy to washing their hands at any time) I was not impressed by the fact that each table had a pot with cutlery jammed in to it and just the very tips of the "business" end protruding. So grubby hands have to root around selecting the knives, forks, spoons......How can this be allowed? Surely basic common sense and hygene should prohibit this?

This month I've flown 9 sectors. And what stands out? My stroll in the sunshine at LGW? No. Just a feeling of depression and sorrow at just how poorly T5 was presented to me/everyone yesterday evening. Shabby, dirty and unhygenic.

Oh dear!

[WHBM]

The above is mostly a commentary on BAA rather than BA.

Having said that, Willie Walsh should be down there looking at every aspect their supplier (for that is all BAA are to them, just as much as Airbus or Shell are) is providing, or not. And raising the roof if things are not perfect.

Where on earth are the press statements from the top of BA that what is being provided a T5 is "disgraceful, an insult to Britain", etc. If said they would be on the front page in a moment.

I can only conclude that BAA have managed to get compromising photographs of the whole of the BA board to keep them quiet. There seems no other logical explanation.

[172driver]

Just received an email from BA titled:

Get ready for an altogether unique shopping experience

Yes, really !! They are flogging the 'shopping experience' at T5 !!

Actually, this is turning into a case study for all these fabulastic MBAs:

HOW TO LOSE CLIENTS !!

[PAXboy]

Quote:
At least BA isn’t killing its customers (at least not yet)...Dave BlokeThey're trying though. Try doing a "Pan Pan" into LHR with a medical emergency. Speedbird Airport Centre, or "55" as they're known, would seem to be incapable of organising a suitable reception committee without a significant wait. If I were you, I'd divert.Speaking as Pax and PPRuNer, everything I have ever heard in here is that the British staff are brilliant. We hear many folks saying that the London people are in the top five of the world and that, when declaring a Pan or Mayday, everything works for them. You might like to find the appropriate forum to discuss this issue.

[VAFFPAX]

The above is mostly a commentary on BAA rather than BA.

The fact though is that all the materials trumpet T5 as a BA experience, not BAA (even though BAA owns it), and that the lowly SLF can't be blamed for lapping up all that marketing palaver and believing that this is a BA fiasco.

I saw something similar on Monday inbound from BCN. I take the Oxford Airline bus to Oxford from LHR, and inbound it drops people off at T5 and then Central, then outbound picks people up at Central and returns to T5 before hitting the M25 for Oxford.

While stopped at T5, two very confused foreign arrivals approached our bus asking how to get to Central because they had to continue their journey from T2. They were apparently told by staff in T5 to take a bus. Which one they were not told. Our bus driver politely told them to go back into the terminal and look for the 'Trains' sign to take the Tube or the next Heathrow Connect to Central. Why ground staff in the terminal couldn't do that is beyond me.

A disinterested staff member stood a few yards away but didn't lift a finger to help.

S.

[fat'n'grey]

This may be technically correct. But T5 is the "LHR home" for BA. Irrespective of who owns, manages and cleans T5 if I was BA I would ensure that resources and programmes were in place to present the image that I want.

T5 yesterday evening was a disgrace. Why can't BA/BAA see this? And sort it; rocket science it is not!

Oh dear!

[WHBM]

Just received an email from BA titled:

Get ready for an altogether unique shopping experience
Sounds like all of us Exec Club members got this one.

For the benefit of the BA management members who read this board, can you please, over your Lattes at Waterworld, tell Sarah Keyes ("Exec Club Manager"), who signed this one, to just get a grip ! What an idiotic thing to send out.

The e-mail tells us that we will find "all our travel essentials" in T5. Presumably we are having to shop for these because BA lost our baggage on the inbound.

[PAXboy]

BAA are keeping quiet because they know that anything they say will be blasted across the papers. Whilst there has been criticism of them in all media outlets, they have not been shown stammering apologies in front of Jeremy Paxman. In other words, an extremely sensible approach. Despicable - but sensible.

Fortunately, the break up of BAA is now inevitable. Yet another monopoly turned commercial and maintained by the Conservatives that has failed to deliver long term value to the UK.

[Mariner9]

I flew out of T5 to Joburg last Tuesday afternoon and back Saturday morning.

Had previously arranged valet parking - this was reasonably signposted and I stopped in the marked bays only to be told I couldn't park there :ugh:. Anyway, that was sorted soon enough but not a great start :=

Went to an automated checkin - all done in 2 mins with no fuss. Had taken hand luggage only due to the anticipated problems. A shortish queue for passport check only to be told I had to go back to a BA desk to get my passport checked (summat to do with visas). Then queued at the "passport check" BA desk, where the BA staff took a quick glance at my passport before sending back to the by now longer passport queue.

No issues at all with security - impressed that we no longer have to remove laptops. (still frustrated with the silly liquids rule but I digress)

Through security to see the BA lounge on my right. However this was the Concorde room (1st Class) and I was only travelling business. The business lounge is on the 3rd floor, directly above. However, to get there, you have walk towards the centre of the terminal to decend from floor 2 (entry level) to floor 1, then walk back to the right side, go back up to 2, then walk across the 1st class lounge lobby, then take another escalator up to floor 3 :ugh: Signs were not particularly clear and there were loads of confused business class pax wandering around looking for the way in :ugh:

The flight boarded on time, but we were 30 mins late off stand due to "baggage irregularities". No matter, we made up the time and the in-flight service was as good as ever :D

Came back 1st Class, again with hand baggage only. Excellent in flight service again. Arrived on stand exactly on time, but then had to wait 20mins for the air bridge to be connected :ugh:

Got no more then 1/2 way up the airbridge before finding myself in a scrum behind a locked glass door. Took a further 20 minutes before someone came and opened the door.

Longish walk through to passport control, noting en route that half the escalators were already marked off unservicable, but the terminal was quiet and I got through without undue further delay to the baggage hall, by now 50 minutes after the aircraft's arrival.

Having only hand baggage I walltzed through an almost deserted baggage hall, but noted in passing that the baggage info for my flight was showing "wait in hall" :ugh:

Overall, not a complete disaster by any means, but so far short of what it should have been :=

[WHBM]

.... noting en route that half the escalators were already marked off unservicable ...This is a Heathrow speciality (and the walkways as well).

I recently was on the walkway from the Central Underground station to T1 in the early morning. Ahead, an overloaded baggage trolley jammed at the end of the walkway, those following it started to trip over it, then it overturned. I was close to the emergency stop and pressed it (just as well).

Coming home in the evening I noticed it was still stopped, and a distinctive paint mark I had noticed in the morning showed it was still stopped exactly where it had stopped it. In 8 hours and tens of thousands of passengers nobody had bothered to come round, see the stoppage, and restart it.

[VAFFPAX]

Incroyable... *shakes head*

:oh:

S.

[747-436]

Through security to see the BA lounge on my right. However this was the Concorde room (1st Class) and I was only travelling business. The business lounge is on the 3rd floor, directly above. However, to get there, you have walk towards the centre of the terminal to decend from floor 2 (entry level) to floor 1, then walk back to the right side, go back up to 2, then walk across the 1st class lounge lobby, then take another escalator up to floor 3 Signs were not particularly clear and there were loads of confused business class pax wandering around looking for the way in

I have heard that BA wanted all business lounge punters to be able to use the door nearest security if they wished, but no, BAA said they couldn't do that as they wanted the other passengers to go the long way round, and thus through the shopping mall!!

Through to security. This was very disappointing. A brand new terminal and no "lessons learnt" seem to have been applied to security screening. Very cramped and inefficient, And where may I unpack my laptop, take my belt, and jacket and shoes off and then where do I go to reverse this process? Easy, just leave all my bits on the conveyor belt until I get round to them thus blocking the flow of pax. Great! I do wish more airport operators would see how this is managed at Brussels National (BRU).

Would be good if BAA were consistant on this, sometimes shoes off, othertimes shoes can stay on. Also belt off sometimes and not others! Useless!

[Hand Solo]

BA had to pay £14M to BAA to install a door close to the Concorde Room so first class passengers could bypass the shops. I'm sure we all have our own ideas of how much of that £14M went on building the door and how much was compensation for lost revenue in the shops.

[Sunfish]

I've enjoyed BA service on the Atlantic routes and never had anything especially good or bad happen to me at LHR, I always felt that the presence of the shops at the airport rather negated half the purpose of visiting London anyway since a lot of the "signature' British stuff is available at LHR.

However, I've now decided that I will avoid LHR in future, probably by going to Zurich and then train or car onwards.

[overstress]

Arrived on stand exactly on time, but then had to wait 20mins for the air bridge to be connected

That typifies the BA experience at LHR, sadly. I'm usually the one on the PA apologising and promising that we are 'chasing it up' :sad:

[Bus429]

Strange, isn't it? I use many airlines and put BA (and Quaintarse) among the best for cabin service. Shame that the same sort of professionalism isn't exhibited by BA's management.

[PAXboy]

Slightly off topic but an amusing indication that the world of the Top Table continues unabated:

Channel 4 doubles chief executive's salary, despite posting losses

By Ciar Byrne, Arts and Media Correspondent
Thursday, 24 April 2008

Channel 4's chief executive, Andy Duncan, saw his pay double in 2007 to £1.2m, even though the channel is pleading for a £150m public subsidy.
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/media/channel-4-doubles-chief-executives-salary-despite-posting-losses-814755.html

[Wingswinger]

There you have it. That's the problem. It's not just BA, Open Skies and T5. They are simply signs of a much deeper malaise. It's the "stuff yer gullet" culture of the so-called executives everywhere. Bonuses, bonuses, bonuses bigger than their salaries.

The banks have all been caught by their own folly and now expect us to pay through the nose to refill their coffers. Never again will I listen to a bank manager lecturing me about financial probity.

It really is time to blow the whistle on the lot of them and make them hand back the bonuses to the share-holders and tax-payers. I'm no socialist but this sort of stuff really does raise the hackles.

[two green one prayer]

I'm lucky in that I am not a business traveller and have a wider choice of what airport I use. BAA's idea of herding everyone through their absurd shopping mall shows a fundamental contempt for the users of T5. This contempt is seperate from from the operational cock up in that it was planned at an early stage and is therefore deliberate.

When I want to go shopping I go to Tesco. If I ever want a £1,000 handbag I'll go to Harrods. I don't mind flying with BA but not if I am required to jump through BAA's hoops to get to them. A lot of PPRuNe posters have said that they are avoiding LHR as they avoid the plague and this must be having an impact on BA's profits. If BA cannot sort this out they are going to be taken down by other hungrier airlines. Until then it's a case of "sorry you don't sell want I want to buy".

[SWBKCB]

Not that bothered by the shops - if I don't want to buy I don't have to. However, airlines are meant to get people from A to B and hopefully the good ones treat their passengers with a bit of repect.

Last night the BA1338 from LHR to NCL due out at 20.50 was delayed until 22.30. Pax were told regularly that the reason was the late arrival of BA363 from Lyon, and once this arrived it would do the outbound BA1338.

BA363 arrived at a21.25 and at about 22.00 BA1338 popped up on the BA website as canx - at this time pax in the lounges had not been told.

I know a number of Gold/Silver cards for which this is the last straw and who will never set foot on a BA aircraft again - more gains for KLM/AF and National Express East Coast.

[13Alpha]

I know a number of Gold/Silver cards for which this is the last straw and who will never set foot on a BA aircraft again - more gains for KLM/AF and National Express East Coast.


Agree.

In a way it would be a blessed relief if BA abandoned its domestic operations entirely and stopped pretending it was interested in regional pax.

The service it provides on the ground at regional airports is no better than its competitors now that they share the same ground handling companies, they continue to lose people's bags (even putting the T5 problems to one side), and their flights are routinely late or cancelled when some other part of the BA operation has a problem.

I was at a travel fair earlier in the week including many major airlines. There were a lot of very grumpy customers surrounding the BA stand, to the extent that I felt quite sorry for the staff who had to stand there all day and defend the company. They looked absolutely shattered. Meanwhile the people on the AF/KLM stand, and the Star Alliance one, looked positively buoyant.

The lady on the BA stand I spoke to was very sympathetic about how BA is treating its regional pax, but I'm afraid sympathy doesn't cut it any more.

I'm a silver card holder but I'm afraid some free drinks and a comfortable seat in a lounge doesn't compensate for routinely late or cancelled flights and lost luggage.

13Alpha

[Full_Service_SLF]

I am based in Manchester and travel with one of the three alliances on a weekly basis at least. I am writing this because as I got T5'ed last night after several incident free (but at times comedy) trips through BAA's new greenhouse. I got stuck in an automated check-in nightmare and missed the last flight. It was a pain but BA put me on a BMI alternative without any drama. I was in Paris recently and my flight went tech. Air France found another plane and we got in 90 minutes late - a great performance.

I have a list of delays, cancellations and nightmares (Moscow once took 24 hours with KLM via AMS and CDG) for all the carriers. My conclusion - living in a region sucks and this will get worse as MAN goes loco.

[BAMANAGER]

This thread is about the quality of BA management, lets stay on thread. Certainly with the rash of BA pilots hitting the front pages of the nationals this weekend I think the airline has lost the plot. BA management have lost the respect of one of the most important staff groups, the pilots. I think it's time BA face up to the incompetence, big change ahead at the worlds worst airline!

[Max Tow]

I note that "BAManager" has submitted a total of 23 posts, all knocking BA & its management and not one on any other subject. He also misidentified the BA pilot referred to in another thread. Readers beware as I suspect that the moderators' warning that writers may not be who they claim rings bells in this case.

[Full_Service_SLF]

I believe that I was sticking to the sentiment of the thread. As far as I am concerned BA's service is no better or worse than the other carriers where you had to make a connection. On board, on long haul at least, it is generally better but that is very much a matter of personal taste. From my perspective the mistake that BA management have made is retrenching from the regions as that makes BA much the same as AF, LH, KLM... (maybe I just don't get the OpenSkies thing)

When they do get T5 working with very short connections they may have something that differentiates them. My God, is that the plan after all? Personally I would be so much happier if they replaced the MAN to LHR bit with a 2 hour train service. Now that would be differentiation but I am going off topic again.

[BEagle]

Some scathing words from Michael Winner in today's Sunday Times:

"The most stupid statement I ever heard came from Willie Walsh, chief executive of British Airways. A day before Heathrow’s fiasco opened he stood there on TV and announced terminal 5 would be up and running smoothly from day one and no British Airways customers would ever have more than two people in front of them at the check-in desk.

We know Wee Willie is small, but his brain is obviously diminutive even in relation to his body. What a ridiculous statement to make. Any new venture may well go wrong – although Willie provided magnified meaning to the word “wrong”. And there’s no need to fantasise about how few people will be in front of you at the check-in desk.

The rest is history. Confusion beyond belief. Tens of thousands of lost bags sent to Italy and America for sorting out. Hundreds of BA planes cancelled. Enraged customers. A total catastrophe. Whereupon Wee Willie aka Silly Willie aka Willie Wonka (I misspelt that last word) says, “I’m sorry. The buck stops with me. I take full responsibility.” Then he sacks two of his key executives. So the buck stopped not with Silly Willie, but somewhere down the line.

Polls in The Daily Telegraph and the Evening Standard showed a large majority of readers wanted him to resign, as did the British Airline Pilots’ Association and any sensible person on the planet. But Willie stays on. Why should he give up a highly salaried job just because he’s inept?

Compare that to the chairman of HM Revenue & Customs, Paul Gray, who resigned because a twit employee in Tyne & Wear sent out discs containing people’s personal information. Paul’s a man of honour. Willie stays because, in my view, honour is not his strong card.

As for the nonsense, “No BA passenger will ever have more than two people in front of them at the check-in desk”, I went down last Saturday, 25 days after terminal 5 opened. There were many desks with more than two people in the queue. I’m photographed, at 2.30pm on a quiet day for travellers, standing behind 11 BA customers queuing at check-in B7. You can’t see them all, but, I promise you, there were 11.

When Willie Wonka became BA’s chief executive on October 1, 2005, the company’s shares stood at £3. Last Friday they’d sunk to £2.21. That he remains in the job is beyond belief."

[Captain Correlli]

Great post BEagle. I used T5 as SLF a week ago. three canx flights and no bags at the end of it. Three days later, returned with new bags and new contents. Only one flight canx, second flight three hours late. No bags.

Incredible. I shall move heaven and earth never to have anything to do with BA or LHR again unless it is prohibitively costly.

[beerdrinker]

I don't often agree with Winner but on this occasion he is spot on.

[BUNGLE123]

I dont think we can blame Kirkwood, he was instructed to read from a statement and not to answer and questions he just did what he was told, he wanted to face the questions but was instructed from higher (ww) not to.
WW had to point the finger at someone:rolleyes: and he has done it with two of his top guys, how sad and what a waste of so many years experience between them. It NOT just two people fault but a whole team of them so why should they take the blame?:oh: its a cowards way out for WW, he should have stood up for his team and said "fire me and not Kirkwood and Noyes"...but he didnt. tut tut.:=
Kirkwood does not deserve to be victimised in this way...i wish him good luck for the future. ;)

[The Little Prince]

Hmm, but Kirkwood has been totally involved in all of the BA strategic decision making, including T5. Ergo he is complicit. In any case, I am quite sure he would not be going so quietly unless his payoff had been agreed at the usual SIT rates. I wonder how much longer Willie W@nka has got?

(SIT = Snout in Trough)

[WHBM]

"The most stupid statement I ever heard came from Willie Walsh, chief executive of British Airways. A day before Heathrow’s fiasco opened he stood there on TV and announced terminal 5 would be up and running smoothly from day one and no British Airways customers would ever have more than two people in front of them at the check-in desk.
Came through T5 this morning and have to advise Willie that he is grossly misinformed, there are no check-in desks at all.

There's Fast Bag Drop (haha), there's Visa Check, there's Assistance, there's Customer Service (which everyone else would call ticketing) but not one check-in desk.

There are lots of check-in machines. These take as identity locator reference, machine-readable passport or credit card. They don't of course read Russian passports, they don't of course read read Russian credit cards. The locator code is buried down in the text of BA tickets issues in Russia (if I didn't know the format I would have been screwed too). My Russian fellow traveller would have been sunk without me there. There is no Russian language option, despite 4 flights a day to Russia.

Spoke to the agent on duty at the machines (had to approach her as she viewed our confusion from a distance) and was told "probably" customer service could help. This despite the fact we are standing in front of the machine holding a ticket with the locator printed on it.

On to Fast Bag Drop. This should be a 10-second operation, surely ? One desk was into a phone call, another was scrutinising passports for something, a third was reallocating seats, presumably after a machine had not allocated the desired ones ! Excuse me, but this is nothing to do with dropping bags, fast or not.

Does nobody at BA have a CLUE about how to go about systems design anywhere in the organisation.

[hunterboy]

Does nobody at BA have a CLUE about how to go about systems design anywhere in the organisation.
Nope....welcome to BA.....Sadly, the Board seem more intent sorting out free confirmed First Class travel for themselves and their families than sorting out the companies problems. easier to sit tight and hope it all turns out ok in the end.

[fireflybob]

A Terminal Failure (http://www.bbc.co.uk/radio4/progs/listenagain.shtml)

[Sunfish]

Highly automated systems + a wide variety of passenger variability = failure.

For example - and not BA or T5 - paid extra for the legroom of an emergency row exit seat (Virgin) - stand in queue for automated check in........and the machine rejects me and tells me to visit customer service, where I find that they need to check I'm not totally incapacitated if I'm sitting in that seat.

...Or the time I checked in and in front of me was a family of four (incl. two babies) returning home from a bicycle tour, complete with bikes, bike trailers, luggage, baby gear et al. Took the poor girl half an hour.

...or the time at CDG where there was a 100m queue of undocumented Africans trying to get on a flight to Britain.

Minor problems really, but now repeat that experience in Hungarian, Swahili, Mandarin, etc.

There is no substitute for plenty of experienced and helpful staff, but narcissistic management (being unable to empathise with anything or anyone) don't understand much of the human experience at all, and what they do see, they don't like. So they treat their staff as a cost of doing business.

To put it another way, from the ruthless "de - staffing" that appears to be apparent in T5, it's pretty obvious that BA management, from the Board down, see their staff as a liability, NOT an asset of the business.

[Willie Wash]

As is usual on the PPRUNE forum the BA trolls will request proof beyond reasonable doubt the BA treat their staff as a liability........Where is it SUNFISH, your experience counts for nothing!!!!! Wouldn't it be nice if someone had that illusive proof........Just a thought........................

[Sunfish]

http://images.despair.com/products/demotivators/blame.jpg

[Bill of the Hamptons]

Now things are getting really serious!

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/05/04/cnt5104.xml

[zfw]

Just to add.................

Here in MAN BA seem to have a strange way of handling customers bags.

Most of our shuttle services are operated by A319 recently these aircraft have become containerised only, this is because T5 is a container only terminal so Aviance here have been told.

Hence when the 4 containers are full, any extra baggage is to be rushed onto the next A/C, as there is no facility for bulk.

In the last few days i have seen in excess of 30 bags being dumped because of this ludicrous practice.............not only does it inconvenience the punter it must be costing a fortune to rush it on to the destination.

Does this happen at all shuttle stations in the U.K.?

ZFW

[Ex Cargo Clown]

Just to add.................

Here in MAN BA seem to have a strange way of handling customers bags.

Most of our shuttle services are operated by A319 recently these aircraft have become containerised only, this is because T5 is a container only terminal so Aviance here have been told.

Hence when the 4 containers are full, any extra baggage is to be rushed onto the next A/C, as there is no facility for bulk.

In the last few days i have seen in excess of 30 bags being dumped because of this ludicrous practice.............not only does it inconvenience the punter it must be costing a fortune to rush it on to the destination.

Does this happen at all shuttle stations in the U.K.?

ZFW

So no facility to load H5 baggage ???

And more to the point.......


Only 4 AKHs on an A319 !!!

[Sunfish]

After reading the Telegraph article Bill of the Hamptons posted, the proximate cause of this T5 mess is now obvious.

BAA built a shopping mall disguised as an airport terminal - and produced a result that is a failure in both roles.

Why didn't BA see this coming? It's an old business axiom that you cannot be all things to all men - you need to focus on your core business and discard the rest. That's why the fashionable business conglomerates were such a failure in the 1970's.

BAA cannot run shopping malls and airports at the same time because over time, resources and energy are going to be focussed on the "wrong" projects.

[Skipness One Echo]

Can someone confrim that BA are operting a system described above where the aircraft pallets are not capable of lifting a standard load of passenger bags due to the complete inability of the shiny new palatial mall at Heathrow to deal with loose bags.....IS THIS FOR REAL ? If this is the case I would like confirmation because this will be BA and I parting company for good.

[Swedish Steve]

Only 4 AKHs on an A319 !!!

Yes only 4. But there is room for a half sized extra one at the back.
Finnair and Swissair have these on their A319. Not very big but better than leaving bags behind.

[HZ123]

Amongst BA staff this was always an issue that had been anticipated when the A319 orders were placed and a large A320 order was canx. At the time we were responding to the anticipated downturn in traffic. The limitations of this aircrafts effect far more routes than just the shuttle. However, it might well be that another downturn in traffic is about to take place any day soon. Containerising the aircraft was mandatory for the move to T5 and is also a preference at many EU airports.

[d71146]

According to Sky news WW is up before a government panel today for a grilling on the recent troubles ie baggage and the countless other little matters of late.

[Tiger]

In todays Observer.

BA lines up successor for Walsh

Headhunters asked to find potential replacement

* Tim Webb, industrial editor
* The Observer,
* Sunday May 11 2008
* Article history

About this article
Close
This article appeared in the Observer on Sunday May 11 2008 on p1 of the Business news & features section. It was last updated at 00:06 on May 11 2008.

British airways has appointed leading headhunter Whitehead Mann to find a possible successor for under-fire boss Willie Walsh. The airline has mandated the firm to fill the position of chief operations officer, newly created in the wake of the Terminal 5 fiasco.

But BA, which is expected to issue a profits warning when it announces full-year results this week, has told Whitehead Mann to recruit someone who could be considered as a candidate to succeed Walsh.

Carol Leonard, a partner at Whitehead Mann, confirmed that BA had appointed the firm in the past three weeks. 'BA hopes that this person could join the board in one or two years and be considered as a potential successor [to Walsh]. This person has got to prove themselves as a contender to take over.'

She said their first priority was to find a chief operating officer and that any succession would take place in 'five years plus'. But asked whether this would remain the case if the problems at Terminal 5 continued and the new recruit impressed the BA board, she declined to comment.

In a statement, BA said this weekend: 'The process of appointing a chief operating officer is ongoing and we are using a variety of ways to find the best candidate. We are looking for a person who has a wide range of operational experience and customer service knowledge. They must be at a very senior level already within their organisation and have proven leadership skills. The person will report directly to Willie Walsh and have in excess of 20,000 people in their department.'

The news that BA is looking for someone to be groomed as a possible successor to Walsh is likely to increase the pressure on the former pilot.

One day after the shambolic opening of Terminal 5, when asked if he would resign, he told a reporter that the 'buck stops with me'.

Two weeks later BA announced that David Noyes, director of customer service, as well as Gareth Kirkwood, director of operations, were leaving the company. The new chief operations officer will replace them.

This week shareholders are also bracing themselves for disappointment over BA's dividend plans. BA has not paid a dividend since 2001 but last summer said it would have a dividend policy in place by the end of March 2008.

Richard Marwood, of Axa Investment Managers, a top 10 BA shareholder, said: 'It would be disappointing if they didn't pay a final - dividends are very important - but not entirely surprising given the pressure they are under with the current fuel costs.'

Most attention at Friday's results will be on the airline's guidance for the current year. Collins Stewart estimates earnings this year of just £350m, compared with a £819m forecast for the year just ended.

Analysts also warn that this year operating margins could be as low as 3 per cent because of surging fuel costs, against last year's target of 10 per cent. Joe Gill from Goodbody Stockbrokers said: 'Airlines are in a worse situation than after the terrorist attacks of 11 September.'

[d71146]

Realise I might get a flaming over this but they could do worse than to try and get Rod back over.

[woodpecker]

Why would Rod want to come back?

With his excellent pension, free firm First Class travel for life, I am sure he is very happy where he is.

They could start a little club. Bob and Rod as founder members with application form in the post for Willie......

[chrisbl]

A non story really.

[Sunfish]

Discussed already. No one useful will want the position while the Chairman remains the Chairman.

The fish rots.........

[Viewedfromabove]

Nothing that a dose of Viagra wouldn't fix surely?

[MUFC_fan]

The perfect team:

Chairman - Sir Alan Sugar (would take absolutely no crap whether it be from BAA or his favourite British newspaper - The Daily Mail!:ok:)

CEO - Jeremy Clarkson (The most straigh-forward talking man in the country. Gets the job done and a huge patriot. He wouldn't let BA down!)

COO - Roy Hodgson (Getting Fulham Football Club out of that sh*thole was a stroke of genius - next step - get T5 sorted!)

Three men who would make BA and T5 the best people to be with!:ok:

[J.L. Seagull]

Jeremy is not that daft! This is the most poisoned of any chalices yet offered.

However, Sir Alan would be a great move - I can imagine him talking to manager after manager:
"You're Fired"!

Think of the charisma boost, the publicity boost, the ability boost. Problem would be the challenge, which he probably doesn't need, and if risk assessed properly would be a no-brainer to turn down.

[Momentary Lapse]

20,00 staff? Good grief. Surely that's part of the problem. The ar$e isn't talking to the elbow enough.

/I reckon most of Manchester Airports Group senior management could do this job. They're great.

/sarcasm.

[infrequentflyer789]

Now we know (if we didn't already) why willie's hanging on in there:

http://www.forbes.com/afxnewslimited/feeds/afx/2008/05/12/afx4995222.html

Allegedly 100% bonus for "meet City forecasts" - so if the city expected T5 to be a f**k-up, then he's met expectations...

[OneWorld22]

Could fit in with the rumour Walsh has been earmarked for FR....


Today in the press
Monday, 12 May 2008 08:56

BA STARTS SEARCH FOR POTENTIAL SUCCESSOR TO CEO WALSH -

The London Independent says that British Airways has appointed the recruitment consultants Whitehead Mann to find a new chief operating officer and possible successor for its embattled chief executive Willie Walsh. The successful candidate will a fill a newly created role, which was devised after the recent Heathrow Terminal 5 fiasco.

Both BA's director of operations, Gareth Kirkwood, and head of customer service, David Noyes, parted company with the group last month. The two roles will now be combined to create the position of chief operating officer. The airline, which will publish its full-year results on Monday, is believed to have instructed Whitehead Mann to find a senior level candidate who could be considered for a position on the board within two years, and could also be a potential replacement for Mr Walsh within five years.

Mr Walsh may well not make it through another five years in the job, however. Both he and his board colleagues have come under fire over the past few weeks, over their handling of BA's switch-over to Terminal 5 at Heathrow. Having failed to adequately train their staff and test the new facilities, thousands of customers found their flights cancelled or delayed when the terminal opened at the end of March. The airline also managed to lose some 20,000 pieces of luggage.

[WHBM]

I recommend Barbara Cassini and I claim the £100,000 introduction fee :)

If WW has already been lined up by Ryanair as M O'Ls replacement then the sooner he (or anyone else in such a position) is seen off the premises, the better. Come on BA board, get a grip.

[OneWorld22]

Could I suggest a certain Michael O'Leary?

[Caudillo]

Perhaps something along the lines of the selection procedure for the Dalai Lama might be an idea?

[fractional]

BAW must go for a leader with a vision. Who's claiming to make a profit when everybody else in the industry is "depressed"? EK must have someone interested in the position. If BAW wants a profit in few years, that the guy in EY will make it. Last but not least, you have the brilliant AAB from QR. I believe being a National is not a requirement.
Sorry guys. Sands are moving around me. It's just a tentative to light up the subject. Good luck BAW!

[Morbid]

Took the call this morning.... :O

.... and for that they rejected me. :{

[ZFT]

but not least, you have the brilliant AAB from QR


BA couldn't afford the litigation costs!!!

UK staff still have employment rights.

[CaptKremin]

Could I suggest a certain Michael O'Leary?

Why don't you apply for O'Leary's job.
You're cut out for it.

[saintjoseph]

steve mclaren, avram grant, sven, or maybe that guy from m&s! seriously cassani would send a bold message for the future, though the old gits on the board might need to wake up a bit. :oh:

[tristar500]

May I suggest Mr Chipperfield.

He has a wealth of knowledge, used to dealing with all sorts of tricky situations, and has experience in running a large tent full of clowns :E

BA are now playing 'catch-up' on their own patch, nevermind the worldwide route network.

If action is not taken - NOW, it may be too late to save London Airways... :{

[CitiflyerMan]

Save it? It should be raised to the ground. It's gone beyond restructuring!

[Sunfish]

I would expect that once the new person has their feet under the desk, Walsh will be gone within Eighteen months or less. If there are any more unpopular changes to BA's operations that need to be made (for example outsourcing, cost cutting) then Walsh will be urged by the Board to make them now. His successor will then arrive, all sweetness and light, as part of the "healing" process.


....At least that's the way I'd play it at Board level. Nobody is going to take that job unless they have an unspoken fast track to Walsh's desk, but even then with the existing Board and Chairman, I'm not sure it's a "do-able" job.

I think it also demonstrates rather neatly why senior executives get paid very high salaries. Cleaning up BA's image and product is going to be a very difficult and probably thankless task, with an uncertain outcome. Anyone embarking on such a perilous voyage would be entitled in my opinion to demand a very high, price and a guaranteed financial result for themselves no matter what the outcome.....ie: Golden Handcuffs and a Golden parachute.

[HZ123]

Perhaps here at T5 we might be better off with Ant and Dec. At least they have a reputation for fixing things.

[SUBACX]

What about someone like Harry Redknapp ? ;)

[SuperStewardess]

I think Barbara Cassani is an excellent choice... I had friends who were at 'go-fly' and although B.A. is a totally different ball-game, I think she would do it justice. My friends say she was very 'user friendly' and got the job done very well apparantly. It could be said that WW came from a small company Futura through Aer Lingus & to British Airways, so why not Ms. Cassani who I think is at 'Clickair' or 'Vueling' Interesting times ahead methinks... ;)

[en2r]

It could be said that WW came from a small company Futura through Aer Lingus & to British Airways, so why not Ms. Cassani who I think is at 'Clickair' or 'Vueling' Interesting times ahead methinks...
Was WW with Futura?? I thought he'd been working with Aer Lingus for years, first as a pilot before moving up the ranks.

[SuperStewardess]

Apparantly, he joined Aer Lingus in 1979 as a 17 year old pilot trainee, whilst doing a business administration degree at Trinity College in Dublin. He rose through the ranks to become a captain, and then was 'seconded' to Futura to sort-it-out before being appointed chief operating officer of Aer Lingus in 2000 and then being 'given' the role of CEO in 2001. Not bad really. He did turn Aer Lingus around in the wake of September the 11th where most people thought he would fail. It's just such a pity that his name seems to be tarnished now by association wth B.A. I sort of think that he may have bitten off more than he can chew in trying to turn B.A. around..? :ooh:

[WHBM]

Was WW with Futura?? I thought he'd been working with Aer Lingus for years, first as a pilot before moving up the ranks.
Futura was initially a 50-50 joint venture between Aer Lingus and Spanish investors for the Northern Europe - Spain holiday market. EI's share has since been diluted, by adding Spanish investment. Although on the face of it a Spanish operator they also have a Dublin crew base and dominate the IT market from Ireland to Spain. The Spanish banks provided the money and Aer Lingus the aviation knowledge (and WW). Futura's official name is Hispano Irlandesa Aviacion SA.

[G-CPTN]

I think that you've all overlooked the obvious candidate - someone who has demonstrated his ability to resurrect a dead duck (and who has experience of a Mickey Mouse operation too) - PY Gerbeau (http://www.normanphillips.co.uk/pierre_yves_gerbeau_bio.htm)

[Willie Wash]

Hey PPruner's this ones got more interesting since my forced timeout! Looks like there are a few on her now that actually support my view that BA is a completely incompetant outfit that requires radical change in the management and 'culture'.

Little Willie has been out lunching recently with an old time BA PR boss. Maybe getting ready to begin the damage limitation for his own hide. Well me thinks it is too late and MR Walsh has been exposed for his poor business acumen.

How can he seriously be allowed to get away with saying he knew the risks but still went ahead with the move, HUBRIS no doubt. You could not make this sh1t up.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/money/main.jhtml?xml=/money/2008/05/14/ccdiary114.xml

article on Willie's luncheon, I bet it was on expenses!