BALPA withdraw from Open Skies Court Case

[Locked door]

WTF???:mad:

22 May 2008 - 16:06
LONDON, May 22 (Reuters) - The British Air Line Pilots' Association has withdrawn its court action against airline British Airways , a BALPA spokesman said, signalling a potentially costly pilots' strike has been averted.
Shares in British Airways climbed 3.8 percent to 210.5p.
"We have withdrawn the action," said BALPA spokesman Keith Bill by phone on Thursday. "We will give our reasons later."
BALPA had asked the court to rule that its right to strike over BA's proposed OpenSkies service was unlimited by BA's rights to establish operations in other EU states.

[Easy Ryder]

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/law/article3986070.ece

[Fly747]

Pragmatic and very sensible given the threat that the fuel price and economic situation is putting us all under. Why go on strike and make sure your job is on the line.
A new operation running 767s may not last very long anyway in the current climate.

[Dysag]

"Whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we'll ...well... er ugh... maybe surrender..."

[blimey]

A new operation running 767s may not last very long anyway in the current climate.
That's why Jetstar, sorry Open Skies, will be running the latest hardware in the not too distant future.

[MarkD]

those are skinny looking 76s Fly747.

Presumably that was a typo?

[Huck]

"Whatever the cost may be, we shall fight on the beaches, we shall fight on the landing grounds, we'll ...well... er ugh... maybe surrender..."

Just following the lead of the warriors in the U.S. ALPA.

"Why fight the inevitable. Just join the opposition - then you can help steer the outcome...." Makes me weep.

[demomonkey]

Although I never supported strike action, this is a terrible outcome for all of us concerned. BA wins by default on a technicality. Very hollow victory when it will only create alot of bad feeling and lead to inflexibility elsewhere. The only real winners are some very clever legal eagles.

Someone from both sides need to get together and create something we can both live with and allow us to get back to the job of flying lots of smiling 'bums on seats' on time to make 10%.

[lordsummerisle]

Expect that Hand, Mouse, Overstress, Tandem and the like are having a conflab at the moment about how they can spin this into a glorious victory for Balpa??

[L337]

Still waiting for 411a to post. Looking forward to it immensely.

[Dozza2k]

lord,
I see the green eyed monster is still alive in you, I am pleased that we did our best, so we appear to have lost in the end and at the moment it all looks a bit pants for us nigels.

still, onto the next fight.

d2k.

[Megaton]

The misplaced schadenfreude is as disappointing as it was expected. This was no win for BA BALPA or pilots in general. In the short term no-one will notice any difference but in the longer term this will come back to haunt us.

[M.Mouse]

lordsummerisle

I have never been an apologist for BALPA and resent being included in your smug post.

BALPA retained some first class lawyers and they have acted on their advice.

The fact that very recent EU law has effectively manacled unions is another debate.

[Fell_Off_The_Jetway_Again]

I don't propose to be any sort of expert here, but having followed the progress of this situation since the beginning, I would say that BA's grand strategy might be along the following lines:

a. Allow OpenSkies to grow to the point where a requirement to feed connecting passengers from short-haul European routes onto long-haul transatlantic flights ex-London no longer exists, enjoying all the cost-saving benefits that will provide the company.

b. Subsequent reduction of required short-haul capacity, thereby freeing up large numbers of slots at LHR / LGW which can be used by BA themselves for other long-haul routes (more profitable than short-haul), or alternatively sold, leased or rented to other members of Oneworld Alliance to generate cost-free revenue, whilst simultaneously transferring some of the risk of competitive transatlantic flights to other airlines.

c. Finally, further into the future, eventual transfer of operations ex-London to Openskies, now BALPA have given up their right to strike on this issue. (Is this time-limited, or has a de facto precendent been set now, by the way?)

And there you have it: in the long-term, a complete outflanking of the BA pilot body, at least as far as the transatlantic routes go, replacing it with crews from a cheaper cost base (OpenSkies), and having already removed a good proportion of the mch less profitable short-haul feeder routes into London, the whole game guarantees significant profits for BA in the medium-to-long run.

To conclude, I am very sorry Balpa managed to get themselves stuck here between a rock and a hard place, and I am somewhat concerned as to how this will impact the pilot body as a European whole.

This might be a day we all live to regret.

All a bit depressing really...

[Capt H Peacock]

Unfortunately you can only fight battles for which you have the ammo. This was going to have strung out for years in the courts anyway, with countless counter-appeals and referals. The pilots union couldn't pay for such action, they find it difficult enough justifying their expenditure on Big Airways anyway, let alone a massive speculative punt on a dusty alleyway of European law.

If this is to be fought at all it's with the TUC in UK and the big unions like IG Metall in Germany etc.

BA have hired some smart lawyers, and they've earned their bonus. This profession is screwed. Not far behind it every other unionised industry in Europe. Regard the Holy Grail.

You might like to consider whether you're prepared to sit back and allow this situation to continue? Will you be writing to your elected representatives? Your MP, your MEP?

You can laugh at Nigel tonight, but this will come back to haunt us all.

I feel utterly sick.

[Iva harden]

It was always going to happen, I know the BA lot did not want to believe it but there it is. BA found a way out very cleverly. It would have bought down BALPA financially......where do BALPA go from here....a lot of soul searching no doubt.

[lordsummerisle]

Mr Mouse,

Smug?? Suppose must be some sort of achievement to be called smug by a BA captain.

"He did omit the last part of the statement to BALPA at the end of the ACAS talks. The last part of the statement after saying that BA would seek an injunction was that they would also seek damages for loss of revenue caused by the announcement of a strike. In other words they would try and bankrupt BALPA.

The smug smile rapidly disappeared from their faces when the following Monday, at a BALPA requested meeting, BALPA informed the BA team that they (BALPA) were appearing at the High Court within the hour."


Your words above, so did Balpa ignore the advice of their very smart lawyers earlier, or were they not as smart as you were led to believe?

[overstress]

[/QUOTE]Smug?? Suppose must be some sort of achievement to be called smug by a BA captain.[/QUOTE]

Well your words are here on the forum for everyone to form their opinion of you, lordsummerisle. The consequence of this EU law appears to be to return millions of law-abiding workers in the EU to the status of serfs.

I won't be spinning this into anything, old chap, as there is nothing to spin. The victory is for the management of large EU corporations - presumably that amuses you in some way?

It would appear that BA has driven a dagger into the collective hearts of 3000 pilots. How likely are they to 'go the extra mile' now?

BA management seem intent in following the practices of a certain Irish airline, it seems.

[Blackcap]

So just how much has this cost BALPA?

Asking as an interested and perplexed (non BA) BALPA member. So that's where my subs have been going all these years. It does stand for Big Airways Line Pilots Association.
:(

[SR71]

"Surrender bidline and the top five pay points and you can have the OS guys on the master list. Deal?"

:}

[lordsummerisle]

Overstress,

No particular axe to grind on this either way, but whilst this has been going on, there have been some very dismissive, triumphalist and somewhat, dare i say it "smug" postings on this topic from such as mentioned.

"BTW, BALPA is going to re-ballot the pilots once the strike is declared legal by the High Court"

Take it the re-balloting not happening then?

Personally i agree with you that it is another in a long line of victories for "big business", and can be traced back to the election victory of 1979, work ably continued by New Labour in it's obeisance to business interests. However I do find it hard to believe that many BA Balpa members would have been crying at the demise of the unions of all stripes, and most i imagine would have heartily applauded the laws that were brought in to make it more difficult to strike effectively.

That said, you still have the very large yes vote of your colleagues, and if you really believe in what you are fighting for then go ahead and do it, but principles may not be as strong throughout the workforce as yours undoubtedly are.

[Brakes...beer]

Blackcap,

I presume it was the influence of national BALPA that brought this case to a close: not wishing to risk your money. In the long run, if indeed BA succeed with Open Skies, then we shall all suffer as BA mainline's Ts and Cs are reduced.

This is a black day for airline pilots around the world.

[Railgun]

Has we Willie has done a BASSA on BALPA?

[Freehills]

All I can say, looks an odd interpretation of law (that because any EU citizen has the right to start up in any EU country, a strike over such a start up is illegal)

But looks like BALPA decided they don't have the pockets or the time to be case law. Pragmatic, to leave it to bigger unions

[411A]

Still waiting for 411a to post. Looking forward to it immensely.

Shall not disappoint, L337...just three words.

Told You So.

[Norman Stanley Fletcher]

Notwithstanding the dork element who frequent a thread such as this, some of the comments here are most unfortunate. As one who has nothing to do with BA, I recognise that this battle was not just for BA pilots but for all unionised pilots everywhere. There will no doubt be much carping by the disenchanted and misinformed, but the simple fact is that BA have won a huge victory here, and that is bad news for every member of BALPA in every company. I have not the slightest doubt that BALPA would have stayed to fight it out had they thought they had any chance of winning - most regrettably it appears that they did not. The way is now clear for BA to effectively sideline the BA seniority list and build a parallel world that completely ignores the industrial agreements of previous years. They will undoubtedly do so and I hope there is a will to resist that within BA.

The right to withdraw labour is a fundamental right of all employees won over many years by brave people fighting almost impossible odds - the current European legislation has done away with that right in one fell swoop. An obscure piece of legislation has been used to really stuff the BA pilots. Nonetheless, the necessary lessons will be learnt and next time BALPA will win. If the BA pilots really want to fight this, there are still many ways of doing so - from sickouts to working to rule. My sincere hope is that they will not just walk away and lick their wounds. I truly wish them well and hope they will step up to the plate for Round Two.

[st nicholas]

If BALPA do not have the financial backing for a protracted case are they not a " tiger without claws". Could the T and G W Union not do a better job with half the membership fees BALPA commands. After all their coffers are huge and surely they could afford the council BALPA couldnt.

Would we be better served by the likes of the Transport and General Workers Union?

Just a thought:(

[Walnut]

With oil at about US 135pb which business model is best able to survive.?? The OS model (757)with about 50? equivalent club seats or the legacy airline with say 150? equivalent club seats (777).
I ask this question because with jet fuel at circa US 1500 ptonne, the 757 is going to cost about US 75,000 per round trip to JFK ie US 1500 per pax. The 777 will cost about US 150,000 for the same trip or about US 100 per pax.

It is staggering to think that to fly a 744 to OZ & back (say40hrs) will use 400 tonnes which will cost US 600,000. So assuming 400 pax thats US 1500 each, just on fuel.!!! Help aviation is in deep trouble.

[Willie Wash]

A specialised Union like BALPA is a quite unique situation in the 21st century but without doubt serves its members far better than a huge non-specific generalised union like T&G, Unite or GMB.

The finance issue is the same with all unions, maybe it should look at the funds available per member to understand the real financial clout of each union. I would suspect in that regard BALPA would be much the same.

Of course there is no union in the UK that can match the financial might of the globalised corporations.

Personally I think the result has become largely irrelevant as BA lurches toward bankruptcy. There is no need to be dissapointed when this malignant embarressment to the British economy final gets lanced.:ok:

[Devillish]

Hmmm - looks like a pretty big lose for BALPA... an undertaking to avoid the subject in the future.

That is not a win or withdrawal is it?

[Dogma]

BA are reaping what they have sown!!!!

Kicking a Top Notch operator/politician like Merv Granshaw out of the job at a critical time is criminal.

Saunders, Clarke and McAuslan are all at sea......:yuk:

A bad day for all UK Pilots.

[QFinsider]

The first step is the hardest, our esteemed "leadership" since kicked out dropped the ball on J*. As a result guys languish.


Won't compete against mainline
Exchange of opportunities( worthless)
to defend the mainline brand...


Only a fleet size of 21 aircraft
Never an internaitonal operation



Dixon is the same ilk as lil willy.......
:suspect:

[hunterboy]

Personally, I think this is a case of BA winning the battle but losing the war. Long term, I think this is going to cost BA more in good-will and flexibility. Also, I always felt that we should have been concentrating on improving the T's and C's for the present BA pilot workforce, and not defending pilots that haven't joined the company yet.(And judging by the vitriol posted by some of them on pprune, don't want to be part of BA)

[omoko joe]

irrespective of the Openskies debacle, as a union, BALPA now looks pretty much dead in the water. I hope I'm wrong but it's going to take some fancy moves to get any credibility back in the wake of this :sad:

[jacjetlag]

"Gilded lifestyle....."
Sounds like somebody tried to get hired at BA and didn't make the cut.


How is it that any pilot in this industry ever made a decent wage, supported their family and even sent their children to college? It wasn't the benevolence of their employer that gave pilots a workable schedule and a fair paycheck.

If BA pilot (and counsel) choose to come back and fight another day, so be it. This AA pilot will gladly support them in the next round. The quality of a good airline job did not occur in a vacuum or without struggle. Preserving good jobs will require same.

As for OS....it will end up being a non stop training facilty in this era of pilot shortages. No one will stay for very long. The business model is sketchy at best. We've seen these things come and go. Yawn....

[Re-Heat]

I foresee that all new entrants will go through OpenSkies - the cost base of the mainline operation will rise as the seniority of those there rises - then management will stick the knife in when benchmarking their costs against a (more junior) overall workforce at the competition in a few years' time.

Time to start persuading people that it is an unattractive career, to prevent the wave of over-enthusiastic youngsters entering the profession, thus driving down the price of the labour...

[411A]

Time to start persuading people that it is an unattractive career, to prevent the wave of over-enthusiastic youngsters entering the profession, thus driving down the price of the labour...

Good luck with that....:rolleyes::rolleyes::rolleyes:

Some of us, over the years, have received a reasonable wage for pushing heavy iron...and generally don't complain.

Others it would seem, apparently think that it is their God -given right to be paid excessively...and yet complain all the time.
BA pilots appear to be in this category.
Now they have had their wake-up call...as it was sure to arrive, at some point.
I would expect that a few former DanAir guys are smiling today, for they didn't get mad....just had to wait a few years...to get even.

BALPA..proven once again, not up to the task.
And never will be.
Why?
Realistic airline economic statistics in todays (not yesterdays) world.

Like it or lump it.

[jacjetlag]

Painting with the broad brush again, 411a.

BA pilots over the years have fought the fight to even have respectable wages in this business. You benefit from it and "don't complain". If you aren't willing to fight the fight, perhaps you are free-loading on the backs of those who will.

[411A]

BA pilots over the years have fought the fight to even have respectable wages in this business. You benefit from it and "don't complain".

I, personally, didn't benefit at all, from any possible BA pilot action...and never have.
Rather, BA pilot(s) actions have, in the past, proved to be a detriment to advancing pilots pay at other airlines.

SQ is a prime example.
BA guys retired at 55, went to Singapore, and promptly drove down the wages paid.
Went on for years...and this was admitted to me personally by the (then) SQ chairmain JYMP.

No sympathy from me, the BA pilots received (via the courts) what they right and truly deserved.

[ShortfinalFred]

411 a you are an *rse, and a crypto fascist to boot - "BA Pilots got what they deserved" - and what would that be exactly? The use of a piece of EU legislation to prevent the right to strike from ever being used by a union without being sequestered in court for damages? Do you understand basic democratic principles, or even care? If the majority of a union vote in a secret ballot for strike action then they have a right to do that in a free and democratic society. You may not like that reality, but it remains true.

The legal arguments used by BA to prevent BALPA from having a strike over OS are a corruption of those democratic rights and the courts will be overruled by law makers in due course. You can not by legal action remove at a stroke a fundamental right in a democratic society. But what of that to you when you continue to connive at every stage in the downfall of the airline pilot as a professional? You really amaze me in your desert eerie - what next for you eh, pilots are not allowed to resign en bloc either, they must work for who they are told to for as long as they are told to for the wages they are told to accept? Only be paid in credits for use at the company store? Same pay rates as the loaders and cleaners? After all its only a manual job, eh? Etc etc?

Your provocative little asides and smugness make me sick, as I am sure they do 99% of other professional pilots here. What the hell happened to you?

[411A]

What the hell happened to you?

Quite simple really...never worked for BA, nor ever desired to, either.
Collected tax-free salary overseas (long before it bacame fashionable to do so) and smiled all the way to the bank.

BA pilots, as I see it, have a definite problem...they simply cannot face reality in today's cost-driven airline world.
Too bad for them.
Will they continue to complain?
Yep, 'tis assured.
Now, if legislation can be changed, perhaps BA pilots will stop complaining and actually do something about it.
Don't hold your breath.
The cards were stacked against BA pilots (and BALPA) long ago.

[aftcargoheat]

I think you'll find BALPA fight many battles which have nothing to do with BA, but as there are a lot of us Nigels in BALPA it is only right they might spend more on the fights that do involve BA.

Do you not get that?

There is so much anti-Nigel feeling on this forum, it stinks. We are all professional pilots for heavens sake, what is it with all the nastiness?

Get a life, and start to consider how we are all being attacked by Corporate greed here.

[757_Driver]

maybe I'm missing something, but I can't see what is causing all the vitriol and / or hand-wringing here. (Apart from the fact that there are some very entrenched anti-nigel and anti-ba management opinions here)

Seems to me that BA have threatened to use a new, and thus untested law in a dubious manner, BALPA have got a bit bolshy standing up to it and a judge (probably the only cool head in this argument) has reminded both parties that this will go all the way, take years and cost (probalby 10's of millions, possibly more). Both sides have seen sense and stepped back from the line.
I don't see a victory for anyone here, nor a need to run around panicking that this is the beginning of the end for pilots everywhere.
At some point in the near future case law will be provided by someone on this issue and It will probably result in a situation not alot different from where we are at the moment.
I don't have an axe to grind about BA, or its pilots, but I really don't see what the fuss is.

[raveng]

OMG:{I can't believe that I am in agreement with a 411a post- BALPA, have got what they deserved :mad:!!- before you all shout, hear me out. I agree, anything that could potentially change t&c's for the worse, should be not taken lightly. Today however, it's not just a case of voting for strike action anymore. In earlier posts, it's mentioned perhaps getting some bigger unions involved. Sadly, the days of unions all sticking together, are long gone.
The average person on the street, many of them members of these bigger (wealthy) unions, have perceptions that the flying community are extremely well paid, live abroad, pay virtually no tax etc. I for one would be unsure that you would get the support you need from these people.

You have to choose battles carefully. BALPA I fear, have played this very badly, to it's members (not just BA) cost.

[SR71]

I do agree with 757Driver...

But 3000 BA pilots donating 10% of their salary creates a ~£30 million slush fund overnight doesn't it...give or take a few million?

After all, various advocates were suggesting this was BA's battle....

Its just getting interesting!

[Tandemrotor]

I admit it. I am absolutely gutted at this outcome. I can't think of any other way to describe it other than a complete and utter disaster! I feel badly let down. All those bitter BA pilot haters, go ahead, have a field day at our expense. Fill your boots. :D

[curser]

I'm disappointed for you and the others,tandem. But this was never going to be a one shot battle. Regards to all, Curser

[point8six]

10% of salary to belong to BALPA?? Are you sure??
BALPA has come up against both "The Establishment" and reality. The former is a reference to the Board and "UK PLC" and the latter is to what is happening in the world's economies today. Another loss of earnings and customer confidence is not sensible at this moment. It is quite possible that in a years time, less than a handful of airlines will report a profit and with industrial action, BA may not be one of them.
Wake up to reality - now is not the time to strike. With Maxjet, EOS and probably Silverjet out of business, perhaps "Openskies" will be shelved until the global economy and oil prices stabilise again. Once the "good times" return, is the time to take action. Right now BALPA should concern itself with jobs security for ALL its members, including those in BA who may be affected by the planned grounding of airframes this coming winter.

[Dogma]

You will not make the Cr@p airlines good by diminishing the Best airlines!

Trust me I work for Thomsonfly. BALPA needs to regroup and foster a spirit of unity and a slick professional association that represents all UK Pilots at the highest level.

Walk quietly and carry a big stick! BALPA stop shooting your mouth off!

MacAuslan and Saunders :yuk:

[757flyer]

I have to agree MacAuslan is the biggest waste of space in BALPA head office. He outraged the majority of the uk pilot community by inferring that if you were not BA then you were not up to standard (re BA038). Its about time he realised that his £100k salary is paid by US the pilots, he works for US, BALPA is not a business its an association (or some would say a union). The small guys sometimes need more protection than the major customer (BA) thats why we have a union, this is where MacAuslan has failed. Failed for the BA members and failed for the smaller outfits as well.

[Saint Peter]

It's not just MacAuslan, it's the BA Pilots attitude.
This was doomed to failure from day one, if only on the grounds of deepest pockets. Aside from the fact that it was quite clear this was never going to be a winner on logical or legal grounds, what I found offensive was the arrogance, the pomposity, the "I'm all right Jack - oh, and please go to the barricades to help me out or you're a scab" attitude which meant that I had to give up a promotion, a future and a pay rise to support those who were already at the top of the tree.

YEAH - RIGHT!:yuk:

[Captain Correlli]

Interesting to see the criticism levied at 411A when he was proved absolutely right. Weird really from so many supposedly intelligent people:

In context:

"If you try and fly at a speed below VS, you will stall, and at 500 feet, probably die."

"No, no, we can fly at any speed, we know best, we'll prove we're right, if you don't agree - well you must be a scab!"

"Er, well, actually, you'll get more than scabs if you insist on.......................................................... ...........................................................K APOW/CRASH/WRENCH/RIP/TEAR/EXPLOSION/ DESTRUCTION..............................erm, I hate to say I told you so!"

[ShortfinalFred]

Correlli, you are so full of it you must have brown eyes. Makes a change from green though, doesn't it?

Glad to see 411a show his true colours saying, in effect, "I got mine tax free but you guys dont deserve it". Nice. And completely in character, it seems.

I presume then, 411a, that you approve of the wholesale offshoring of US jobs? That you oppose the various anti-free trade measures long championed by the Good Ol' US of A to protect its own industry, like for example, the restriction of foreign ownership rights in US airlines? Go on, give us your thoughts from your sunny retirement spot.

[Hulkomaniac]

"You can take a horse to water, but you can't make it drink"

You can always tell a BA pilot, but you can't tell him much.

[M.Mouse]

It is not so much the fact that 411A sometimes is right it is the supercilious and downright obnoxious manner with which he never misses an opportunity to snipe at BA in particular and pilots in general.

I actually find him unpleasant and would guess that he is one very sad individual to feel the need to constantly display such vitriol which is why I have long since stopped responding to his antagonistic waffle.

What is being missed in the general debate is that the case law which BALPA has been faced with has only just become case law. It became very quickly self-evident in very recent days that until that case law is overruled, which it surely will be in the fullness of time, BALPA stood a very real chance of losing big time.

For those who wish to examine the wider issue that caused the withdrawal see here for a flavour: http://www.thompsons.law.co.uk/ntext/ecj-decision-laval.htm

The balance of power in industrial relations has just changed more dramatically than people probably realise.

[ShortfinalFred]

And I doubt you can tell someone who types like the Hulk anything at all...

[Hulkomaniac]

Whereas any BA pilot with the hypocrisy to criticise ANYONE for a supercilious and downright obnoxious manner
well, must be the non-handling flying non operating landing pilot......:hmm:

[Viking101]

Unions has not always been great. Thats quite international. IFALPA maybe could do something for BALPA, like helping them changing tactics?

In this case, even though I am not a Nigel, I do think BALPA made a misstake of picking a fight at the wrong time at the same time letting their members (BA) down. It seems that they forget who actually is paying their wages...

BALPA has its reasons, but I agree that they dont always perform "to the highest standard". I have been let down too. Maybe time to show that we are not happy?!

Together we are strong :ouch:

[Hulkomaniac]

and for Mr Mouse:

What is actually being missed is that BALPA realised that this would probably effectively bankrupt them. Possibly it was legally winnable, but not within the timeframe of the BALPA bank accounts.
God has always been on the side of the big battalions, but he has also historically shied away from hypocrites. One of the best spin-offs has been the lack of comment from Hand Solo. Hurrah.

Moral - never pick a fight you can't win.:ouch:

[ShortfinalFred]

M. Mouse, the point is that the process of law has achieved a ruling that defies long accepted political freedoms, and for that reason will undoubtedly not be allowed to act in the way that it currently has to deny unions the right to ballot their membership and to take strike action.

It is a fundamental change that has been created not by a legislative process with the explicit political consent that is inherent in that, but as a by-product of litigation that has such overhwelming social and political consequences that it will undoubtedly be overturned in a legislative forum. If it is not, and I remain utterly confident that it will, then employees of any firm in Europe have been reduced to a new form of serfdom, as someone else put it. I very much doubt that that situation will be allowed to stand and it would have very fundamental ramifications for all European democracies if it did. I re-iterate: it wont.

It is a long standing legal principle that Judges interpret the law as it is before them, they do not set social policy. If it is "bad law" then it is for a legislative forum to change it. This is "bad law" precisely because it creates a situation where a Judicial forum has been used to fundamentally alter social policy for which there is no political mandate to do so. It will not stay this way, but may take a substantial time to alter, during which time Mr Walsh will offshore BA to his hearts' content.

[ShortfinalFred]

And for the Hulk, its getting late to spell Schadenfreude correctly, but enjoy yours while it lasts. You can just get on with hating BA Pilots for your own malign reasons. My guess is that Mr Walsh has made BA all-but unmanageable for the forseeable future. Have you tried to run a succesful airline on absolutely no pilot morale at all for a significant length of time?

Has Mr Walsh actually got the full consent of BA shareholders to reverse BA into an untried and untested vehicle?

My overall estimate is that Mr Walsh has actually laid the foundations of his own demise here, and that it will be coming back to haunt him far quicker than anyone thinks. Lets see.

[Beerbelly]

I don't believe it was Mr Walsh who threatened strike action and then had to look rather foolish - (on behalf of all UK BALPA members) - by backing down. It wasn't Mr Walsh who has effectively disempowered BALPA - were I a member, I'd be pretty disappointed with British Airways Pilots and also MacAuslan.
Time for a 1% pay rise and a job with OS methinks.

[Carnage Matey!]

Round 1 to BA. Can't say I was anything other than gobsmacked and dismayed at the result but after 24 hours consideration I remembered BASSA were similarly shafted last March only to have BA meekly surrender to their identical demands last month. BA can play hardball with their lawyers but sometimes it's a hollow victory in the courtroom. BASSA learned their lesson, came back on a different tack and found BA were fresh out of clever tricks. There are plenty more strategies to pursue which are tried and tested. Time to regroup and remember that the UK operation remains paramount to BAs success and they need their staff to make it work. In the meantime I'm going to buy some new toys with my rainy day fund and await round 2.

[Saint Peter]

It always helps to accentuate the positive! Don't hold your breath though!

[jacjetlag]

411a....
You left this part out,

"If you aren't willing to fight the fight, perhaps you are free-loading on the backs of those who will."

So, you are mad at ex-pat BA guys for your perception that they drove down your wages ? It's a tough life for mercenaries ,huh? Did you ever stand for the profession or is it always about your paycheck and let everyone else fend for themselves?

[whatdoesthisbuttondo]

This makes all the crowing from the BA guys over the dodgy coup that got rid of Mervyn Granshaw a little silly now. Perhaps it wasn't such a good move eh? I have no doubt that he would have handled this situation much better. The first big test for MacAuslan and this happens.

Reap what you sow and all that.

[rebellion]

"This makes all the crowing from the BA guys over the dodgy coup that got rid of Mervyn Granshaw a little silly now."

Nothing can be bad about getting rid of Mervyn Granshaw and his old cronies.

It was one of the best day's in the history of BALPA.

[L337]

There is no doubt in my mind that this has been very badly judged by BALPA. However the bitterness, vitriol, and glee displayed at this defeat for BA pilots reflects very poorly on some of you here. It also reflects very poorly on all of us pilots here. The non aviation visitor must read and depart very worried for the mental stability of us all.

Rumours and News has become the place for the ignorant and the bigoted, from all sides, to display there prejudices.

[40&80]

Also their piss poor spelling...last year I could not spell pilot...this year I is one!

[amos2]

Didn't the Americans recently stage protest meetings in both the UK and the USA in support of the Balpa pilots?

I wonder how they feel now!

[M.Mouse]

I have always despaired at the childish and ignorant posting mis-spelt nonsense here but that is the weakness of anonymous public websites.

To claim that Jim MacAuslan is in some way to blame for the withdrawal ignores the way the case developed. Jim took over from Chris Darke. He, in my opinion, was a very poor General Secretary.

Whatever ones personal feelings about Mervyn Granshaw I would be suprised, if he had still been in pace, if he hadn't fully endorsed the BACC's actions. The reason being that OpenLies represents a very great threat to the majority of pilots in Europe.

BALPA's loss in this battle is bad news for the long term Ts & Cs of pilots.

What is interesting is whether OpenLies can hope to become a success now given the massive and continuing hike in oil prices.

[wiggy]

BA is still persuing BALPA for damages over the "fact" that the threat of a strike damaged BA's reputation....Would I be correct in thinking that if BA win that one it would set a precedent in UK law meaning no Union can ever again afford to threaten an airline with Industrial Action?

[rubik101]

If BA thinks that a premium service across the pond is such a good idea, why don't they simply reconfigure a few B757s or 777s and fly them from LHR where they have the slots, the crews etc and presumably, no objection from the pilots?
Just what makes it so commercially attractive to them to start a new airline, effectively, and fly from non UK airports?
I fail to see the purpose of such a questionable enterprise in these increasingly expensive and constrained economic circumstances.
I would hazard a guess that in a few months the whole exercise will result in it being quietly folded up and swept into oblivion, never to see the light of day again.
Result, status quo reigns and lots of money wasted by both BA and BALPA, again.

[Saint Peter]

Well Wiggy, if that proves to be the case, I think we'll all thank Tandem, Hand, Mouse, Carnage, Notso etc etc and all their pals for managing to misuse BALPA to the point that it has become ineffective.
However, doubtless it will be all our own fault for failing to man the braziers on BACC's behalf. Doubtless BA are MUCH more likely to give in now. I predict that the legal threat will keep BACC and BALPA back in their box for a considerable while.
I'm not a BALPA member, (funny old thing) but on behalf of colleagues who are, I'd be interested to know just how much of their money has been wasted on this ridiculous posturing - someone suggested a separate union for BA; sounds like a good idea to me.......AFTER they repay BALPA costs!:E

[WhoopWhoop Whoops]

Open Skies is here but BA pilots need not be concerned.

The BA track record for losing HUGE!! amounts of money on overseas adventures is unrivalled in the World.

Deutche BA
Air Liberte

except for it's domestic adventures which have also lost HUGE!! amounts of money.

GO
Brithish Airways City Flyer (Mark I)
British Airways City Express later reborn as British Airways Connect
British Airways Highlands Division
British Airways Channel Islands Division
British Airways Regional Division
Cambrian
Northeast

It seems that every new Chief Exec has to have a go at some new Vision of the future... Its a sort of tradition at BA that began with Failing Ayling starting GO , buying Air liberte and starting Deutche BA

...................carried on by Aussi Rod who gave away GO and Deutche BA

but euthanised
Air Liberte ............................................................ ........

he then created British Airways Connect (BACON).

Now we have Willie who has jettisoned BACON and ..... BEHOLD!!!!

OPEN LIES has emerged from the waterpark swamp.

If He thinks the Froggies are going to lie back and think of England whilst he has it away with the French transatlantic traffic "IL REVE".

The only question is.... how long will the condition last before it becomes terminal as the doctors say?

My diagnosis is not very long at 1200 USD a tonne

plus the frogs seem to like their Air France (it must be the food)


"IL REVE" = "he is dreaming" ( for the non froggies )

[J.L. Seagull]

Great Post!!!!!

You forgot Cityflyer Express though.

Consistency is an asset I suppose :O

[BOAC]

....and DanAir which was in profit on its scheduled services at the time it became part of BA - and then miraculously became a large drain on the profit line:{

Before anyone bursts out with 'it was bankrupt', schedules were full and making loads of money. Charter was the 'loser' and the loss of bank credit line the final crunch - but that is another story.

[Devillish]

Shoot if you like but I am reliably informed that BALPA have accepted to pay the costs - all of them - the exact amount to be decided at some point in the future.

Doesn't sound like a tactical withdrawal to me. Nice one BALPA - what a fantastic mess

[Carnage Matey!]

That would be the standard price of discontinuing the case, which would seem to be a lot less than the price of continuing. Ask yourself the following: if BALPA are threatened with an obscure piece of Euro-legislation by your employer, what would you prefer them to do? Take it to court and test if it's valid, or say "Sorry boys, game's up, now bend over"? Those were the only two options. No 'wait and see', no 'let's get a really good lawyer and have a think about it'. This was a case where you put your money where your mouth is or surrender. Which option would you prefer?

I actually think Saint Peters idea of a seperate union for BA is not a bad idea. We'll take 60% of BALPAs assets, which is proportionally less than we've contributed, pay off the legal costs then go our own way. Or perhaps he was thinking we'd just leave him all the money we've contributed in the past and have no access to it?

[spider_man]

When will the recruitment ban be lifted? Surely it can no longer be justified?

[bluepilot]

This is not a good situation at all for BALPA, I am not a fan of Jim MacAuslan either, his support when we needed it at KLCuk was poor at the best, in fact he considered us a high cost centre and suggested that we should be "moved" to the VNV, at that time the VNV were very much the enemy and part of our fight with KLM mainline, he seemed to be running BALPA more as a business than a union. As for his huge gaff over BA38 thats another subject.

A way foward here is that BALPA has already been recognised by Openskies. Once Openeskies is up and running perhaps the BA CC and Openskies CC can work together to ensure a mutually secure future for all. I really hope that the lessons of the past re- BACON etc can be learned and that by working TOGETHER the two company councils can make sure one is not used against the other by BA management.

[M.Mouse]

Saint Peter

You claim BALPA has been misused. You admit to not being a BALPA member. Assuming you are a pilot in an airline open to BALPA membership then, apart from being a freeloader, you really have little knowledge of what BALPA was up to. As Carnage points out if OpenLies was/is a threat what was BALPA supposed to do. The fact that recent law changed the whole battleground so massively in favour of the employer meant BALPA had to withdraw from what was at the start a strong case.

The support for the BACC from within BALPA was solid.

I would suggest that should BA pilots form a separate union then BALPA's coffers would look very interesting indeed. However, I fail to see how BALPA would be strengthened by losing just under half its current membership.

BOAC

What I fail to understand is that if Dan Air was so profitable why nobody saw fit to make a killing and keep it in business. Much like British Caledonian and many other airlines they were profitable but ignorant bankers couldn't see it.

bluepilot

Forgive me but if OpenLies is a success and new aircraft originally destined for BA mainline are diverted to OpenLies then please tell me how an OS Company Council and the BA Company Council can end up anything other than at loggerheads? Precisely why the BACC wished for a common pilot workforce.

Spiderman

The IFALPA ban is in the process of being lifted.

Right lets have some more bitter and twisted rants against all that is BA. It does create such a wonderful image for the non-pilot readers of this site.

[bluepilot]

M Mouse, first I am not having a bitter rant against BA or its pilots, quite the opposite in fact and I take exception that you imply that I am.

Second, the fact is that Openskies IS going to happen, FACT, this is why it so so important that BALPA and the two CCs work together. I appreciate that this has not worked in the past but it must in the future. If as you say the two CC are at "loggerheads" then you are going to play right into the managements hands. The choice is yours.

[Carnage Matey!]

That's going to be a difficult one. What do you think will happen when BA management tell Open Skies they can have a new originating in the UK in violation of Mainlines Scope clause? Do you think they'll hold back?

[M.Mouse]

bluepilot, my apologies, I was not implying your post or any other that made valid points devoid of bitterness and vitriol was a rant against BA. I was referring to the posts where facts were short and obvious hatred of all things BA distort the poster's thinking.

The point I was making to you was that the interests of OpenLies pilots and BA pilots will inevitably be mutually incompatible if BA's long term plan comes to fruition. Not so had BALPA succeeded in its quest for a common pilot workforce.

[StudentInDebt]

Would I be correct in thinking that if BA win that one it would set a precedent in UK law meaning no Union can ever again afford to threaten an airline with Industrial Action?My layman's understanding is that the precedent has already been set (ITWF vs Viking) it applies only if the industrial action they are taking is intended to restrict the company's ability to operate within other EU member states through subsidiary companies and the industrial action taken is disproportionate to the goal being sought.

This is just my understanding of the implications, I don't hold any qualifications in the field of law so I could have written complete b*****ks. From what I've read the UK Appeals Court still has to make a final judgement on Viking by applying the ECJ judgement to UK law.

[bluepilot]

Why are you assuming that the pilots in openskies are the enemy? Mainline has a scope clause, BALPA is the COMMON union and this is why they must work together. By taking this attitude now Carnage Matey you will alienate the Openskies pilots.

Of course the management are going to try and play one against the other, thats obvious, that is why BALPA must be one step ahead on this.

Incidentally, should BA attempt to break sched K (scope) then you WILL have the right to strike over broken agreements.

[Carnage Matey!]

I agree with your points blue, it's simply that in my experience the partner on the inferior terms invariably grabs at any opportunity for advancement. Whilst we'd all love harmonious cooperation, the brutal reality is that the BACC will have to defend their Scope agreement and the OSCC are going to have a tough time justifying any alliance with them to their own members, many of whom will have no allegiance to BA pilots or the UK in general. BALPA will be stuck with a conflict of interest and we're going to have the BACX scenario all over again.

[BOAC]

Danger Thread drift alert!

What I fail to understand is that if Dan Air was so profitable why nobody saw fit to make a killing and keep it in business. Much like British Caledonian and many other airlines they were profitable but ignorant bankers couldn't see it.

Aha! Mention 'bankers' and DanAir and that is the 'another story', but the point was how profitable operations can be destroyed by the huge BA overheads and management. In any case, as I indicated, "Dan Air was so profitable" was not the case.

Anyway, enough of history. My commiserations to ALL pilots, BA and other, on this 'result'. Glad I'm out of it soon. A bad day.

[Captain Jumbo]

Some might wonder about the quality of the advice BALPA received that persuaded them to seek the court option. I had always figured that in legal terms, it is best to be pretty sure of the answer before asking the question - or, as happened here, life can become very expensive. From the very beginning some might argue that BALPA and BACC did not consider the potential consequences properly. Judging from the anti OS vitriol posted on here by BA personnel, if those feelings were replicated by BACC and their puppets within BALPA, it may seem that insufficient thought was given to the enterprise. I would guess that the feeling was that seeing as how BA could not really afford a pilot strike, they would have to cave to the threat, and BACC would once again have muscled their way to their desired end.
In fact, what has happened is the strengthening of the employer side of the negotiating table at the worst time possible. Really well done chaps, excellent result!!!!!!!:(

It's also worthwhile reading BOAC's post carefully. The merest mention of DAN AIR, just as with BACX / BACON etc brings out all the apologists for unacceptable behaviour, who delight in rewriting the past. It won't change anything, but it does underscore and focus the viewpoints of the BA pilot community who refuse to work with their own management, but who also seem to have consistently historically refused to stand up for companies bought/taken over by their companies. Too much hypocrisy for me.:=

With regard to unions generally, this debacle has undermined them all. Perhaps given the use of terms like scab and blackleg by supposed professionals, for goodness sake, by supposed ex-Queen's Officers then this is just as well.
If BA wanted to clear off and start their own airline, then I think more would applaud than not - at least there would be no dubiety about what the remains of BALPA was actually for!. I seriously think it should be considered - there seems to be a proliferation of Cabin Crew unions, which works very well.:D

For the future - well, I look forward to seeing the cafuffle when the first 787 is allocated to OS. It will make this look like a jamboree in the playground, and BALPA already know what the management response will be now to the slightest objection to such Fleeting. The phrase "Shot your bolt" springs to mind.It will be ironic indeed if BALPA and the BACC end up in the European Court of human rights demanding the right to strike - I wonder how much more of the non-BA members' contributions that will waste? Fortunately, like BOAC, I shall watch from the sidelines as a mere contractor.

[M.Mouse]

Some might wonder about the quality of the advice BALPA received that persuaded them to seek the court option.

So when BA said to BALPA 'announce a strike and we will sue you' what was BALPA supposed to do? Roll over and stuff the consequences? It is being overlooked that the case law now applying has only just been made and BALPA became a victim of timing as much as anything else.

BA have won this battle and their plan to drive down pilots Ts & Cs can proceed with all speed. It is surprising that many seem to revel in that outcome.

It is not just BA pilots who are the losers despite that appearing to be what so many are gloating over.

[bluepilot]

Agreed M.Mouse, this is not just a loss for BA pilots it is a loss for all UK pilots, however dont give up!

As i said before turn this disadvantage into an advantage, unite with the OS CC and be strong, divided and you will fall.

To all those who are gloating at this outcome and feel that the BA boys got their deserves...think again. BALPA has been discredited by this loss to which all management of BALPA recognised companies will be rubbing their hands in glee. BALPA will need to look at what happened here and learn for the future...maybe some heads need to roll.

[BOAC]

The BA posters here are understandably smarting. However, could they have a closer, less anguished look at this thread where you will find that with a FEW predictable exceptions, most PILOTS here are not 'gloating' and 'Nigel bashing'. There always will be those who do take the opportunity to have a go, and let's face it, there has been enough 'stuff you Jack, I'm all right' and arrogance over the years to encourage that.

Go away, lick your wounds and let the dust settle. BA appear to have trumped your cards. Time for a review of things at BALPA. It will unfortunately be expensive for all BALPA members and long-term bad for pilots' T&C in general.

[ARINC]

All rather amusing.....at the risk of sounding somewhat jaundiced...

having been on the wrong end of management/union negotiations myself in the past and having put all my eggs in the union basket only to find I had completely wasted my time and effort with the union rolling over, I did the decent thing for my self esteem and T&C's, I left.

I don't suppose for one minute any of our BA contributors feel quite that much conviction about the anti OS cause.

[goerring]

Is that smoke on the flight deck from a burning SCOPE agreement ?
OXO ON everybody for a breath of fresh air !

[Rotors]

I think Jumbo has got it about right - did they not consider a 'no win - no fee' basis?

[bobmij]

Any accomplished chess players will know that a bad situation can change for the better very quickly and vice versa. As long as people still have the will to struggle and fight there is still hope.
It's not over til it's over. (and it's still not over)

[CaptKremin]

Will the OpenSkies pilots be welcome to join BALPA?

[Devillish]

This is a fascinating thread. As a bystander and long-time lurker now forced to register I do wish to offer an 'outsider' point of view.

Imagine you were running a huge multi billion dollar business that was very profitable. One day after years of 'cordial' relations and many discussions a union comes along ands asks for one big thing (let's call it all pilots on one seniority list) or else they'll ballot their members to strike.

It sounds a lot like holding you to ransom but nevertheless you seek to reassure. You state that there is no threat.

Despite all of this the position remains 'give us this or we'll strike'.

That is a pure, unmitigated threat. As a negotiator you have no place to go to meet halfway. Whichever way you cut it one side wins and one side loses.

As the Big Corp you have the duty to protect your assets and shareholders as well as to safeguard the jobs of the other employees.

BA acted in the only way it should have done when faced with such a demand. Had it capitulated then industry observers like myself and my colleagues would have shook our heads as we watched yet another player die on the road to Union 'partnership'.

BALPA trumped this up from day one - it was madness from the beginning and I suspect that they knew that (I cannot wait to read the court docs and disclosure information). BALPA displayed bad faith throughout and I am sure that this will come out in the wash.

Pilots - your union has played fast and loose with your money. They have destroyed any credibilty they had as a moderate union and have possibly started the unravelling of benchmark Ts and Cs. In the longer term this may be a good thing - I know of only a handful of industries which still sustain seniority based systems.

And what does seniority get you? Well, it gives a mechanism to ensure that a wholly inequitable system of incremental pay that ensures that the very top earners can pull £145k whilst the bottom boys and girls barely breach £30k. On top of that there exists a whole host of other potentially discriminatory rules relating to bidding rights.

Now I am not suggesting that experience should go unrewarded but that spread seems very hard to justify.

Out of this whole mad escapade you can take comfort from the following - by averting a strike BA allowed the employee bonus to be paid.

But look ahead - disaster looms for the sector as a whole and only the strong and flexible will survive. Your union does not pay your wages - most pilots I know would find it very tough to be poor and principled over paid and pragmatic. Perhaps it is time to start asking real questions about what it is that your Union is protecting? A system or your pay?

Want to make the job more 'professional'? Start pushing from the bottom not pulling from the top - it'll be an easier win to up new entrant salaries against the costs of training rather than explain away a gross inequity that has existed for three decades.

[Human Factor]

It sounds a lot like holding you to ransom but nevertheless you seek to reassure. You state that there is no threat.

The question is, how many times have you reassured that group in the past and gone back on your word? That will determine whether your reassurances are believed, irrespective of whether or not they are genuine.

[Devillish]

Maybe - but 'past performance is no guarantee' either...

If BA had a poor Industrial Relations history then that is part of the mix. However, the onus is also on the union to avoid pitching up with utterly mental demands that leave the company no other option.

As for Jim McAusland making a 'well informed' plea to the City to unseat Willie - I nearly fell off my chair. There is very little investor sympathy towards any Union (nothing personal) but I think that even my mates can see through a deposition request from a Union that is in dispute with its CEO. It's a cold hard world.

BA pilots are - in general - wonderfully trained and well selected individuals. That is, of course, in part due to a whole bunch of systematic management policies and activity - it doesn't happen by magic. Managers have to agree that it is desirable, spend the money and manage the process. Pilots are a massive part of that but it seems astonishingly arrogant to suggest that BA Pilots are good despite their management.

BA is good because it is a good company (in a rubbish sector, by the way). What is also thunderingly arrogant is the notion that pilots from outside the airline (a pool which BA also draws from) are in some way inferior. What happens when a BA pilot is recruited? Do they walk through a smokey portal like on 'Stars in Their Eyes' to emerge as some form of Sky God? I think not - they benefit from training and environment that is supported by - guess who - British Airways PLC, not BALPA (although they appear to have a valuable contribution to training a technical).

I suspect that OpenSkies will take a very similar approach - that they will select, hire and fire in a very similar way and that it will be successful. They will have a hard time - it's a tough sector, and getting tougher - but I do not think that they are the industry-screwing force that BALPA claim... ...some airlines are asking pilots to PAY to be on the aircraft. Are OpenSkies doing that? Apparently not. Some airlines pay less than OpenSkies (quite a few looking at the figures here) so where did all of this b*****it and vitrol come from? BA, I suppose - no wonder they want a clean start.

[WhoopWhoop Whoops]

I see the first Open Skies Departure is EX JFK on the 19th June.

Departing ORY 20th June.

Interesting ? Starting a new low cost business operation by positioning an empty B757 across the atlantic first.

Are they afraid of the French not turning up for the big startup event??

Will it use the BA JFK terminal to just rub it in to BALPA and the BA Staff?

I await developments.

[chrisbl]

The comments by Devillish are amongst the most coherent in this thread.

I am sure people feel agrieved when previous assurances are not upheld but in any business, such assurances are only valid if the circumstances remain the same.

In the aviation world today, circumstances are different. Open Skies is just that. Without the feather bedding of the previous bi lateral agreements any assurances are just not possible to deliver.

The open skies policy has forced all the transatlantic airlines to reshape thei businesses, BA has as much if not more to lose by doing nothing.

Open Skies is their response to a political change in the aviation landscape, whether it works or not is something else but they have the absolute right to manage the business as they see fit for the political, legal and economic environment they face.

By doing nothing the future of BA would be grim. The future of BA staff would be grimmer.

This talk of getting the TGWU to take up the cause is just plain stupid. They have not been able to halt the tide of change in other industries.

The world has changed and is changing so rapidly that no one has any idea what the rules are.

I suspect that if the open skies nogotiators from the EU and US had known what was going to happen with oil, the economy (ie credit crunch), then they might not have been so enthusiastic about open skies and the risks it has now brought to the airlines they were hoping to help.

Welcome to the brave new world - at least be grateful you dont work in the UK housebuilding industry where 5000 people lost their jobs last week through no fault of themselves.

[SR71]

Imagine you were running a huge multi billion dollar business that was very profitable. One day after years of 'cordial' relations and many discussions a union comes along ands asks for one big thing (let's call it all pilots on one seniority list) or else they'll ballot their members to strike.


In defence of the BA pilots, that is a gross mis-representation of the situation isn't it?

BA decided it (effectively) wanted to outsource BA pilots jobs....having seen how successful Jetstar and American Eagle have been at doing the same.

BA pilots in conjuction with BALPA said (perhaps 'endeavoured to say' is a more accurate statement) "Errr....'No!'."

What were BALPA supposed to do?

That is a pure, unmitigated threat. As a negotiator you have no place to go to meet halfway. Whichever way you cut it one side wins and one side loses.


Whilst I agree with many of your principled arguments, the jaded workforce knows that the reality is their management play hard and fast with the cash flow that they earn for them....a £350 million fine here, an expensive botched Terminal 5 launch there....

Still, perceived management incompetence doesn't change the economic reality...just leaves a bitter taste in your mouth...

However, I would like to know whether, when in discussions, BA did say they would concede to putting OS pilots on the master seniority list if BA pilots would concede some of their more "expensive" T&C's?

Because OS pilots on their own T&C's for the duration of their "OS freeze" with a right to subsequent employment on Mainline T&C's doesn't save BA a great deal does it...if we're honest...

[raveng]

Great post from Devillish.

[Shaka Zulu]

SR71 thanks for a balanced reply.
It's obvious that many outsiders will not know how the industry works and apply basic principles that can't be brought over from other industries.
Fair enough to do so but a reality check is needed.

We asked explicitly during a conference with WW, that if we match the OS business plan on cost , point for point, would he allow OS pilots to be on the BA Mainline Seniority list: answer NO.
Convienently this question was cut out of the DVD recording that was sent to all BA pilots!!

Also, in discussion with BA it has been said that they might 'entertain' the thought of putting them on MSL IF we gave up a couple of the top paypoints in BA. Now to me, BA is playing just as much hardball as we are. We know it's an issue about cost/flexibility. Even with that given to BA before discussion they would not entertain it.
You can draw conclusions yourself!

Question is: where to go from here?

there is the rub, it is obvious that the OS guys want the expansion for themselves and I can't blame them. I just hope that enough common sense exist to learn from past mistakes. Mistakes that I know little about aside from reading the VARY varied postings mainly on this forum.
It does not serve the pilot community to go at loggerheads with eachother again...

Indeed if (and its a big if at the moment) we can preserve anything of our present job as we know it, it is going to be through unity between unions in different countries and less of an screw the rest attitude.
Short sightedness is helping no-one.
Call it Utopian I think but we owe it to ourselves to do something about the things we see happening right in front of our eyes.
We're alright Jack for another couple of years, but what lies behind that??!!

[Skylion]

Devillish's posts are spot on.
This was always a most curious dispute and appears to have been manufactured to raise emotions.
There is no proposal by BA to back BA mainline into BA Openskies.
Unlike the oft quoted Jetstar, Openskies does not plan to operate into or out of BA mainline home territory,- the UK.
All there was was an unsubstantiated fear that BA might be tempted to allow Openskies to take over mainline routes. There was no evidence of such a plan or intention.
There was therefore nothing other than an underlying mistrust of BA's management hyped by BALPA to have a strike about. If BA had stated that they intended to back BA Mainline into Openskies there would have been a real issue for industrial action,- but they didn't and in fact firmly denied it.Whether you trust them not to change their mind in the future is not relevant. Only when an objectionable proposal is on the table is there a reasonable basis for industrial action. If strikes were the norm whenever a staff group had fears about what might or might not happen in the future there would never be a moments industrial peace.
BA took the action it did in confronting BALPA to protect its business, its customers, its shareholders and the future of other staff groups. They had no reasonable option and would have been negligent if they had not done so.
The whole affair is most unfortunate, especially as it widened to include a personal attack on Walsh, and it should never have happened. The management of the union have not covered themselves in glory.

[757flyer]

Do you think the next BALPA move will be to allow BA secondees to OS filling the command seats? I cant see that if BA will not allow OS pilots onto the mainline list that mainline pilots should be allowed into OS. Would be BACX all over again and the whole sorry bitter process again.

[M.Mouse]

Surely this thread is drifting dangerously into reasoned debate? Please stop.

[WhoopWhoop Whoops]

My guess that the secondee situation is likely to go the other way .........

Now that BA has managed to set up a separate low cost operation.

BA could pull back its F/O,s that currently have command slots at GSS.

GSS does not want them as it screws up promotion for GSS F/O,s and causes their copilots to leave GSS because BA pilots take half the command slots, the extra training must cost GSS .

The original deal was brought about by a BALPA demand.

BA would want a cheaper charter deal no doubt from GSS after if they did the dirty on that one no doubt.

It seems to me, to be a possible next test by BA to see if BALPA would again back down in face of the new legal barrage that would inevitably result

GSS is not even a BA subsidiary so the BAPLA legal position is weak.

[WhoopWhoop Whoops]

My guess that the secondee situation is likely to go the other way .........

Now that BA has managed to set up a separate low cost operation.

BA could pull back its F/O,s that currently have command slots at GSS.

GSS does not want them as it screws up promotion for GSS F/O,s and causes their copilots to leave GSS because BA pilots take half the command slots, the extra training must cost GSS .

The original deal was brought about by a BALPA demand.

BA would want a cheaper charter deal no doubt from GSS after if they did the dirty on that one no doubt.

It seems to me, to be a possible next test by BA to see if BALPA would again back down in face of the new legal barrage that would inevitably result

GSS is not even a BA subsidiary so the BAPLA legal position is weak.

Anyway I am sure BA would claim it was a demand from GSS and outside their control. GSS is non union I believe.

WARNING THIS IS PURE SPECULATION

[Carnage Matey!]

One thing that did become clear from the legal ruling is that Article 43 does not apply to the existing BA Scope clause in the UK. It's under that deal that the GSS secondee arrangement exists. BA would be a little daft to go and poke a stick in that hornets nest right now. GSS could kick the secondees out any time they like. Their problem is that BA then couldn't use GSS for their cargo without breaking the Scope agreement.

[WhoopWhoop Whoops]

I fully agree that Willie would be unlikely to prod BALPA again at the moment.

But it is clear that he wants to run the show his way and will use the courts at the drop of a hat.

I just cannot see him not wishing to put the scope agreement in the bin when convenient to him and trashing this GSS arrangement could be be a start.

[Devillish]

My view is so narrow because I confine it only to the real world :}

Yes, I know the industry very well, thank you. That is why I am currently employed in this position.

Look, the simple situation is this - Unions were primarily created to protect the workers' rights when society had very few social protections. The social protections that were previously (and rightly) sought by Unions and activist groups are now in place. Therefore, unions have a diminishing role (in BALPAs case they stated previously that the strategy was to become a partner or stakeholder).

Within the UK and Europe workers unions now primarily play the role of trying to increase terms and conditions - companies naturally wish to challenge that. That is pretty much it - the real world. It is right and proper for BALPA to seek to increase pay and conditions both within BA and without it.

The situation over OpenSkies was exactly this: OS pilots on the master list or we're off. That is NOT negotiation - that is making a demand. This is also where BALPA will fall foul of all sorts of TU legislation (like going on strike over a third party). Next tactic - 'Let's fight it over the SCOPE agreement instead - shhhhh! everyone shut up about OpenSkies'. But - whoops - what about GO, BMED, GB, BACON/CitiExpress blah blah blah... Now here is where I get confused - you cannot pick and choose elements of what is notionally a point of principle.

That chap from ALPA youTubes his hand-wringing missive to the planet as a whole bunch of 'normal people' scratch their heads and say "but this has already happened - BA have been franchising for years".

All the while the whole seniority debate is propped up by nice chunky salaries at the top with the added bonus of a final salary scheme to make the wait all worthwhile. Now there is a foul stench to this whole thing... How long will it be before the armies of well intentioned twentysomethings with a pocketful of debt and tat salaries start asking the bigger questions - like, 'how will I pay my mortgage?' or 'whoa, twenty years to command and a stagnant list!'

"You don't understand - aviation is a special case..." - I hear it again and again. Nope, not so special - It is just an industry very used to protectionism. Stockholm Syndrome is alive and well - you grow to love the system which has caused your profession to lag wages in real terms despite a shortage of appropriately qualified individuals.

Within your own sector non-seniority based systems (like the corporate market) have seen a jump in wages that far outstrip the airlines. Go figure.

So back to BALPA and the BACC - The chairman of the BACC himself is on record as stating that he would '...seek equalisation of OS and BA terms and conditions after three years...' if the seniority lists were conjoined. I am presuming that he means to drag the Ts and Cs up rather than force BA pilots to take a pay cut. So, funny old thing, this is nothing like the 'price promise' that the public face of BA BALPA gave in respect of OS pilots.

I think the Company Council doth protest a little too much.

Look boys and girls, I have no axe to grind - just an alternate view. I thought that you clever pilot-types were objective, impassive, steely-eyed and all that? Take a look at the system that lays in front of you and ask yourself if you would rather join the real world or get bumped along on the fringes to go the way of the train driver.

[Human Factor]

Within your own sector non-seniority based systems (like the corporate market) have seen a jump in wages that far outstrip the airlines. Go figure.

It's not that I disagree, Devilish. You have made some valid points. However, the only way to remove the seniority system is as a whole, globally. At the same time, you would need to remove the obstacles preventing EU pilots from working outside the EU and vice versa, otherwise there is absolutely no benefit to pilots in the majors ditching seniority based systems. If you look at the likely rationalisation of the industry over the next few years, there will be no more than a dozen major players left (within Europe, probably three) and I for one would not wish to give up a command with a major for anything other than a command with another major.

[Captain Correlli]

I thought that you clever pilot-types were objective, impassive, steely-eyed and all that?

Fantastic posts Devillish! Actually, some of us are as you describe above, that is why this thread has provoked so much debate from within and without BA.

Some of us also agree that a seniority system is bunkum - you don't find it in HM Forces! Unfortunately, the seniority system has been in place for a long time, and has actually worked to the advantage of the employer as well, although with decreasing returns in recent years - hence some employers attempts at changing things. You wouldn't find a consultant surgeon having to start again on the ward floor if he moved hospitals, and the same should be true of pilots. I think OS and the inevitable copycats will bring this to an end sooner rather than later. Innovation and change are what move things along, and while BALPA has proved very useful in maintaining Ts and Cs for BA, I think this will, looking back, be seen as the first crack in the wall.
The future of air travel is bleak anyway, and as you say, generally aviation is a rubbish sector with utterly pathetic margins when compared to other sectors. The future is more and more expensive air travel, which will lead to the less well qualified and skilled airline pilots, and hence the airlines they work for, going under.
Darwinism has finally caught up with Aviation, remarkable that it was a union which precipitated things!

[genghis khan 01]

The problem with much of this industry is that when you look up you see a bunch of ar*eholes. When you look down you merely see a bunch of smiling faces. We need to get in the real world otherwise we will go the same way as the dinosaurs.

[Ray D'Avecta]

Devillish, thank you sir (or madam) for raising the level of this debate. :D. For far too long, the pilot body has been fixated on the black / white traditional view. Alternative views such as yours force us to consider the "shades of grey" ....... which may indeed be the future.

[SR71]

...All the while the whole seniority debate is propped up by nice chunky salaries at the top with the added bonus of a final salary scheme to make the wait all worthwhile. Now there is a foul stench to this whole thing... How long will it be before the armies of well intentioned twentysomethings with a pocketful of debt and tat salaries...

Within your own sector non-seniority based systems (like the corporate market) have seen a jump in wages that far outstrip the airlines. Go figure.

Ah yes, the corporate sector....

That'd be the sector that today (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/uknews/2022636/City-bonuses-defy-credit-crunch-and-hit-new-record-of-andpound13bn.html) is reported to have shelled out £12.6 billion of bonuses inspite of the £15 billion hole in UK bank finances...where the guys at the top get 8 figure salaries (not 6, and even, when they f**k everything up!) and the guys at the bottom get...?

What a paragon of virtue that sector is....the stench of it....

:rolleyes:

I guess you fly a desk Devillish?

So you ought to appreciate that its the devilish detail that renders your "broad brushstroke" characterisation of the BA situation somewhat wide of the mark...

Answer me why, if BA's intention was only to fly a "handful" (6, was it?) of OS aircraft (out of 200+?), and they already make a good 10% margin on a £9 billion turnover (more if corporate hadn't frittered away £XXX million in fines and compensation), they'd even want to touch pilot T&C's?

Corporate "smash and grab"?

Ah, the hegemony of big business....

Tell you what though, Genghis Khan is right...

:ok:

[Ray D'Avecta]

SR71,

Ah yes, the corporate sector....

Ermm......no, actually :}

I think the reference was to the corporate aviation sector.

...........but nice rant about the financial sector, though. ;)

[SR71]

Apologies.

I feel better tho'...

:ok:

[Willie Wash]

The dust has hardly settled on the BALPA withdrawl and Qantas is off with Jetstar, this is of course what will happen to Openskies and BA. http://www.smh.com.au/articles/2008/05/26/1211653885968.html

[amos2]

What makes me think that Devillish..the little devil... would be the first pax to mess his pants if he was on an airplane that lost a donk on t/o!? :ok:

[Slim20]

Great stuff everybody!

Can we get back to flying aeroplanes in peace now?

That's pretty much all I ever wanted to do.

[koi]

My compliments to all. Some excellent posts on this thread. As we said earlier....don't pick a fight you cannot win. Yes indeed some broad smiles out here in the real world. Ah haa.
Koi

[PENKO]

Thanks Devellish for your post. I am not going to agree or disagree with you. I just hope that your antagonists can come up with a posting as well written and unemotional as yours. It would do this forum much good.

I have been followoing this debate for months now and still it is not exactly clear as to why Open Skies is so bad to us all. And once I saw the word scab being used I really lost all interest. What rests now is the question: was this afair necessary?

On the other corner of the BALPA room there are companies that have 10 or more different contracts for the same pilot workforce, one contract for every EU-country and other things far more immediately threatening than Open Skies. I wish issues like these would get as much attention from BALPA HQ.

[PENKO]

We have been asking this all the time. Like in the forum: Do the BA pilots really deserve our support?

It is no simple pro or con. BA is my competition. OS is an opportunity. And BALPA is there for us all!

[RAT 5]

Penko;

"BALPA is there for all". Should be; wonder if it's true. I don't want to open that old chesnut, but it does crop up very often.

Now, this open skies thing is there for everyone. I hear Air France are opening routes out of LHR. What is happening elsewhere? Prune is open to all the worlds pilots & unions. Why is this topic only under a BALPA umbrella? What are the Frenchies saying, & the Germans etc. Is it only the entrenched dinasaurial Brits who are knashing teeth? Are the yanks throwing toys out of the pram? Lets hear a rounded debate from all sides, not this one sided "if I can't play I'm taking my ball home" attitude. The ghosts of Dan Air, B.Cal & Laker lurk in the shadows.

[wiggy]

RAT 5 - fair question, what are the "Frenchies" and the American's doing?

Well, the "Frenchies" seem to have their LHR-US operation up and running using mainline crews on presumably mainline T&Cs..no knashing of teeth there.

The US Carriers have yet to start operating US-Europe with non-US labor - I guess we might hear a little knashing of teeth when that gets proposed:ok:

Nope, only good old BA, so far, have proposed to exploit Open Skies by recruiting workforce for a parallel operation on lower T&Cs than Mainline.

BA BALPA have negotiated succesfully with the Company over recent years over issues such as Pensions ( I was one of the many who took a hit) and scheduling arrangements...hardly an entrenched workforce. On the other hand BALPA asked for the Openskies pilots to be put on the Master Seniority List and all hell lets loose - who's the Dinosaur, who's entrenched?

Now BALPA may well have handled this badly, and/or had bad advice - we don't know yet, but remember BA management is still trying to sue BALPA for damaging it's reputation by threatening Industrial Action. Remind me again who were the clowns that brought you the public relations disaster known as T5, BALPA or management?

Is it any wonder teeth are knashing?

[Ray D'Avecta]

@ RAT 5,

I hear Air France are opening routes out of LHR

AF & KLM are already operating routes out of LHR.

However the model is different to BA's. USA/LHR flights for AF-KLM are being operated under codeshare by the Skyteam Alliance Partners Delta & Northwest. AF and KLM gave up existing LHR slots for use by these airlines.

From a business point of view, seems like a good model,.... the partner airlines carry most of the risk, but AF-KLM reaps a healthy percentage of the generated revenue.

From a union / labour relations point of view, there has not been much of a public reaction by the unions (well, in KLM at least).........usually because the union will have obtained some other concessions in exchange for agreeing to the proposal.

As an aside, I sometimes wonder why it is that LH, AF, KLM etc do not seem to be itching to start up operations in each others backyards, e.g LH in Paris, or AF-KLM in Frankfurt, but all seem to want a slice of LHR. The premium business traffic is an obvious answer, but if all the premium traffic worth fighting for is concentrated at LHR, should BA not be fighting to protect this rather than spread itself thin competing on many fronts?

[wiggy]

Ray,
I was under the impression that AF were operating LHR- JFK with one of their own 747's/777's rather than codeshare.

Edited to add - I stand slightly corrected, AF operate LHR-LAX, the others are indeed code share.

[koi]

411A
Excellent posts. My compliments.

That BA pilots thought that they could pick this fight and win shows a remarkable lack of awareness and understanding of the present climate.
But that is par, going on the last thirty years of Balpa activity.
This is however just the start. Expect more of the same and good luck to open skies. Can you imagine sitting next to some of the authors of these pro strike posts.
Koi has fresh tissues available for tears of laughter. Call me.
Now watch how fuel and salaries shapes our real world.
Koi.

[M.Mouse]

Devellish, to answer your points:

Imagine you were running a huge multi billion dollar business that was very profitable. One day after years of 'cordial' relations and many discussions a union comes along ands asks for one big thing (let's call it all pilots on one seniority list) or else they'll ballot their members to strike.

It sounds a lot like holding you to ransom but nevertheless you seek to reassure. You state that there is no threat.

Despite all of this the position remains 'give us this or we'll strike'.

That is a pure, unmitigated threat. As a negotiator you have no place to go to meet halfway. Whichever way you cut it one side wins and one side loses.

You are rather simplifying the issue. If one accepts that responsible representation through a trade union is desirable then it would seem prudent to develop a sound working relationship with that union. Recent examples of where BA and BALPA have had such a relationship and where it has paid dividends were the recent changes regarding the pension deficit and work coverage problems. The pilot group are not a bunch of ignorant sheep wanting their way at all costs a la 1970s miners/printers/car workers, etc. The changes to pensions and our bidding system were fiercely opposed by many but successful agreement, despite many unpalatable changes, was reached. Result company problem(s) resolved and pilots accepting of the solutions.

With OpenLies BALPA first asked to discuss the issue formally with the company at the beginning of 2007. The company flatly refused. Eventually late last year discussions did take place. After much talking what it boiled down to was that the company wanted OpenLies to operate entirely separately from BA Mainline.......except for engineering, marketing, ticketing, management and, of course, financing. BALPA agreed to proposed Ts & Cs but nope, BA pilots were to be completely excluded. Now why can that be?

The management have given 'assurances' that BA mainline Ts & Cs were not going to be affected. Having been in BA for some considerable number of years I have heard assurances before. They are valid until the next business plan or change of management. If OpenLIes was just going to remain a small operation then fine but I would place good money that the long term plan is to expand OpenLies and gradually shift BA business across - new aeroplanes, new routes - and let BA mainline stagnate. It has happened in Australia and it has happened in America. If BA's assurances were to be believed then they would surely have nothing to fear from a common seniority list would they? If OpenLies is a roaring success then BALPA would be foolish to start making unrealistic demands to the point of making the operation unprofitable, that would be no use to anybody. BALPA does not have a history of doing do so either e.g. LGW.

So what was BALPA supposed to do? Say OK BA we believe you or ask for what we considered was a no cost guarantee against future shafting i.e. a common seniority list?

Striking is a complete anathema to me and I suspect the majority of my colleagues but I learned the hard way long ago that if I do not stand up for myself it is certain that I will be taken advantage of. BALPA exhausted every possible opportunity to resolve the issue and BA's parting shot at the end of the ACAS conciliation was that if BALPA announce a strike BA would sue. Now who was threatening whom?

The full story leading up to the withdrawal from the court case has not been publicised yet but we are waiting with interest to learn how we ended up in such a humiliating and costly mess.

The TUC are holding a seminar very shortly on the whole Article 43 ruling in the Viking and Laval case because it will certainly be challenged and most likely overturned eventually because it is a plain misuse of the legislation for it to be used to prevent lawful industrial protest when it was designed to prevent anti-competitive behaviour.

The one thing BA has achieved is a unified, angry and disgruntled workforce. A masterpiece of modern industrial relations by BA whether you despise unions or not. It will come back to bite Willie Walsh and big time too.


Pilots - your union has played fast and loose with your money. They have destroyed any credibilty they had as a moderate union

Knowing many of the individuals involved I do not believe that and, like yourself, await the details of what happened with interest. I shall be the first to complain if what you say is true.

.... and have possibly started the unravelling of benchmark Ts and Cs.

No that was started by the likes of Mr. O'Leary and Willie Walsh with OpenLies.

In the longer term this may be a good thing - I know of only a handful of industries which still sustain seniority based systems.

Good for who? Certainly not pilots. Seniority has been debated to death. As we all have precisely the same qualifications then how does one promote? The person who carries least fuel? The person who is prepared to carry the most defects? I worked for a company many moons ago where an individual would eventually be sacked if they put too many defects in the tech. log especially if that defect would ground an aeroplane. Too much payload? We had to make a deliberate error in the loadsheet to bring the figures within limits. Don't like it? F... off and get another job then. I kid you not. That is what happens in airlines without seniority and without unions.

And what does seniority get you? Well, it gives a mechanism to ensure that a wholly inequitable system of incremental pay that ensures that the very top earners can pull £145k whilst the bottom boys and girls barely breach £30k. On top of that there exists a whole host of other potentially discriminatory rules relating to bidding rights.

Smacks of socialism to me. What is overlooked that the bottom rates of pay are still good and that 99% of people look forward to and will reach the giddy heights. I am open to persuasion on a more equitable system but I bet that over a career an individual would earn less. My pal worked long and hard for poor money before he reached the lucrative years of his profession - consultant in his branch of medicine. Very similar to pilots and seniority.

Out of this whole mad escapade you can take comfort from the following - by averting a strike BA allowed the employee bonus to be paid.

Ah yes, the bonus. Well without boring everybody to death. The management bonus was based on profitablity but the average employee's bonus was also linked to....wait for it......punctuality! Managers have done very nicely thank you. Employees will also receive a bonus but, although I am sure we are all grateful, it pales into insignificance when compared to a manager's bonus and has conditions attached which made a sizeable payout as likely as winning the lottery! Personally I think bonuses are a debatable issue anyway but that is another argument.

But look ahead - disaster looms for the sector as a whole and only the strong and flexible will survive. Your union does not pay your wages - most pilots I know would find it very tough to be poor and principled over paid and pragmatic. Perhaps it is time to start asking real questions about what it is that your Union is protecting? A system or your pay?

I cannot argue with your first assertion and looking back to when we (pilots) took a pay cut during the first Gulf war I do not believe we can be accused of being unaware or unrealistic regarding the company's finances. We also made changes to our terms to finance the engineers severance package after the grounding of the B747 Classic following the September 11th atrocity.

If BA had a poor Industrial Relations history then that is part of the mix. However, the onus is also on the union to avoid pitching up with utterly mental demands that leave the company no other option.

I agree but BALPA was not making 'mental demands'.

As for Jim McAusland making a 'well informed' plea to the City to unseat Willie - I nearly fell off my chair. There is very little investor sympathy towards any Union (nothing personal) but I think that even my mates can see through a deposition request from a Union that is in dispute with its CEO. It's a cold hard world.

It made me squirm a little too! However Willie Walsh's track record is not good on the industrial relations front. But then he was a former union leader so perhaps that is where he learnt to be so unreasonable.

BA pilots are - in general - wonderfully trained and well selected individuals. That is, of course, in part due to a whole bunch of systematic management policies and activity - it doesn't happen by magic. Managers have to agree that it is desirable, spend the money and manage the process. Pilots are a massive part of that but it seems astonishingly arrogant to suggest that BA Pilots are good despite their management.

BA Technical and training management are, on the whole, well respected by the pilots. The rest of BA's management are held in utter contempt. If you had witnessed and experienced them from the inside you may well agree. Lord King/Virgin case, fuel surcharge cartel, T5 to name but three of the disgraceful and embarrassing ways some of our managers have behaved.

BA is good because it is a good company (in a rubbish sector, by the way). What is also thunderingly arrogant is the notion that pilots from outside the airline (a pool which BA also draws from) are in some way inferior. What happens when a BA pilot is recruited? Do they walk through a smokey portal like on 'Stars in Their Eyes' to emerge as some form of Sky God? I think not - they benefit from training and environment that is supported by - guess who - British Airways PLC, not BALPA (although they appear to have a valuable contribution to training a technical).

This whole issue of standards to which you allude arose because BA, during the OpenLies, talks said that OpenLies pilots would not be allowed to automatically join mainline, they would have to go through the whole application process because 'they had been recruited to a different standard'. It was not BALPA or BA pilots who alleged that OpenLies pilots were in some way inferior but BA management.

- but I do not think that they are the industry-screwing force that BALPA claim... ...some airlines are asking pilots to PAY to be on the aircraft. Are OpenSkies doing that? Apparently not. Some airlines pay less than OpenSkies (quite a few looking at the figures here)....

Having seen the OpenLies contract I am amazed anybody would want to take a job with them.


My apologies for the length of post.

[M.Mouse]

At the risk of sending everybody to sleep two further points from your last post Devillish:

All the while the whole seniority debate is propped up by nice chunky salaries at the top with the added bonus of a final salary scheme to make the wait all worthwhile. Now there is a foul stench to this whole thing... How long will it be before the armies of well intentioned twentysomethings with a pocketful of debt and tat salaries start asking the bigger questions - like, 'how will I pay my mortgage?' or 'whoa, twenty years to command and a stagnant list!'

A twenty year first officer in BA would be on a very comfortable salary, 75% of the equivalent pay point captain's salary. If Willie Walsh and Mr. O'Leary have their way 'well intentioned twentysomethings with a pocketful of debt and tat salaries ' will never be able to pay off their mortgages no matter how many years they work!

So back to BALPA and the BACC - The chairman of the BACC himself is on record as stating that he would '...seek equalisation of OS and BA terms and conditions after three years...' if the seniority lists were conjoined. I am presuming that he means to drag the Ts and Cs up rather than force BA pilots to take a pay cut.

I try to keep myelf well informed on matters that affect me but I am unaware of that quote. Where did you read or see it?

Rat 5

Are the yanks throwing toys out of the pram?

Interesting point. When the beloved EU negotiated Open Skies with the Americans we allowed the Americans unfettered access and rights to fly with anywhere within the EU. The reciprocal (unfettered access in and around the USA) is supposed to happen in 2010. I will watch for that moment with great interest.

(I think my understanding of the Open Skies agreement is correct but stand to be corrected if not).

[wiggy]

Mr Mouse.
An excellent precis (:eek:) of why we are where we are now. No doubt some will extract "sound bites" to throw back at you but I hope the majority will read it in full.

Rgds

Wiggy

[PC767]

M.Mouse I believe you are correct about open skies part II due in 2010. And I believe that the wager to palce at present is that the US administration will not allow full access to the USA by European airlines. In which has the agreement sees part I revoked. So after all this OpenSkies may only have 2 years to live. Perhaps Walsh knows better, but financial matters in the states seem to be dictating that US companies are retreating to their core business and being defensive.

[411A]

...but financial matters in the states seem to be dictating that US companies are retreating to their core business and being defensive.
Looking objectively...core business yes, but I think you will find that many will welcome investment from Europe (and likely to be allowed by the next administration) simply because European airlines seem to be able to make a profit and homegrown airlines...can't.:{

[Human Factor]

Ah, blissful silence.:ok:

PC767,

You are correct. I believe by negotiating with AA and Continental with regard to anti-trust immunity, WW is currently hedging is bets in case Open Skies is shelved, despite him being the one to insist upon it's withdrawal if the Americans renege on Part 2 of the deal.

As things stand though, the US airline industry is in fairly dire straits and it's questionable whether or not Chapter 11 will either be permitted or sought again, which means unless the US government is going to allow some of the majors to die, they will need to allow further concessions to foreign ownership or part-wnership.

[PC767]

Looking objectively...core business yes, but I think you will find that many will welcome investment from Europe (and likely to be allowed by the next administration) simply because European airlines seem to be able to make a profit and homegrown airlines...can't.:{

I did consider this and my question would be if US management cannot make money out of their companies then why would European management. As I understand US companies are actually more unionized than our own.

[Willie Wash]

For all those who think BA management are reasonable and respectful of their staff, maybe have a look at this latest scoop from the socialist worker newsaper.www.socialistworker.co.uk/art.php?id=14966

[M.Mouse]

The day the the BA pilots decided that it was OK to shaft the new hires in terms of Pension the writing was on the wall. Once the stone was allowed to start that roll downhill you could not stop it.

During pension negotiations the BACC told us (the members) that we could not strike over the issue of new joiners being excluded from the FSS until BA recruited a pilot on that scheme. This happened two years later. So a ballot of 3,500 pilots asking will you go on strike to force BA to put new joiners on the closed FSS would have been a foregone conclusion? The scheme was closed to all other new BA employees too so another can of worms there.

Presumably new joiners read their offered contracts? So we would have been asked to go on strike to force BA to put new joiners into the FSS scheme when they were happily signing up to the BARP scheme. I know from the way BALPA now collects research data from the members the whole issue was, unfortunately, a non-starter. Many were vociferous in their calls for a ballot and, long term, they may well be proved right.

In the end if BALPA did not have the funds to fight the action, why did the BA pilots not reach into those deep pockets and put up the funds ? Why blame Balpa, its your union and if its not doing what you want change it !

There is more confidence in the current BACC than in many years after the 'old guard' were thrown out a few years ago. BALPA did not run out of funds and had we been asked to put up more funds I have little doubt the money would have been forthcoming.

We, the members, are currently waiting for the full explanation of events which cannot be made until after BA either drops or completes its current legal manouevres aimed at bankrupting the union. BALPA is being sued for the damage caused to BA's reputation and business by the strike ballot.

BA's reputation is of course at an all time high!

[Re-Heat]

During pension negotiations the BACC told us (the members) that we could not strike over the issue of new joiners being excluded from the FSS until BA recruited a pilot on that scheme. This happened two years later. So a ballot of 3,500 pilots asking will you go on strike to force BA to put new joiners on the closed FSS would have been a foregone conclusion? The scheme was closed to all other new BA employees too so another can of worms there.
At the time, there was a great deal of emotion surrounding this issue, with many saying that they would strike rather than create a pseudo-B-scale with inferior Ts & Cs - exactly what the pension issue has resulted in.

Regardless of your exact opinion on the outcome of that issue, and its effect on the long-term, it point to exactly the reason why modern unions are useless in workforce protection - it is only ever useful to aid the workforce in place at that time in an employer, and of no use whatsoever to those who have yet to join a workforce. A union contributes nothing to expansion of employment and is not incentivised to do so.

While you argue that it is the choice of those new recruits to join, and the conditions are clear, that is not relevant. The workforce at the time made no effort to prevent the B-scale arising, thereby diminishing the size of the pie for those joining in the future, for their benefit alone. To follow the argument through to its logical conclusion, one could say that since Victorian mills' working conditions were known to all and people still sought employment there, why should conditions change? That is contrary to the foundations of unionisation in the first place, but is the core of what you suggested regarding the pension issue.

BALPA does have a place - it should be involved in safety issues, supporting those in legal wrangles with their employers, and preventing the company from infringing on the ability of the commander to undertake his duties.

As I have argued many times in the past, the seniority system is to the detriment of the employee, prevents mobility, and depresses employee wages in the long-term. Younger employees, who will not have their turn, who will not attain the same pay scales where they have had to move employer through necessity, who work on below-market pay points, and who do not benefit from DB schemes - those people will one day refuse to support the elder employees when management turns its focus on them, by virtue of their inaction in the past.

[exeng]

BALPA is being sued for the damage caused to BA's reputation and business by the strike ballot.


What a state of affairs - you didn't go on strike but BALPA is being sued because you considered going on strike.

If BA suceed in financially breaking BALPA I would imagine the whole affair might end up as an 'own goal' as employee/management relations drop to an all time low in all departments.

Mybe Mr Walsh could consider bringing back 'People in Business' to try and sort out the mess that will follow.


Regards
Exeng

[Mick Stability]

Sadly Mr Walsh couldn't give a frying flock what we think of him and the company. He has a gun to our heads now and will stop at nothing till he's smashed the pilot workforce, our terms and conditions, pensions, livelihoods and morale.

I was one of those who spoke out passionately at the time of the closure of NAPS. I was rebuked by the very people who are our achilles heel - 'Stop moaning boy, you'll be alright in the end, I'm in APS anyway'. I genuinely believe that we've made enormous progress at taking these people behind the bike sheds to explain the harsh realities of life in new-BA.

That legacy sadly though remains with us for the duration now. From the closure of NAPS to the clumsy neglect of Schedule K, we have now sustained serious battle damage. We must now dig in and regroup to ensure that the next time that BA ram raids our profession, we are ready and waiting with all assets in place.

'Industrial relations' as we laughingly call them in BA have now taken on a new and sinister guise. We will spend the future on the brink of nuclear war with two mutually distrustful and polarised camps. This isn't what any of us want, except for the greedy, avaricious, and morally bankrupt management of BA who want nothing else that to have a subjugate workforce of mindless compliant automatons.

What a desparately sad state of affairs.:(

[IcePack]

From "the Land down under"

http://www.smh.com.au/news/travel/qantas-slammed-over-jetstar-charade/2008/05/26/1211653885968.html

Interesting World

[L337]

"British Airways withdraws counterclaim"

British Airways has now had time to consider whether to proceed with its Counterclaim in the High Court action brought against the Company by BALPA. Having looked carefully at the undertakings given to the Court by BALPA, in particular that it will not call industrial action based on similar issues, we are satisfied that these undertakings sufficiently cover the issues in the Counterclaim.

Source is teh BA Intranet

[Human Factor]

They wouldn't have won anyway. :rolleyes:

It would have meant that no-one (flying or otherwise) could go on strike about anything, ever.

[Tinytim]

So the question now is ...........exactly what amount of money did this little exercise cost Balpa and how competent was the legal advice they had in the first place?

This is a humiliating climb down and no amount of lobbying for change alters the fact that Balpa and all those who had whipped themselves up into a self righteous frenzy have been made to look like a bunch of ill advised amateurs.

I trust that those in Balpa who have overseen this humiliation pay with their jobs.

[Wet Start]

Many many wise words have you uttered down the years Tim, and few more than that last post.
(Some may feel the whole exercise was worth it if only to apparently silence Hand Solo and his ilk!)

More seriously though, as usual you make an exceptionally valid point: quite apart from the unquantifiable effects of the loss of credibility, just how much real money has this ridiculous posturing cost us?

As for paying with their jobs, there is no responsibility ever taken by those in positions of responsibility any more......unless you're a pilot.....

[demomonkey]

Devillish has some excellent arguments. Fancy being the next BACC Chairman?

The industrial-relations of the aviation industry are drastically out of date. BALPA has followed a disasterous strategy. New faces and a new direction is needed. To those BALPA reps currently up for election, you have the chance to make a difference

As a freshed faced youngster, I want BALPA to start discussing how to create a mobile workforce by migrating (i.e. not overnight, thus protecting those nearer the top) away from a seniority based pay scheme that restricts you leaving if your T&Cs drop. If we had a free market of employment, the company would be forced to respect T&Cs or face pilot churn.

I want to see BALPA become more representative. Having read the recent ballot paper manifestos all I read was a bunch of whinges. Summarised: as BALPA good, BA evil. Life is slightly more complex than that. Not a single woman stood for election. Why isn't BALPA encouraging female pilots to stand?

BALPA in its present incarnation is the status-quo. I want to see my union less like Arthur Scargill and more like the union model now adopted in say the car industry.

BA must change too. Willie get with the programme. I have 3 bits of advice for you;

1. Stop chasing BALPA for costs and get on with running and improving our airline. It makes you look petty and vindictive.

2. Concentrate everyone's mind on the little things like getting buses and equipment to stands. Look after the pennies and the pounds will look after themselves. Costs will tumble if the system ran like clockwork. Bash heads together to make it happen but make it happen.

3. If you want a co-operative and consensual relationship with your workforce you need to change the management culture. The tone/ relationships/attitude of many middle managers only causes resentment amongst those of us trying to do our best for our customers. These people take their cues from you, so lead by example.

Having insulted all sides, I now need to go for a short lie down and then get back to flying planes. Bye.

[Wet Start]

Lots of what you said there was dead good. I would argue with the comparison to the car industry, and sugest that what we actually want is something more akin to the General Medical Council or the Law Society - you don't often see THEIR members being manipulated or jerked around - quite the opposite. (And when they are, half the time it's revoked on appeal!!!:ooh:)
But I agree - Devillish for BALPA Chair!:D

Now, let's face it, the seniority system is not one that you would invent if starting from scratch. Problem is that it's there, we're here, and there are huge amounts of vested interest on both sides.
But really, would doctors accept such a ludicrous concept? Would lawyers? Would dentists? Would accountants? Would uni lecturers or teachers? Would scientists? Would civil servants? Would policemen? Would journalists? Would - (dare I say it) - the military?

So why should we; there's no reason why we shouldn't align ourselves more nearly with the other professional bodies with whom it suits us to compare ourselves. I can't imagine anyone who could argue with meritocratic principles, the ONLY real objection is the misuse we fear management may make of it -but look at the debacle BALPA have just caused by harping on what are fundamentally seniority and hence remuneration related issues.

We need a BALPA committee, (of more than just Big Airways), looking seriously at this issue, because the seniority system actively opposes and hinders the free movement of personnel. Further, if meritocratic principles took over, arguably we would be better placed to control more of our own destiny because seniority and experience would have fewer reservations about leaving a perceived 'safe' placement.

I don't suggest it's easy, but if you look at the professional bodies I mentioned earlier, they don't seem to have a problem with it, in fact it seems to work very well for them - I believe it could for us too!

Actually, this is probably thread creep. I may just cut and paste - waddaya think?:sad:

[Heathen_Sol]

A bit off topic but I am wondering how recent events in BA have affected pilot morale.

First there was the disaster of T5.
Now BALPA members agreed to a strike but after some underhand misuse of a Euorpean law they have had to pull out due to cost.

WW must feel all very clever that he has pulled this magic rabbit out of a hat but it surely only causes worse relations between staff and management.

I am also going through dispute with management [although in IT industry] but I find it having a detrimental effect on my morale and motivation.

I would hate to think that pilots morale is so reduced that it causes issues with safety.

Do these problems begin to effect pilots carrying out their jobs?

[CanAV8R]

The relationship between BA and its pilots has deteriorated in the few years I have been with the company. In this time profits have swelled. At this point from my observation, the good will factor is gone.

Professional pilots will always put safety first regardless of morale. That being said the feeling of helping the company out and going the extra mile will be a thing of the past.

BA will want cost savings during the tough times ahead. They will need the support of their pilots as a pivotal role in doing so. I wish them the best of luck.

[OverFlare]

As a freshed faced youngster, I want BALPA to start discussing how to create a mobile workforce by migrating (i.e. not overnight, thus protecting those nearer the top) away from a seniority based pay scheme that restricts you leaving if your T&Cs drop.

I assume from this that you would be in favour of a flat salary structure? As a member of BARP (BA's money purchase "pension" scheme) myself I have some sympathy with this idea. More money in the pot initially compounded up, etc... But I am not convinced it's the seniority based system that restricts people leaving - it's the fact that, even if our T&Cs reduce, they are still better, over an entire career, than most other airlines. If you are a BA pilot, there's nowhere else to go (if T&Cs are your main reason for existing, that is).

But, in any case, if you would like to see what life is like with no seniority based pay increments, why not bid for secondment to Open Skies? :rolleyes:

[411A]

They wouldn't have won anyway.

Just how do you know, HF?
Those pilots at BA were so sure of themselves (as well as being slightly full of themselves...at least most of the ones who post here) that they apparently felt that 'they' were in control.
Now, they certainly are in control of the aeroplane while in operation, but that certainly does not transfer over to the company...and the management thereof.
For BALPA, no money, no honey (speaking here, honey coated conditions, etc).
Will they learn from the obvious BALPA mistakes?
Quite likely not, as has been proven time and again, in the past.


I can only laugh at their (collective) naivety.

[hunterboy]

Me too....the pilots probably would have got more respect from BA if they'd just walked out without a ballot.Seems to work for other groups of staff. What is potentially nasty is the legal precedent that has been set by this court case. I wonder about the law of unintended consequences.

[XT668]

Excellent post 411A; my only difference of opinion would be that the sole emotion their - (BALPA and BA pilots) - chutzpah and punchy ill-informed decision making evokes is one of extreme irritation.
Fortunately, in my case, it remains at irritation: were I a fee paying BALPA member it would be anger at the loss of funds,the loss of face and the loss of credibility they have achieved. They have caused more real damage to UK pilot prospects than a dozen 'Open Skies' would have done, yet like quasi-politicians, none of them have the balls to admit they were in error both tactically and strategically.
Hence your last point is the most galling of all, doubtless they will repeat the exercise on a different battlefield, and actually, you're right, one has to laugh - otherwise one would cry!:(

[overstress]

This message is hidden because 411A is on your ignore list.

Life is so much less stressful now...

[windytoo]

best you change your handle then.

[overstress]

guess you don't know what an overstress is then, do you :rolleyes:

[XT668]

Right again.
The really troubling point is that BALPA seem not to realise, or be able to accept it. Glad I'm not a member, but I suspect the whole industry will come to see this as a watershed, and not one favourable to Airline Pilots.:uhoh:

[windytoo]

I think I probably do. More than 9.5G on my boy's toy is, however more than 1g on a normal working day tends to upset the punters. But then again I just don't stick my fingers in my ears if I don't like or agree with what somebody else is saying. Life's too short for stress.

[ShortfinalFred]

Off goes 411a again! Wow - have you no shame mate?!

We established in a previous correspondence that you a) do not support the relaxation of US airline foreign ownership restrictions limiting foreign ownership of a US airline to less than 25% of the shares. These rules severely restrict the chance that US pilot jobs will be offshored in the way that Open Lies seeks to do to UK pilot jobs - so you are inconsistent, AND, b) we established through previous postings that you made your career in a carrier domiciled in a way that allowed you to earn the significant money that you say they paid you, free of tax; you even crowed about it.

Now point a) makes you inconsistent, as I say, and point b) makes you a hypocrite, seeing that you express, in your multitudinous postings, the view that you believe no one else is entitled to earn a professional living from professional aviation, (except you).

Its easy to see why people stick you on an ignore list with views like yours.

I re-iterate my view. WW will lose and the off-shoring of UK pilot work that he seeks will not succeed.

[411A]

Wrong, ShortfinalFred, a few less enlightened folks simply cannot see the airline forest for the trees, and as a result, are left waiting at the train station long after the last express has departed.
BALPA is amongst these folks, and it ain't likely to change.
A pilot union does not dictate to airline management.
Not ever.

Just look at BALPA now.
They can't even pay a reasonable pension to their employees.
Bankrupt ideas, in more ways than one.

I simply state the obvious...like it or not.

Now, least you think I'm one-sided, I don't think much of American pilot unions either...ALPA, APA, etc.
In these cases, the US pilots unions have proven time and again that, they are out to enrich themselves, at the expense of the pilot employees they purport to represent.

[ShortfinalFred]

OK 411a, do I take it then that you oppose the principle of the right of a democratically elected trade union to represent its members in negotiation with a companies management?

What exactly is the "wood for the trees" that we dont see in the airline world?

What evidence do you have that BALPA, in this case, has ever acted to enrich itself at its members expense? I know of no BA BALPA official who has made a personal financial gain through being a representative.

Do you approve of the kind of airline management that all but destroyed Continental Airlines in the past, to give but one example?

Do you believe that employees have any rights at all in the workplace? If yes, then what rights?

[411A]

OK 411a, do I take it then that you oppose the principle of the right of a democratically elected trade union to represent its members in negotiation with a companies management?

You can take it anyway you like, ShortfinalFred, however, that is not at all what I wrote.
What exactly is the "wood for the trees" that we dont see in the airline world?

Speaking of unionized pilots generally, they oftentimes believe that the company is a bottomless money pit, and demand unreasonable salary increases...for example the recent 53% increase that APA proposed.
Now, of course, the AA pilots feel this is justified due to the 'salary givebacks' that they agreed to earlier, however I would maintain that, considering the economic circumstances today, that 53% is totally unrealistic.
15% OK, 53%...out of the question.

What evidence do you have that BALPA, in this case, has ever acted to enrich itself at its members expense? I know of no BA BALPA official who has made a personal financial gain through being a representative.


None whatsoever, as if you care to actually read what I stated...I referred to ALPA, APA etc.
Nothing there in my statement about BALPA in this regard.

As regards Continental, clearly you know very little about the situation..IE; how Continental, after Robert Six passed away, had their collective plate cleaned by UAL...until one guy came along, reorganized the company, and made it into one of the more stable carriers in America (with a considerable amount of cash, as well).
Yes, Lorenzo is vilified by unionized pilots today.
However, if it had not been for Lorenzo's efforts, there would not even be a Continental.
Even ALPA must agree, as they accepted all their previous members back into the fold.

As for what pilots are entitled to...they are entitled to reasonable pay and conditions, but they are most definitely NOT entitled to tell the company how to run the business, where to fly, how much to charge for a ticket...nor anything else, whether pilots think they have a right or not.
BALPA thought otherwise, and was slapped down by the legal process, for want of ready cash.
Get over it, and stick with flying the airplane, not trying to manage the company.

[XT668]

Pilots = Individuals with good motor skills and a reasonable intellect.

Given the flat promotion structure and the somewhat 'Hollywood' aura surrounding the job, most pilots soon think they know more about everyone else's job, from the CEO downwards that the incumbents of those jobs.
They then tend to believe they are the most important people in the Airline, something to do with the 'front-of-the-aeroplane' syndrome, not to mention the uniform.

Inevitably, they clash with the professional businessmen and accountants who actually run the business, NB BUSINESS.
Given that BALPA is a union, it behaves like a union, (even though most pilots feel themselves above the likes of the GMB or the TUC) and equally inevitably the union loses or the firm goes bust. Now factor in high oil prices and green political agendae - there was more chance of Scargill winning his miners' strike than there is of BALPA winning a Porsche Picket Line duel.

Sad - but true.