BA and Project Columbus

[Snidely Whiplash]

BA staff could go on strike after a leaked memo showed the company is planning a major shake-up in the New Year that will include salary cuts and performance-related pay.

Details of the shake-up – codenamed “Project Columbus” by BA – are set out in a leaked confidential internal document. “Cabin crew costs at LHR are uncompetitive when compared against our main airline competitors,” according to the leaked memo. And “complex and restrictive cabin crew agreements” are creating “a barrier to change” and “hamper efficiency”. The airline also aims to replace existing agreements and bring in performance-related pay. New staff will be put automatically on to the new terms and conditions.

It aims is to “remove the complexity and inefficiency of current LHR cabin crew agreements” and attract staff at “competitive cost”. The British Airline Stewards and Stewardesses Association - part of the Unite union - has urged members to 'resist' the plans. It says that means existing staff will be left to 'wither on the vine'.

BA also intends to change the airline's culture by making it more skills and merit based "enabled through performance-related pay and merit-based promotion". A BA spokesman blamed the worst trading environment the industry has faced on the new measures. “We have to offset these challenges and identify areas across the company where we can reduce costs.”

How novel; to pay a person on skills and merit. Is that not the normal way people get paid in every other industry? If BA's staff go on strike as is threatened, WW may as well fire the lot. Looks like he would be better off with just about any other person wanting a job. The world is full of such people, and working for BA would be seen by many as attractive.

[jordan]

Not at all surprised! Any CEO worth his salt would have to look at emergency measures in the current economic climate - and I wouldn't be surprised if there weren't more significant changes on the horizon. BA can't be expected to compete effectively whilst having costs above those of competitors. I would imagine that the changes would have to be made quickly, and could be quite painful.

[max zedeffdubya]

well he got rid of the regions and has had a go at gatwick/perhaps it was just a matter of time before he took on the sharp end of the business/maybe hes trying to do what he did at lingus

[PC767]

The leaked memo also states that WW LHR is highly productive when running to plan but inflexible when not. Rather than destroy one of his assets W Walsh should perhaps look at the basics and ensure his company is able to run to plan.

[Carnage Matey!]

Willie Walsh can't control the weather, but maybe he could persuade the long haul cabin crew not to demand two local nights off when their aircraft diverts to Cardiff because of weather delays at Heathrow?

[indamiddle]

can anyone post what WW earns and what the respective CEO's at virgin, cathay, singapore, lufthansa, AF/KLM and emirates earn? possibly enlightening.

[QRCC2B]

My sister works with BA since 1996.

I can understand if BA wants to cut costs, especially at this time and mixed flying has also shown to be effective (most airlines also seem to do it). She came home from HKG the other day and that trip was probably worth at least £500. They have around 13 CC (not including the ICC) on each flight (three daily flights).

That's £6 500 per flight. £19 500 for all daily flights. £136 500 per week. And this is only for one destination!

Sorry to be a bit harsh. But, those numbers are fascinating and it does make sense if they want to introduce a new fleet with new T&C to cut costs.

[Re-Heat]

can anyone post what WW earns and what the respective CEO's at virgin, cathay, singapore, lufthansa, AF/KLM and emirates earn? possibly enlightening.
I hardly see how that is relevant, but I post it anyway - all public sources. His comp is low, esp in comparison to the Americans.


A dash denotes no info in one year only.


Walsh - BA (GBP 2004-2007):

Salary - 548,000 611,000 679,000
Bonus - 135,000 - -
Total Annual Cash Compensation - 683,000 611,000 679,000
Other Annual Compensation - - - -
Total Short Term Compensation - 683,000 611,000 679,000
Long Term Incentive Plan - - - -
All Other Compensation - 69,000 14,000 22,000
Restricted Stock Awards - - - -
Total Calculated Compensation - 887,000 625,000 701,000
As Reported Total compensation - - 625,000 701,000
Other Compensation - 204,000 14,000 22,000


Harrison - easy (GBP 2004-2007)

Salary - - 450,000 540,000
Bonus - - 900,000 997,000
Total Annual Cash Compensation - - 1,350,000 1,537,000
Total Short Term Compensation - - 1,350,000 1,537,000
All Other Compensation - - 37,000 38,000
Total Calculated Compensation - - 1,387,000 1,575,000
As Reported Total compensation - - - 1,537,000
Other Compensation - - 37,000 38,000


Joyce - Qantas (AUD 2004-2007)

Salary 532,273 608,066 778,646 1,092,614
Bonus 324,000 280,275 880,592 1,207,000
Total Annual Cash Compensation 856,273 888,341 1,659,238 2,299,614
Total Short Term Compensation 856,273 888,341 1,659,238 2,299,614
All Other Compensation 406,067 238,346 366,153 95,800
Restricted Stock Awards - 296,843 - -
Total Calculated Compensation 1,418,599 1,423,530 2,663,962 2,395,414
Option Awards - 296,843 638,571 -
As Reported Total compensation 1,418,599 1,423,530 2,663,962 2,395,414
Other Compensation 562,326 535,189 1,004,724 95,800


Emirates - not disclosed
Virgin - not disclosed


Tyler - Cathay (HKD 2004-2007)

Salary 2,400,000 - 2,964,000 3,392,000
Bonus 1,505,000 - 2,903,000 3,289,000
Total Annual Cash Compensation 3,905,000 - 5,867,000 6,681,000
Other Annual Compensation 294,000 - - -
Total Short Term Compensation 4,199,000 - 5,867,000 6,681,000
Long Term Incentive Plan - - - -
All Other Compensation 3,464,000 - 4,261,000 4,337,000
Restricted Stock Awards - - - -
Total Calculated Compensation 7,663,000 - 10,128,000 11,018,000
As Reported Total compensation - - 10,128,000 11,018,000
Other Compensation 3,758,000 - 4,261,000 4,337,000


Mayrhuber - Lufthansa (EUR 2005-2007)

Salary 650,000 700,000 700,000
Bonus 955,350 1,137,788 1,400,000
Total Annual Cash Compensation 1,605,350 1,837,788 2,100,000
Total Short Term Compensation 1,605,350 1,837,788 2,100,000
All Other Compensation 37,220 103,140 107,847
Total Calculated Compensation 1,642,570 2,090,545 2,605,996
Option Awards - 149,617 398,149
As Reported Total compensation 1,642,570 2,090,545 2,605,996
Other Compensation 37,220 252,757 505,996


Spinetta - AF-KLM (USD 2004-2007)

Salary 425,200 - 612,720 600,240
Bonus - - 330,000 637,500
Director Fee - 31,000 24,000 31,000
Total Annual Cash Compensation 425,200 31,000 966,720 1,268,740
Other Annual Compensation - - - -
Total Short Term Compensation 425,200 - 942,720 1,237,740
Long Term Incentive Plan - - - -
All Other Compensation - - - -
Restricted Stock Awards - - - -
Total Calculated Compensation 425,200 31,000 966,720 1,268,740
As Reported Total compensation - 710,000 966,720 1,268,740
Other Compensation - - - -


Arpey - AA (USD 2004-2007)

Salary 518,837 526,620 581,534 656,500
Bonus - - - -
Non Equity Incentive Plan Compensation - - 225 50
Total Annual Cash Compensation 518,837 526,620 581,759 656,550
Other Annual Compensation - - - -
Total Short Term Compensation 518,837 526,620 581,534 656,500
Long Term Incentive Plan 130,061 - - -
All Other Compensation 200 250 39,769 36,146
Restricted Stock Awards - 327,960 8,558,878 3,103,550
Total Calculated Compensation 649,098 854,830 10,201,059 4,601,165
Option Awards - - 851,398 550,793
Change in Pension Plan/Non-Qualified Deferred Comp Earnings - - 169,255 254,126
As Reported Total compensation - - 10,201,059 4,601,165
Other Compensation 130,261 328,210 9,619,300 3,944,615
Estimated Payments in Event of Termination Without Cause - - - 12,264,726
Estimated Payments in Event of Change in Control - - - 24,918,205


Tilton - UA (USD 2004-2007)

Salary 756,832 605,625 687,083 850,000
Bonus 366,393 482,532 - -
Non Equity Incentive Plan Compensation - - 839,028 422,425
Total Annual Cash Compensation 1,123,225 1,088,157 1,526,111 1,272,425
Other Annual Compensation 27,910 17,822 - -
Total Short Term Compensation 1,151,135 1,105,979 687,083 850,000
Long Term Incentive Plan - - - -
All Other Compensation 8,481 9,036 210,959 155,968
Restricted Stock Awards - - 11,694,640 4,708,258
Total Calculated Compensation 1,159,616 1,115,015 23,809,557 10,314,769
Option Awards - - 10,377,847 4,178,118
As Reported Total compensation - - 23,809,557 10,314,769
Director’s All Other Compensation - - - -
Other Compensation 36,391 26,858 22,283,446 9,042,344
Estimated Payments in Event of Termination Without Cause - - - 16,325,006
Estimated Payments in Event of Change in Control - - - 18,037,537


Anderson - DAL (USD 2004-2007)

Salary - - - 200,000
Bonus - - - -
Director Fee - - - 16,667
Non Equity Incentive Plan Compensation - - - 289,560
Total Annual Cash Compensation - - - 506,227
Total Short Term Compensation - - - 200,000
All Other Compensation - - - 221,162
Restricted Stock Awards - - - 2,308,557
Total Calculated Compensation - - - 3,329,488
Option Awards - - - 293,542
Change in Pension Plan/Non-Qualified Deferred Comp Earnings - - - -
As Reported Total compensation - - - 3,329,488
Other Compensation - - - 2,823,261
Estimated Payments in Event of Termination Without Cause - - - 10,015,903
Estimated Payments in Event of Change in Control - - - 13,301,994


O'Leary - Ryan (EUR 2004-2007)

Salary 505,000 550,000 565,000 595,000
Bonus 127,000 200,000 365,000 560,000
Total Annual Cash Compensation 632,000 750,000 930,000 1,155,000
Other Annual Compensation - - - -
Total Short Term Compensation 632,000 750,000 930,000 1,155,000
Long Term Incentive Plan - - - -
All Other Compensation 49,000 58,000 62,000 63,000
Restricted Stock Awards - - - -
Total Calculated Compensation 681,000 808,000 992,000 1,218,000
As Reported Total compensation 681,000 808,000 992,000 1,218,000
Other Compensation 49,000 58,000 62,000 63,000


Kelly - LUV (USD 2004-2007)

Salary 322,436 404,719 416,860 424,065
Bonus 220,000 275,000 462,000 462,000
Non Equity Incentive Plan Compensation - - 620 2,089
Total Annual Cash Compensation 542,436 679,719 879,480 888,154
Other Annual Compensation - - - -
Total Short Term Compensation 542,436 679,719 878,860 886,065
Long Term Incentive Plan - - - -
All Other Compensation 41,065 68,980 96,541 95,939
Restricted Stock Awards - - - -
Total Calculated Compensation 583,501 748,699 1,405,883 1,301,438
Option Awards - - 429,862 317,345
As Reported Total compensation - - 1,405,883 1,301,438
Other Compensation 41,065 68,980 526,403 413,284


Parker - US Air (USD 2004-2007)

Salary 550,000 550,000 550,000 550,000
Bonus - - - -
Non Equity Incentive Plan Compensation - - 1,749,000 924,000
Total Annual Cash Compensation 550,000 550,000 2,299,000 1,474,000
Other Annual Compensation 5,268 81,963 - -
Total Short Term Compensation 555,268 631,963 550,000 550,000
Long Term Incentive Plan 687,500 1,787,500 - -
All Other Compensation 3,853 3,853 47,947 89,772
Restricted Stock Awards - 3,260,437 1,657,930 1,941,585
Total Calculated Compensation 1,246,621 5,683,753 5,357,582 5,444,996
Option Awards - - 1,352,705 1,939,639
As Reported Total compensation - - 5,357,582 5,444,996
Other Compensation 696,621 5,133,753 3,058,582 3,970,996
Estimated Payments in Event of Termination Without Cause - - - 8,676,285
Estimated Payments in Event of Change in Control - - - 8,676,285

[OzzieO]

Willie Walsh can't control the weather, but maybe he could persuade the long haul cabin crew not to demand two local nights off when their aircraft diverts to Cardiff because of weather delays at Heathrow?

Where did you get that little gem from?

[clipstone1]

whilst the point is made of say £500 allowances for a HKG trip, remember that the basic salary of BA longhaul cabin crew is c£14k after 8 years service.....so the allowances purely take their earnings up to a sensible level.....

[Carnage Matey!]

Where did you get that little gem from?

Worldwide cabin crew agreement. This particular clause rears it's ugly head everytime there's disruption.

[Re-Heat]

whilst the point is made of say £500 allowances for a HKG trip, remember that the basic salary of BA longhaul cabin crew is c£14k after 8 years service.....so the allowances purely take their earnings up to a sensible level.....
However, the allowances are not taxed at the same rate, and while earnings are no longer as high as old contracts permitted, they still exceed in aggregate (a) competitors (both Europe, UK and US), (b) comparable high service industries, and (c) comparable safety-based roles in other industries.

The ability of crew to have a different decision from flight crew on whether to fly or not post-delay is also a quite ridiculous situation, reminiscent of 1970s union thinking.

[TopBunk]

The quoted £500 for a HKG trip is well below the reality. For a junior crew member the extras will include 2 box payments of £320+, overtime after 12:30 hours duty at about £45 per hour (about 4.5 hours), overnight allowance of another £40, and then meal allowances of about £350. The whole trip for a main crew member is worth closer to £1000 than £500.

[OzzieO]

CM - That 2 night local stop was scrapped a few years ago.

[FormerFlyer]

OMG - I may actually regret having declined the job way back in 1994 or 95 I think it was.

Hey ho :ugh::ugh:

cheers ;)
FF

[newbagr]

formerflyer yes bad luck you didnt take the job! You would have been on an old contract , on worldwide routes making LOTS of money!

[Carnage Matey!]

OzzieO - crew still insist on two local nights during disruption. It did not go unnoticed that during the recent disruption at BKK a rerouted jumbo left SIN empty (leaving behind lots of passengers) because the inbound crew from SYD had demanded two local nights.

[seasick]

How much would a main crew that were recruited in 95 earn in basic salary?

[LD12986]

OzzieO - crew still insist on two local nights during disruption. It did not go unnoticed that during the recent disruption at BKK a rerouted jumbo left SIN empty (leaving behind lots of passengers) because the inbound crew from SYD had demanded two local nights.

It certainly didn't go unnoticed. The flight crew were happy to continue to LHR after they'd had the minimum rest. Their rationale being that industrial agreements are there for planning purposes, but when there is disruption outside of BA's control, crews should do whatever is necessary (provided it is legal) to get passengers home.

[Railgun]

OzzieO - crew still insist on two local nights during disruption. It did not go unnoticed that during the recent disruption at BKK a rerouted jumbo left SIN empty (leaving behind lots of passengers) because the inbound crew from SYD had demanded two local nights.

TBH i would just want to get home rather than spend another few nights away from it. All some crew do it think of the allowances :ugh:

[747-436]

Some of the agreements can cause problems during disruption. I have heard of a flight a few months ago that was heavily delayed. The crew would have been in hours to do it if they had reduced their turnaround at LHR by 15 mins from the Industrially agreed level of an hour and whatever it was. They didn't so the flight was cancelled.
That to me is appaling when for the sake of the crew reducing turnaround at LHR by 15 mins (They would have still had over an hour) a flight got cancelled and a hundred or so pax had to be put in hotels. How much did they cost BA??!?!?!?

And what is the big issue against performance management??

I can see big changes coming and there will probably be a fight a long the way, although this time I don't think BA will give in!!

[ltn and beyond]

The contracts that BA are proposing sound very much like the contrats in BA @LGW ??. How will the unions defend not accepting the contracts in LHR when they have already allowed it there??.

This will only bring BA cabin crew,and only those that want it, inline with all other UK carriers that they are in competition with, so you can understand where BA's thought come from.........

Good luck to all involved

[VS-LHRCSA]

The reason the unions didn't object to the LGW contract, as it is now is because it had actually been in existance since 1991 when BA bought Dan Air. SF LGW is basically the Dan Air contract with 777 flying added to it.

Objections weren't raised because it meant that the existing WW LGW crew would be sent to LHR (something many wanted) and EF LGW would get to do long haul flying.

This new thing at LHR is different entirely. A lot of people want to do 'mid-fleet' again but not on inferior conditions.

With regard to inflexibility, it cuts both ways. I've lost trips (and flight pay to boot) for the sake of 10-20 mins. Perhaps that is something they can look at?

[747-436]

With regard to inflexibility, it cuts both ways. I've lost trips (and flight pay to boot) for the sake of 10-20 mins. Perhaps that is something they can look at?

I guess that could be one way that BA could argue on cutting down the min turnaround times, that crew will benefit as well as less likely to be pulled from trips, and it would provide BA with more flexability.

[TheKabaka]

Since the new contract been touted around is for volunteers i would think it is difficult to strike over?

[bermudatriangle]

no change in terms and conditions can be imposed on a workforce.incentives and inducements can be offered to attract people to change from one contract to another.if the options are not attractive,mereley remain on your current pay,terms and conditions.if too few staff choose to transfer to the new contracts,then the operation will be very difficult to implement.waiting for natural wastage could take an eternity to replace current employees with new starters.BA is in a very weak position when proposing to change work practices for thousands of current employees.the columbus proposals may appeal to some and not others.existing staff have nothing to fear in the short term,as change will be a very slow and gradual process,if indeed any change takes place.

[silverstreak]

Project Columbus...

Its not really a 'new' concept. It happened to the 'out-stations' and more recently to the UK Regions. No one stood up, threatened to go out on strike for them did they... WW is now getting round to the cabin crew. Cutting EVERYTHING back to the bone.

Fortress LHR, T5 - whatever...

WW really must act now and do something. LH has aquired bmi. AF/KLM are already at LHR and planning bigger things at said airport. The OPENSKIES - European agreement allowing just about anyone into LHR...

What do BA have left? They have the name. They have their 'New Home T5', but is that realy enough to survive in this current climate?

How much more can Wee Willie cut?

Interesting times ahead.

[bermudatriangle]

with crude oil at $40 a barrel,cuts are not the main topic on the agenda of airline survival.delivering a consistent,high quality product on longhaul services is the key to attracting and maintaining a sound customer base.slashing costs,destroying service standards and demoralising the workforce are not the measures to ensure growth and profitability.BA are now delivering the highest levels of customer satisfaction since records began,compiled with reduced fuel surcharges and a superb product across the range of cabins,the outlook for the future is far better than most of the competition.the reduction in premium traffic as a result of the financial sector meltdown will have a negative effect,but emphasis on delivering a great product to the world traveller customers will ensure substantial load factors.T5 is now an enjoyable heathrow experience,just look at BA's punctuality levels,absolutely outstanding.change in this industry in inevitable,but change can only be achieved with the cooperation and enthusiasm of both management and employees.BA will offer incentives for crew to change working practices,some will appeal,some will not.some crew will change contracts and some will not.the key to the future is choice and respect for individuals preferences.BA is big enough an organisation to accomodate a variety of work and lifestyle choices.with this in mind,this airline can only prosper in the current economic climate.the competition had better be worried,BA will emerge as a more powerful airline in the future.i suggest investing any spare cash in BA shares,a superb long term investment.

[Carnage Matey!]

Have you ever considered using spaces and capital letters in your posts? We might read them if you did.

[aar4n5]

BA (and Virgin) have totally seen off any competion at LHR, the Air France LAX service has been a failure and the route has been dropped. The only new carriers with any real pressence at LHR are the American carriers Delta and Continental with a few trans-atlantic routes which BA alteady competed with out of LGW and BA offers a far better and consistent product than both.
The whole open-skies event has been a total anti-climax with little or no impact on BA profit margins, if anythinng it can be argued that BA have done well out of open-skies as it has enabled them to move there Dallas, Houston and Atlanta services to LHR resulting in higher yields. Loyal BA passengers and believe me there are many loyal executive club members are not going to desert BA in favour of any of these carriers that have tried to gain a big market pressence at LHR.
The operation at LHR is now running at a good efficiency with the opening of T5 and this has solved many of the airlines problems, if WW starts aiming his cost cutting mesures at frontline staff he is going to cause damage to the company were it cannot afford to fail.
Damaging the moral of loyal staff is going to damage the moral of loyal customers which as the airline always points it is an important time to be keeping are loyal customers.

[QRCC2B]

Perhaps it won't be that difficult if future recruitment is done straight into their new fleet? Also, what they might do is that every new aircraft that arrives to LHR (A380 and B787) will only be crewed by the crew belong to the new fleet?

[Classic]

There will be plenty of people willing to swop ont the new contract. Most of Gatwick will be willing to move to LHR onto a wider range of routes and aircraft, and are already used to the mixed long and short haul routine. They'll probably still earn more at LHR under the new hourly rate deal, and will be able to go part time too.

The part time option, as well as the mixed fleet flying, will attract many already at LHR, especially the lower paid new contract types, and the huge number of temporary contract cabin crew members who have completed their contracts will in many cases be ready to step in.

A few Bassa (old contract CSD) hotheads will shout and roar "over my dead body" in their usual manner but will have been sidestepped by BA's tactics and will just have to sit at home on their basic until they're made redundant.

Bout time too.

[stormin norman]

The pilots 24 point pay scale will be next on the list !

[pips]

mr walsh needs to take a pay cut as well ,and the board of directors too.
then we start to change- needs to come from the very top too.:=

[HZ123]

I fail to see that WW needs to take a pay cut. Here at BA LHR we have mostly enjoyed a great life with excellent T & C's for the last 35 years or more. Many of us still do but like with all good things it must come to end ortherwise there will be no-one in employment as BA will go down the tubes. At the end of the this we answer to passengers and shareholders, it is what they want not what we wish to have. If we take WW's pay it is moderate compared to many city positions, look at the mess thay are in?

[Human Factor]

Also, what they might do is that every new aircraft that arrives to LHR (A380 and B787) will only be crewed by the crew belong to the new fleet?

That is apparently in the plan.

[pips]

iam crew at lhr ,but change needs to come for the very top,if not we can
not move fwd as a company .:=

[Get Smart]

Everyone talks about how much money we earn at BA. I've been off sick and only on my basic. I clear £860 after tax. Now, of course, I'm not off sick all the time, but that is the basic after tax. I can't afford to take more than 2 weeks off at any one time. Most months, if I'm lucky, I'll clear £1600. I'm new contract. Everyone seems to forget that we're not all on the old contract?

[The Moo]

I agree. £13,000 pa basic and up to my max 900hrs. When I used to work at Bmi Basic was 19,000 and that was 4yrs ago. If I take leave or am off sick ( and thats 1 time in 4 1/2 years ) I cant even afford to pay my mortgage if I,m sick or on leave.
£863 pm with no flying. and they want me to take a pay cut . I think not .
Even with a 20 % pay rise on my basic ( and thats what some pilots got for changes to t & C ) thats still lower than my local bar staff.
The new contract says different terms and conditions and lower pay but better life style.

I like my current terms and pay , leave it alone.

Sources say BA is on target for a 5% profit/ operating margin this year. Dollar was hedged at 1.80 and currently 1.45 . Oil hedged at $80 per barrel , break evan for the company was 140.

All the managers have swallowed willies stuff. We are in great shape every other airline in europe would fold before BA and thats on curent terms.

This current meltdown is just another stick to beat the aviation industy down with. like 9/11. Terms never get better in good times only worse in bad.

[Human Factor]

I'm new contract. Everyone seems to forget that we're not all on the old contract?

BA aren't after the people on the new contract. My guess is when this is over, the people on the new contract won't notice a great deal of difference to their take home pay.

[Carnage Matey!]

When I used to work at Bmi Basic was 19,000 and that was 4yrs ago.

Why not ask the company to benchmark you against other airlines?

Even with a 20 % pay rise on my basic ( and thats what some pilots got for changes to t & C )

Get rid of your box payments, CAT payments and meal allowances and incorporate them into your basic and you might get a pay rise too. Of course BASSA won't even consider an hourly rate, no matter what that rate is.

[QRCC2B]

No, they are not really after the crew on the new contract. I think the basic salary isn't even £11 000 per annum. My sister, who is main crew (not even first class trained), has been with BA since 1995 and her basic is around £30 000 per annum!

[Get Smart]

It may be that they are going after the old contract more, however, if they go cutting out box payments, overtime etc, new contract will be affected. Allowances are the majority of pay. They need to up the basic but somehow, I can't see BA doing anything to benefit any crew. :{

[GS-Alpha]

BA apparently want this new contract to save them money simply through volunteers. In order to achieve this, they only need to pay the same money per crew member, but gain efficiencies so that they no longer need so many crew. This can be achieved by having the mixed fleet with different contact terms.

They will probably save even more money, if they slightly up the new contract overall pay so that they get even more volunteers, and hence more efficiency. If they get enough volunteers, the pay for the old contractors will go down considerably, because they will be given as little lucrative work as possible. With sufficient volunteers, BA probably do not even need the old contractors to agree to a new contract, because their allowances will be reduced dramatically.

In my opinion BA are being very clever with all of this. There is no way that confidential Columbus literature was leaked to BASSA by accident. They are just gauging the reaction, and will more than likely offer a final package that is actually quite attractive to the majority of BASSA's members. They want it to be voluntary. Therefore by definition, it must be more attractive to at least some crew.

[Human Factor]

There is no way that confidential Columbus literature was leaked to BASSA by accident.

I'm surprised it took so long to reach BASSA. It's been relatively common knowledge for months. Unless it's BASSA's world famous timing again. Surely they wouldn't have sat on this, would they?:rolleyes:

[Re-Heat]

I think the Moo and get Smart miss the point - you are paid to work. Sitting at home for more than 2 weeks sick is symptomatic of something far more problematic than simple colds and general sickness. £860pm basic sick pay far exceeds what some pay as the legal minimum: it is your responsibility to get mortgage protection insurance if you are sickly enough to require it.

You might think it harsh, but last time I checked, we were not Communists, and our economy can't afford it even if we were.

I really cannot understand the lack of motivation of some. Yes, there is the unwritten agreement with the company to work hard such that they look after you, and yes that is abused at times, but the posts above are completely imbalanced.

[13 please]

What's first class trained got to do with salary..?? nothing..

Really, your sister is on £30 000, and been flying since '95.??

That's interesting as I've been flying since '92, and if I was full-time, my salary would be £28 000.. Not much different, but different all the same..

[QRCC2B]

Being GR1 has nothing to do with salary but does show that promotion with BA is very slow.

And, I said around £30 000 per annum (if full-time but she works part-time).

[HZ123]

Are not higher levels of sickness a symptom of traditionally poor management and supervision. The symptom is not exclusive at BA to CC but is manifest throughout the company. It must be noted that high levels of sickness are sometimes associated with the variouis activitys taken place within the UK - Wimbledon used to be one of them.

NECC start pay is indeed about £11,000 and let us not forget there are a couple of hundred in the job pool waiting for employment and also many thousands of othes out there. If BA management had a mind to they could swamp the area with new rate staff. PC is not new and not exclusive it is reflected across the company in particular Ramp services, Turnaround Managers and Passenger Services centre at Newcastle, all three areas having been specifically changed and back filled with staff on new and lower rates of pay.

The plus point is that BA have been doing this since I joined nearky 40 years ago. It is always a focus when business is poor, however, once it picks up again and with the arrival of the A380 we will hit the panic button again and staus quo will remain until the next crisis. Happy Xmas!

[TopBunk]

I have to say, having read the document, that I see it as a totally factual and unbiased summary of the current situation.

Rather than defending the status quo by deflecting attention elsewhere (like mentioning WW's salary, change from the top, BA pilots deal of a few years ago) why not point out to us where the document is factually incorrect?

Go on, we are all ears?

[The Moo]

I think Re- Heat missed to point. My basic if I don't fly is 863pm total , not stat sick pay. I get that same total for my 30days leave that I have to take each year. I can not afford to take an annual hol.
If I was ever off long term sick with a chronic illness I'd earn that same amount until stat sick pay kicked in.
Again I state. If a BA pilot takes a 20% pay rise on an average salary of 75,000pa to accept an hourly rate. Thats a 15,000 pa pay rise. If I got a 20% pay rise thatsan extra 172 pm rise.

[jetset lady]

The Moo,

Do not compare our wages and T&C's to that of the flight crew. It's a completely pointless exercise. We did not spend an average of £75,000 and train for 18 odd months to become cabin crew. We are, technically, unskilled workers and if you look around, especially on the ground, £860.00 is pretty much the average for unskilled workers. The difference between them and us is that, unlike us, most don't have the opportunity to top those wages up with flight pay, commision, allowances etc.

I will agree with you totally regarding holiday pay, as we, legally, shouldn't be penalised for having to take annual leave but that's something that the flight crew have had to fight for and that we will now fight for. On the other hand, while it is damned hard when you're off on long term sick, unfortunately, that's the nature of the job and it is something that we knew about when we signed up for this flying malarky. At least we do get our basic, rather than the statutory sick pay allowance. A lot don't.

I'm not trying to talk our role down but comparing us to others in the company is a waste of time and achieves nothing.

Jsl

[Carnage Matey!]

If a BA pilot takes a 20% pay rise on an average salary of 75,000pa to accept an hourly rate.

Your arguments would have more credibility if you didn't blithely post the standard (and incorrect) BASSA claim that pilots all got a 20% pay rise.

[PC767]

Quite right Carnage, not all pilots recieved the 20%.

[Human Factor]

Personally, I broke even moving to the hourly rate. My basic pay went up by around 5%.

Very few pilots saw their basic pay go up by anything like 20% to be honest. The ones who did best from the deal were junior Captains who had historically been significantly underpaid to that point. The proof being senior longhaul co-pilots who, when the allowances were being taken into account, were taking home more than junior Captains on the same fleet. There was no incentive either for these people to bid for shorthaul commands as that would also have meant a pay cut, particularly moving down to LGW. Now, you will not find a Captain who takes home less than a co-pilot on the same fleet and LGW pilots on the same deal as LHR pilots, albeit with a pay cap. Overall, a forward step IMHO.

[GS-Alpha]

My understanding is that there were a small number of pilots who received such pay rises. These individuals were senior Concorde pilots who around that time, moved to longhaul due to the aircraft going out of service. People who flew Concorde, did not do so for the money, hence it was not especially well paid. Transferring to a better paid fleet was by far the biggest contributor to those individuals' 20% pay rise.

Quoting 20% pay rises for the pilots, is basically like the cabin crew getting a 3% pay rise across the company one year, and then quoting that you got a 20% pay rise because a few crew transferred from LGW to LHR long haul around the same time, with the associated increase in their pay.

It's a good figure to throw around, to try to create envy, and to try and get yourself a payrise or defend your pay, but in reality, these pilots achieved their large pay rises by effectively changing jobs.

[3Greens]

And what has ANY pilots salary got to do with cabin crew deals? They are totally differant jobs requiring totally diferant qualifications. Apart from working on the same aircraft the similarity stops there. You would have more credability within the company from the top down if you/BASSA stuck to facts and compared like with like. All the spin and childish literature frm BASSA makes you look ridiculous to be honest; something i dislike as i know there are many well educated and rounded CC out there.

[HZ123]

3Greens is correct. What BA wish is to pay us are T & C akin with the UK average. I would hazard a guess that that is thousands of pounds per annum less than we at BA get. CC are 14,000 strong correct me and as such will retain some clout for the foreseeable future. We have to realise that the day of great changes gets closer. Shoiuld be OK till 2012!

[TopBunk]

where the document is factually incorrect?

The silence is deafening. There is no defence to the document. BA Cabin Crew are overpaid and inefficient to the tune of £15,000+ per annum and/or 200 hours flying per annum depending on where they work.

I see a fractious, but uncontestible, defeat for BASSA/CC89 in 2009, and the relentless transfer of all 'lucrative' routes (you know what they are) to the new fleet over the next 2-3 years.

BASSA (especially) is well overdue being brought down a peg or ten. Their lack of recognition of reality is going to come home to roost. Without it, BA's future is in doubt [14,000 CC x £10,000pa = £140,000,000 pa].

There are in addition, still 5,000 staff to be got rid off (@£25,000 pa = £75,000,000).

Thumbs up to Willie on this.

[pinkaroo]

Topbunk, You go first then. How much are you willing to give back to Willie per month? How about just taking enough to live on? Would you have Openskies fly your sectors on their T & C's?

[Carnage Matey!]

I'm sure he'd be willing to give up anything he's paid above the benchmark level. That's irrelevant anyway as Willies not asking anyone to give things up yet, he's just saying the gravy train is full and no more will be allowed to jump on it.

[newbagr]

...over our dead bodies mate!!!

[PC767]

TopBunk. EU legislation limits flying hours to 900 pa, as you know. Myself and many others are around the 850 mark. Others are sat at home having reached the limit. (That is inefficient.)

Take £15k from my salary and I'd take home less than £10k pa. I guess you and others on justifiably higher salaries will just accept the additional tax burden as the state coughs up additional tax credits etc.

As for challenging the document and its facts, which ones? The document is a wish list for the future, not an appraisal of the present. It isn't even a proposal as yet, just a 'leaked' draft - one of many. No point arguing facts and figures until they are on the table. Then discussion can begin, indeed there was no BA acknowledgement of the document at the lastest NSP meeting between the TUs and BA.

[Hotel Mode]

As for challenging the document and its facts, which ones? The document is a wish list for the future, not an appraisal of the present. It isn't even a proposal as yet, just a 'leaked' draft - one of many. No point arguing facts and figures until they are on the table. Then discussion can begin, indeed there was no BA acknowledgement of the document at the lastest NSP meeting between the TUs and BA.

Exactly. I actually think some of the proposals may suit many new contract crew.

Others are sat at home having reached the limit. (That is inefficient.)

I think thats the rationale behind the mixed flying proposal.

[OzzieO]

Not sure why people are getting so excited about OC anyway. Its only a leaked document to date. Lets wait and see what the final proposal consists of.

[Olympus593]

Everyone is an expert on BASSA policy and have nothing to do with the internal politics of IFS, and indeed the cabin crew community.
Thanks for the support.
It was a different story when the pension issue arose.
"WE have to stand together on this one". Well we did. Where did it get the cabin crew? Nowhere and now you have the gaul to applaud WW for wanting to slash our take home???
We (BASSA) supported BALPA on the OS plan knowing the "possible" effect on the FD community and the "possible" knock on effects for the cabin crew.
No-one is saying things have to change. They must. Start by taking the lounge budget, the ground staff budget from IN-FLIGHT services and a truer cost will emerge.

[Hotel Mode]

Where did it get the cabin crew? Nowhere

Dont you still have a final salary pension then? I must have missed that.

BASSA only became interested at the last possible moment and failed to attend several meetings. Openskies is irrelevent to cabin crew as the BA aircraft being crewed on on different contracts battle got lost by BASSA years ago. But at least they keep important matters like room upgrades for CSDs and buses to central area at weekends right at the top of the agenda eh?

[Carnage Matey!]

The document is a wish list for the future, not an appraisal of the present.

It's both. The comments about WW crew being inflexible off schedule and EF being inflexible on schedule are very pertinent. The comment on remuneration versus benchmark and the excess of supervisory grades is also rooted in fact.

[jetset lady]

Everyone is an expert on BASSA policy and have nothing to do with the internal politics of IFS, and indeed the cabin crew community.
Thanks for the support.
It was a different story when the pension issue arose.
"WE have to stand together on this one". Well we did. Where did it get the cabin crew? Nowhere and now you have the gaul to applaud WW for wanting to slash our take home???
We (BASSA) supported BALPA on the OS plan knowing the "possible" effect on the FD community and the "possible" knock on effects for the cabin crew.
No-one is saying things have to change. They must. Start by taking the lounge budget, the ground staff budget from IN-FLIGHT services and a truer cost will emerge.

Olympus,

It's highly commendable that "we stood together" when it came to the pensions dispute and OS. Now, if only we'd all "stood together" a little while before that. Around the time that BA were trying out all their cost cutting ideas on the BA Lab Rats, otherwise known as LGW. Maybe if we had had some support back then, we wouldn't all be in the uncertain situation of today!

Unfortunately, not all but definitely a large majority at LHR didn't give a damn about what was happening down the road. After all, it was only LGW and LGW wasn't even really mainline...was it? Those crew were so shortsighted and arrogant that they never thought it could happen at the Golden Runways. Well guess what? They discovered it could work and now it looks like it's coming to an airport near you soon!

Please don't insult us by spouting on about how you've all stood by everyone else, because it's absolute rubbish and you know it!

As for your comment about starting with cutbacks to the ground staff in IFS, I think you'll find they have. Very recently, in fact. Such a short memory!



newbagr,

Oh, that's very constructive and I'm sure will make a world of difference to the plans of the management!

Jsl

[Olympus593]

Jetset,
Just want to clear a couple of things up regarding your post.
Firstly I am certainly NOT advocating jobcuts. My memory is fine, thanks. 100 groundstaff are going at LGW. (Lets see if AVIANCE worm their way in in the future, but thats another topic).
I was referring to the fact that ground services, ie groundstaff and the lounges fall under the IN-FLIGHT budget. In Touch days include these costs as part of the "You cost too much" Brainwashing.
I never intended my post to be seen as ANOTHER LGW v LHR thread, far from it.

Do you really think that LHR crew never seen this comming? LGW has always been the testbed, mainline or otherwise, for any implimentations that BA have wanted or desired.

HotelMode,
The point of the central area bus and CSD room upgrades were in the settlement document as points of principle. The bus was negotiated in the early 80s. BA wanted to remove it without consultation. It was seen that, just trashing an agreement would be the thin end of the wedge. Ditto the room upgrades.

Happy Landings.

Olympus.

[jetset lady]

Olympus,

I'm not talking about the job cuts involving the LGW groundstaff. I'm referring to the recent cull of managers from IFS.

I'm also not particularly interested in a tit for tat argument either, but I have to ask, if LHR say this coming, why didn't they attempt to stop it before BA could get the chance to discover whether it would work or not?

Jsl

[newbagr]

JetSet,

Hi, for your information I am LGW crew. I strongly believe that we have to fight all as one as this WILL affect us all! If we think at LGW that BA is done with us, then trust me WE ARE WRONG!Next thing, they will remove incraments, will remove other little payments, they will remove breakfast allowances as simply they will know we are just easy trargets! I agree with you that LHR should have had taken a more active approach when BA was creating LGW but now this is done. We cant go back to change it! We can try to change whats in store for ALL of us!

[jetset lady]

newbagr,

I never made any assumptions as to which base you were from. As it happens, I am perfectly aware that you are crew at LGW from your previous posts, but in this instance, that had no relevance to my comment.

I would also be interested to know how you have come to the conclusion that I think Colombus will not affect LGW if it does come to fruition? I don't think I have said as such so far and I will make up my own mind when a final proposal is finally put onto the table. Until then, I will not be sent into a frenzy of panic by the overly emotive BASSA "news" letters.

Jsl

[Olympus593]

JSL,
The management cull doesn't just apply to IFS management, it is companywide.
Just goes to show what every one knew. Too many Cheifs etc.
FWIW, if you think LGW are above further cuts then think again.
No-one is immune.
BA want to remove the "extra" PSR from the 777. Are you going to let them smash that hard fought agreement? Where will it end? Imposition of £1.20 per hour?

Olympus.

[Ex Cargo Clown]

I'd love to know just how WW is going to cull the enormous amounts of pointless middle management that the company has..........

Nuke Waterworld ???

[Olympus593]

WW is offering severance to the upper enchelons of the management structure. The same people will, undoubtebley ,return on over -inflated rates as consultants, therefore costing BA more in the long term.
History has a habit of repeating at BA, despite lessons "learnt".

Its all number crunching, targets met bonus and back patting on the so called results.

Olympus.

[jetset lady]

Olympus,

What are you on about? Please re read my last post, paying particular attention to:

I would also be interested to know how you have come to the conclusion that I think Colombus will not affect LGW if it does come to fruition?

Jsl

[Carnage Matey!]

The bus was negotiated in the early 80s. BA wanted to remove it without consultation. It was seen that, just trashing an agreement would be the thin end of the wedge. Ditto the room upgrades.

Are you sure about those room upgrades? I seem to remember BASSA claiming it was agreed in the early noughties, yet since that date they've been unable to produce a signed agreement to that effect or even minutes of a meeting in which it was agreed. It's now been kicked into touch by means of Simon Telling-Smith saying "Yeah yeah, we'll give you that" and Hotel Contracts saying "You're not authorised to do that so we're just going to ignore it".

[Olympus593]

JSL,
Since the question was posed to newbagr and not myself, I feel it is inappropriate to comment.
However, I will not cast aspersions but hope that the threat is headed off by the BASSA members at LHR with a positive outcome for us all.
The BASSA newsletter may have been emotive and alarmist to some but, there are so many crewmembers out there who have no idea of the implications of BAs plans, I feel it was timely and appropriate to make BASSA members, and all for that matter, wake up and realise the extent of the "Wish list".
Any word from CC89 yet?

Olympus.

[Carnage Matey!]

Do CC89 still exist?

[jetset lady]

Olympus,

The question was posed to newbagr, as you quite rightly point out, but despite this, you then went on to suggest more or less exactly the same thing as newbagr....

FWIW, if you think LGW are above further cuts then think again.

so it now applies to you also.

Jsl

[marlowe]

Cabin Crew 89 are now amalgamated into TGWU and are under the UNITE banner .

[Olympus593]

Only in their own eyes and egos, CM.
Alleged merger happened early November.

Bestest,
Olympus.

[Olympus593]

JSL,
How can you type and rub your hands in glee at the same time?

[jetset lady]

Olympus,

Get a grip and come off your high horse. If anything, I'm typing and rubbing my eyes with tiredness, having been up for over 24 hrs!

You started off with some good, reasoned points, even if we didn't neccessarily agree on everything. However, you now seem to have drifted off into the typical paranoia, assuming that everyone that doesn't agree with you must be full of glee about the possible downfall of LHR. For the last time, I have never said that I agree with the idea of the Columbus draft, and note that word, draft! I have merely stated that I will wait to see the final proposal before I make any decisions on what I think!

Just out of interest, I noticed you never answered my earlier question.

I'm also not particularly interested in a tit for tat argument either, but I have to ask, if LHR say this coming, why didn't they attempt to stop it before BA could get the chance to discover whether it would work or not?

Jsl

[lovethesky]

us crew will get no support from flight crew on here, most pilots cant wait for us to be on the hourly rate. they cant wait for us to be screwed over.
well they are stupid if they think it will end with the crew, im sure they will be back to look at the pilots soon.
there is nothing to stop ba doing this to them, as there are now plenty of pilots out there looking for jobs.

[Carnage Matey!]

Interesting theory, but pilots are already on an hourly rate, already work close to 900 hours on short and long haul and are already benchmarked against all major Euro competitors. BA can't produce any of the Columbus justifications against us. There may be plenty of pilots looking for jobs, but BA don't need any more pilots.

[OzzieO]

Don't understand why would the pilots benefit from cabin crew being on a hourly rate?

[Juan Tugoh]

The hourly rate is not necessarily a bad thing. If BASSA can get the amount spent on allowances by BA secured and redistributed as an hourly rate then the only people who will lose out will be the senior CSDs and others who have a friend in scheduling.

Go to any premium destination and the station staff will tell you that the same faces keep cropping up. The rest do the destination payment places.

The hourly rate does not need to be £2.80 it could be much higher, it all depends on how smart the people negotiating with BA are. Oops! I forgot the same senior CSDs who are screwing the system for their own benefit are doing the negotiating. So it will be a strike and much vitriolic comms: and at the end BA will still get what they want with BASSA failing once again to use change as a positive thing.

[OzzieO]

JT Where on earth do you get your information from?

[TheKabaka]

Juan,

Good post you are absolutely correct. Most crew don't understand how the hourly rate works and BASSA are happy to leave them in the dark.

If you can capture the same amount of money and distribute it differently then it is more equitable than the current system (work more earn more).

The other side of the equation is efficiency, simply put BA have to squeeze more work from there crew, the agreements are from another age and very hard to defend.

[Carnage Matey!]

Of course they know how the hourly rate works. They'll all be paid £1 per hour, be too poor to go sick and have to sit round a candle in the winter to keep warm. BASSA told them in their "Diary of a crewmember 2012" publication at the last dispute! :ok:

[GS-Alpha]

I can see the overall pay package being slightly better than the current new entrants' package. It will likely involve a fairly significant hourly rate (incentive pay), and will also include incentive pay during holiday periods too. BA will save significant money by getting cabin crew holiday pay sorted out before the pilots win the last holiday pay entitlement tribunal appeal. A bidding system will also lessen sickness, whilst increasing efficiency with the mixed fleet. Overall, it is going to be good for the majority of cabin crew, whilst at the same time saving BA quite a considerable sum.

Note that none of this is based on known fact. It is all just my best guess.

[jetset lady]

course they know how the hourly rate works. They'll all be paid £1 per hour, be too poor to go sick and have to sit round a candle in the winter to keep warm. BASSA told them in their "Diary of a crewmember 2012" publication at the last dispute

A candle? A CANDLE.....?

Nah! You must have been reading the Amicus "Diary of a crewmember 2012". I don't remember the BASSA one saying that we would be able to afford a candle to sit round! :{:E

Jsl

P.S. And before I'm jumped on and accused of being overly gleeful again, I...AM....JOKING! Or is that not allowed now?

[Londonlads]

Couldn't agree more. The vast majority of the crew at LHR couldn't care less about what was happening down at LGW.

As for mixed flying, most airlines are ACTUALLY doing it successfully! EK, EY, KL, LH, QR, SK, SQ to mention a few of them. One of the reasons why Mid-fleet wasn't much of a success was probably for having far too many fleets at one time; LGW EF, LGW WW, LHR EF, LHR WW and LHR MF!

They see it's working at LGW and they probably feel it can be done at LHR. After all, they are not running a charity.

I'm at WW and have decided not to say yes or no to Project Columbus until it has been presented. Most of the crew are extremely negative towards this but bare in mind NOTHING has been announced and therefore nobody can actually say what the "package" will be like. Perhaps it would be beneficial money-wise, especially for the ones on the new contract since 1997, which also of the majority at LHR are on.

[Get Smart]

With regards to mixed flying, how would BA propose crew to type rated on A319/20/21 (one type), 757, 767, 777, 747 and soon dreamliner and A380? I'm sure there is a way, just wondering how? Surely they will have to wait until they get rid of the 76 and 400 which isn't in the immediate furture? These changes could take years? :confused:

[Carnage Matey!]

I suspect the plan is Columbus crew on A319/320/321, A380 and B777 a.s.a.p., hence only 3 types. The 380 will be getting all the big box payment routes (HKG/SIN/BKK), the B777 can also cover some of the additional lucrative routes (eg NRT) if it makes a difference to the bottom line over operating a 747. The 787 (if it ever arrives!) is largely a 767/777 replacement so could be crewed by existing crew. The 787 could eventually be recrewed as numbers build. Eurofleet would probably see a more rapid change as I suspect there'd be quite a few volunteers amongst existing crew and all new entrant positions would be backfilled either by LGW crew or new entrants on the Columbus contract.

[OzzieO]

Speculation Speculation Speculation, its just all speculation.

[Londonlads]

Crew don't necessary need to be licensed on all aircraft types! A girl whom I used to work with at QR works at LH these days and flies A340, 737 and 777. Look at the numerous of aircraft types LH flies...

I also think 777 and 787 would be on the same license as the doors are exactly the same.

These are only simple formalities!

[Human Factor]

The hourly rate does not need to be £2.80 it could be much higher.

Actually it does. Much over that and the taxman will have the difference.

[Carnage Matey!]

Is it all just speculation? I'm sure the leaked Columbus document stated that crew would be on A319/320/321, A280 and B777.

The hourly rate could well be over £2.80, they'd just need to make sure the tax burden was comparable to the existing meal allowances, a proportion of which are already taxed.

[OzzieO]

CM I don't think it went into that much detail. I will have a check......

[OzzieO]

Apologises there is mention of the aircraft types on the leaked document.

[PC767]

The hourly rate is not necessarily a bad thing. If BASSA can get the amount spent on allowances by BA secured and redistributed as an hourly rate then the only people who will lose out will be the senior CSDs and others who have a friend in scheduling.

But the idea is to save cash not redistribute it. If the current IFS cash was repackaged into a single hourly rate, then I would support the suggestion. Fairness and transparency.

But the idea is to slash costs. And any suggestion from LGW crew and Flightdeck crew that there is no room for further cuts to their divisions is highly dangerous. Walsh has set the ball rolling and no doubt his successors will keep pushing it along. BA now stands for grab what you can for as little as you can. It is the turn of LHR cabin crew now, then who?

[Classic]

The trouble is, the senior CSDs who would lose out are the ones running Bassa, and woe betide anyone who questions the received wisdom of the 'Bassa world view'.

The younger cabin crew who would benefit hugely from the hourly rate and a reasonable preference system don't get a look in.

[overstress]

Has the requirement for cabin crew to be licensed actually been introduced yet?

[bermudatriangle]

PC 767 is spot on...ba have no intention or redistributing the overall cabin crew pay more evenly and fairly.they are not taking all this time to remain where they are now as regards the overall pay costs.swopping allowances per destination, for an hourly rate,not a chance.the idea must be to cut costs and that means reducing current pay and conditions,that has to be of concern to existing employees !

[Classic]

O'stress
No, cabin crew aren't licensed.

Bermuda,
How do you know that BA aren't willing to redistribute the existing pot of cabin crew pay? The company can make huge savings by introducing the hourly rate because it is so easy to administer, compared to the massively complex allowances system - it also means you don't mind where you go, and don't lose out so much in a bad month or if you're ill.
Amazingly, it can also be made pensionable so you don't have to be doling out chix or beef into your 60s!

Decent negotiation by Bassa could achieve all that, without losing you a penny (except the 25year CSDs on 60k+)

[PC767]

We will just have to wait and see the actual proposal. If, and it is a big if, the pot is merely redistributed then I can see the reaction being predominantly positive. But I am certain this will not be the case, unfortunately.

[The Moo]

I think that most longhaul crew would go for the hourly rate if the whole pot was redistributed.
The reason being , The harder you work the more you get paid. On the current system you could do 5 India or east coast night stops totalling 80 - 90 hours flying in one month and earn half what you could if you did just 2 premium trips, total of 50 -55 hrs.
The beneifits for the company are:
We are told that there would be less tax therefore less NI to be paid by the company,saving the company millions per year.
Sickness should be reduced as under the current system if you get a rubbish roster some people just think "sod it" and go sick thinking "it can't get any worse and I might pickup a premium trip"

Can i just add I,ve only ever been off sick once and it wasn't down to a crap roster.

[Railgun]

Whatever they have planned i hope they offer severence.

[The Moo]

old contract ?

[MrBunker]

Lovethesky, you said,

"us crew will get no support from flight crew on here, most pilots cant wait for us to be on the hourly rate. they cant wait for us to be screwed over.
well they are stupid if they think it will end with the crew, im sure they will be back to look at the pilots soon.
there is nothing to stop ba doing this to them, as there are now plenty of pilots out there looking for jobs."

Consider yourself supported by one member of flight crew. ATB :)

[WeLieInTheShadows]

The hourly rate works to an extent.

At LGW there is only ONE RATE. £2.37 or something. That's the same no matter if your sitting on a beach or flying on a jet.

Correct me if I'm wrong but the Flight Crew have two tier rate? One for sitting ona beach (or in a hotel room), and one for flying a jet.

The flying rate is much higher than the non-flying one, so more work = more pay.

A sensible solution, that seems to work for most. Those who wish to earn more bust their nuts flying. Those who wish to sit on a beach doing 6 day BGIs do exactly that, but earn less as a result.

At LGW with only one rate for everything, it has created a two class flying programme. 7 day UVF trips crew earn the most for not really much work. While some of their colleagues are earning far less for busting their humps doing shorthaul doing 4 sectors days and PFO there and backs.

The senior people cream all the good stuff through the bidding system, and senior main crew end up earning more than the in-charge crew members, making promotion unattractive.

Sound familiar to any BA pilots out there?

Negotiation is the key to this situation. I only hope BASSA are interested in negotiation, and not putting out propoganda.

[TopBunk]

Correct me if I'm wrong but the Flight Crew have two tier rate? One for sitting ona beach (or in a hotel room), and one for flying a jet.

Not really correct, in that the pay element for flying does not replace the TAFB element, it is additional.

The TAFB is paid from check in to check out at the end of the trip and replaces allowances. The Flying pay element is paid for flying out done. As most pilots fly the same number of hours per year, we all earn the same flying pay element, so we don't really care where we fly to as far as money is concerned.

[pinkaroo]

Topbunk,
Does that mean that you now get paid less than you did before and your less senior colleagues get more or are you financially better off and so are they?

[TopBunk]

Pinkaroo

This thread is not about pilots pay, and the answer is not a simple yes/no.

What I was doing was trying to point out a misconception/error in a previous post by giving facts.

[Classic]

Pinkaroo,

The benefits of hourly rate mean the differential between destinations is largely eliminated, resulting in far smaller differences in pay between junior and senior pilots.

I'd never want go back to allowance based pay, and I think cc would see a similar result if they switched to the hourly rate.

[wiggy]

To carry on with this "Flight Crew Pay " thread.

Classic: I agree..the main effect of moving to an hourly ( allowances) rate was that places like NRT ceased to be err, popular, and people tried to bid for lifestyle reasons, rather than following the dollar / pound signs. Some senior people lost out ( both Captains and F/O's - myself included), but like you I would never want to go back to "destination pay".

As for our Cabin Crew Colleagues - I reckon you need to see some numbers from BASSA and/or BA and do your own calculations before you can make an objective call on this.

As an aside, comments from claiming that the Flight Crew can't wait for Cabin Crew "to be screwed over" well and truely **** me off... I thought we Flight Crew dinosaurs were the employees supposedly guilty of stereotyping all and sundry.....seems there are dinosaurs amongst the Cabin crew as well....

[jacquelinee]

There are some nasty bits of work in the cockpit that can't wait for us "to be screwed over". Last year down in JNB some pilots loudy said that cabin crew are both overpaid and underworked. I was number 12 and had to look after those b*stards as well. Lovely!

[TightSlot]

Please try and raise your game a little, preferably above the level of the previous post. Anecdotal evidence of why people either side of the flight deck door are *!%^^&*'s of some kind is not really helpful to anybody. Any group of people will contain both good and bad - generalizing about the group based on either one end of the spectrum, or the other, is a waste of time.

BA crew should have more interesting contributions to make than grumbling about pilot pay - I look forward to reading it here...

[Classic]

Jacquelinee
If that's how you refer to your senior colleagues, it's hardly surprising they weren't too sympathetic to your interests.

[jacquelinee]

I'm not after any sympathy. Certainly not from individuals (these were pilots) that for no reason at all, at a restaurant, open their mouth and say that cabin crew are overpaid and underworked. That's it.

[TightSlot]

Final, written warning...

[Hotel Mode]

I dont think any of us want any of our crew to suffer financially or otherwise. When this eventually is over I hope some of the crew will look at their union and ask if they actually did them any favours.

You cant say no to everything for so long whilst peddling half truths and some very definite lies to bolster your case without putting yourselves firmly in the sights of any CEO worth their salt. A gradual top down streamlining would almost certainly have prevented this full on attack. The costs of the meal/box allowance system and the insane restrictions on short haul productivity could have been gently removed over the last 10 years. Instead WW now has the opportunity to not just fix these issues but massively cut average T+Cs too.

[The Moo]

Yes shorthaul should/could be more productive.
Average Shorthaul crew member flies an average of 600 - 680 hrs pa.
Average longhaul crew member 880.
I don't thinkwe should be paid any less. I don't know any other job where your t and c and take home pay decrease every few years.
I also believe that if this does go through the pilots will be next. Why pay the higher end of the industry standard.
99 % of UK carriers have well trained high calibre pilots. And most of those would like to earn BA pilot salaries. Esp if they are young and would have the op to reach the higher end of the BA Capt scales.

But at the end of the day I don't think and dept in BA is currently safe.

[Carnage Matey!]

They'd need to be young because they'd be waiting 15+ years for a command now. Which is why BA actually have quite a hard time finding suitable experienced candidates in the numbers they required before the slowdown. And remember a BA salary doesn't go as far if you have to live in the South East or commute 200+ miles from your home for a short haul job. Thats why they can barely get anyone experienced to accept a short haul contract.

[Hotel Mode]

I also believe that if this does go through the pilots will be next. Why pay the higher end of the industry standard.
99 % of UK carriers have well trained high calibre pilots. And most of those would like to earn BA pilot salaries. Esp if they are young and would have the op to reach the higher end of the BA Capt scales.


Theres a little contradiction there. BA only pays only a little more than the UK competition (and substantially less than the European majors) Indeed over a whole career a BA pilot may earn a lot less than counterparts elsewhere due to slow promotion. If they cut the pay where are these keen newbies who can reach the high paypoints (which you say wont exist anyway) coming from? BA already employs around 30% of all qualified airline pilots in the UK, we dont grow on trees. They were struggling to recruit enough good people only a few month ago.

[TopBunk]

Moo

Average Shorthaul [cabin]crew member flies an average of 600 - 680 hrs pa.
Average longhaul crew member 880.

My italics.

My sources are at considerable variance from yours. The longhaul figure is in the ballpark, but the shorthaul number is much closer to 500 hours per annum.

[HZ123]

It is no good to keep going back to what FC earn. It has nothing to do with CC or anyone else for that matter. CC can be recruited with great ease and they are still queuing up to join. NECC course started today at CBK and another next Monday with a couple penciled in for March. It seems to matter little to new starters about T and C's in fact few have a clue that such things exist?

[PC767]

And therein, HZ123, lies a problem for current cabin crew. There is an illusion about the role of cabin crew in general and a high attrition rate. Those who have a real insight into the role, who find the reality to their liking will stay flying whilst it suits there lifestyles and in many cases will become new recruits at BA. A quick census onboard and a majority of crew have worked for another airline before moving to BA. They stay. Those without previous flying experince have a steep learning curve and often move on. And it is these people BA seem happy to recruit from now on. Staying a couple of years, not becoming a pension liability, no graduating to higher pay increments. From a business point of view the books look good. And there is a queue to join.

Loyalty costs. Walsh is happy to gamble that long term the executive club will be happy to see the demise of the long serving, all knowing, reliable and second natured crew member. He may well be right and therein lies my problem. My experience counts for nothing.

[charliecc]

Not sure where the figure of 500 hours for Eurofleet cabin crew might come from. I'm full time, do an average of 3 x 3 days trips a month, the rest there and backs, and my planned hours to end of Jan are 669.40. I know there are those who would bring the average down (the early MAN club for example), but equally, there are those who work more than me (those who do 8 sector 3 day, and 6 sector 2 day trips).

I know that doesn't add much to this debate, but just wanted to point this out.

[TheKabaka]

those who do 8 sector 3 day, and 6 sector 2 day trips

Welcome to our (BA pilots or any other airlines crew, by which I mean flight and cabin crew) world. Or how about 4 day 14 sectors or 5 day trips with loads of sectors. These are common place for us.

If the crews are being made more efficient then the head count can be lowered and BA have to pay fewer people.

[charliecc]

Well I guess that's what Columbus is out to achieve. Personally, and I know of quite a few crew who agree with me, I'm prepared to work harder. But I'm not prepared to take a pay cut.

Just out of interest, how do you do a 4 day 14 sector trip? As far as I know, BA pilots don't do that. I'll double check that with my friend who's an Airbus SFO though. Certainly the pilots on the BUD/TXL 3 day trip I did the other day weren't doing anything like that. It was 4 sectors for them too!

[Dozza2k]

Its on the airbus Charlie,

3-4-4-3.

They are not tiring at all. Usually domestic nightstops though so not all bad.

[carrots]

We work differently and are rewarded differently, so end of really.

So to compare with cabin crew for almost all other UK airlines, and singlefleet Gatwick...

I am Short Haul crew, and my hours are almost spot on with Moo's upper estimate of the 680 Hours

Another 220 hours, or 30% more work to be done.

[Human Factor]

As far as I know, BA pilots don't do that.

They do at LGW and I've got a 3-4-3 coming up at LHR. There is the odd 3-4-4-3 around as well.

HF (Airbus Capt)

[TopBunk]

Used to 5 sector days out of Birmingham, and nothing theoretically to stop them ex LGW or LHR.

Now, remind me, why can cabin crew do a LHR-ARN-LHR with a 45 minute turnaround (for example) but not an ARN-LHR-ARN on the same aircraft?

Good luck, but BASSA, I feel, are about to be hung out to dry by their historical intransigence coming home to roost.

[flyer55]

Only thing is with 5 sector days it reduces how many hours u can do depending on what time of day u start !

[TopBunk]

F55

Natch, of course.. You aren't gonna do 5 two hour sectors with an 0600 start! But a 1200 start with 5 x 45 min sectors would probably work (unless you are LHR SH cabin crew! - in which case 3 sectors (without a 3 hour rest) would be just too much).

Just to say, I understand the desire of current crew to maintain he status quo re earnings etc, but that I understand (and agree with) the company's desire to have a competative product to protect our future pensions!

Anyway, what I say will not change things; but apparently there is someone (ex-senior CC manager, now VP American Ops) travelling around upsettin gcrews saying that it is a done deal and that a matter of weekd will see it in. He is also reported as saying that the temp LH crews have been told to 'hang on to their uniforms for abother 2-3 months'.

Read into that what you wish/or not.

All I can say is that we live in interesting times.

What is now may not well be so in mid 2009, be you cabin crew or flight crew!

[1000 to go]

Interesting times indeed!

A few facts.

Comparing the salary and terms with flt crew will get you nowhere

BA would have already worked out that any strike would be illegal, therefore this will not happen as it will bankrupt BASSA.

The lack of effort toward LGW SF a few yrs back will seal the fate of LHR

BA loved the lack of unity between bases, see previous point

Ex GLA base, ex call centre staff, etc as mentioned. No relevance on seniority as BA will do what they like as its a 'volunteer' new fleet.

There will be more than enough new people who will go for the fleet.

Enjoy the prem trips while you can! Hkg,JNb etc will become min rest under national CAA law, not BASSA's rules

Finally, I dont want this to happen either, but ignoring the facts and talking about other groups T and C's will just speed up the process and be a gift to BA. It may not happen, but get your head out of the sand and take a practical approach and be prepared in advance.

[newbagr]

are you flight crew by any chance 1000togo?

[ltn and beyond]

Which ever side of the door "1000 to go" works he has listed some quite realistic points which are the basis of what BA are pushing..

Trying to compare pilots and cabin crew T & C's is the same as the Nurse wanting the surgeons T & C's...

Lets concentrate on the arguable issues and not ones we cant win ......

[newbagr]

aw please...look after your own interests and let us LOOK AFTER ours!We do not expect any support from flight crew.Once Willie finishes with us, he ll come back for you too.

[EYXW]

what a refreshing and highly mature attitude. :ugh:

[TightSlot]

For the second time...

Comparing (and squabbling about) T's & C's or anything between Flight and Cabin crew is a pointless task, and serves the interests of nobody - except, of course, your employer, who will always benefit from "Divide & Rule".

Please try and raise your game above this bickering - it is very dull.

[PC767]

Top Bunk. I get the impression that you are either BA flight deck crew or senior BA cabin crew close to retirement. Why? because your post suggests that cabin crew will have to work for peanuts in order to protect your pension. Teamwork? Your attitude is that of a, (fortunately), dying breed. I'm open to change, properly reasoned and negotiated change, not change to save somebody elses financial requirements or indeed to cover the cost of senior managements acculimation of international fines.

Last year BA made an unprecedented profit - with my supposedly expensive terms and conditions. This year, despite the worst crisis ever faced by airlines, BA is still set to make a profit, (after settling fines). Project Columbus, or as now know FOC (Focus On Costs), is a long term project. The current economic market is perfect for announcing the requirement to change terms and conditions. After 9/11 the British goverment saw the opportunity to bury bad news. It seems BA see the opportunity to announce it.

[TopBunk]

PC

You seem to have read my posts in the wrong way.

I am playing devils advocate here, trying to outline some facts, rather than play any smoke and mirrors type of game that Bassa/Unite are playing.

I am merely pointing out a different view, I express no view as to the the result of negotiations over which I have no influence.

I am only saying that in the current economic climate (forget last years 'manipulated' results) that all sections within the company need to deliver industry standard levels of the measurable parameters. The BA leaked document would suggest that in terms of cost per unit, BA Cabin Crew are far from industry benchmark.

I am likewise sure that many other BA areas are similarly inefficient.

As to my position, it is irrelevant, but visible....

[Re-Heat]

Last year BA made an unprecedented profit - with my supposedly expensive terms and conditions. This year, despite the worst crisis ever faced by airlines, BA is still set to make a profit, (after settling fines).
Sorry to nitpick, but the accounting charge for the fine went through the accounts in March 2007, so of course was not in the March 2008 record results. Furthermore, the charge went through below the "operating profit" that was so highly trumpeted, so you are talking about two different profits in two different years!

A profit is the shareholder's compensation for putting up their capital: at present, they have had no dividend for a stretch of 7 years until 2008, and (if investing in 1999) had a halving of their capital value. Having a profit does not mean it is available for the taking by the employee group - the financial backers have a return to make as well!

[Glamgirl]

I've put on my tin hat and kevlar vest...

Regardless of anyone's feelings, CC on some contracts are paid way above what is industry standard. I'm not wanting people to lose money, but we have to look at this without emotions.

Both WW and EF t&c's make for ineffective work, ie being inflexible. What we need is more flexibility. An example being the long turn-around at LHR for EF during trips. Do you really need a 2,5 hour break? I'm not saying that you shouldn't have a break, but if your inbound aircraft is delayed and you only have 2 hrs 15min for your break you lose the rest of the trip (I know, not all the time), or the flight is delayed.

We can't survive as a company by making our customers wait. It's as simple as that.

Bassa has said "no way" to the hourly rate, without even knowing what the rate would be, if there would be an increase in basic, night stop allowance, etc. I personally think the hourly pay could be a good thing, as WW could then get the bidding system, same as the other fleets. The company save a heck of a lot of money on not paying destination payment (seriously, I've never understood that one - the company having to pay you extra for turning up for work), as all routes would earn the same.

Bidding would be less complicated for EF as well (on hourly rate), as crew could bid for places they'd like to go instead of bidding for the trips with the most box payments just to earn the money.

Bassa uses emotive language at every turn and sometimes stretches the truth. This is very unfortunate, as it makes them look ridiculous when the truth comes out (I've seen it a few times in the last few years).

Some crew are saying that they shouldn't be forced to change contracts, and it's the company's fault for wasting money on this that and the other. That is now irrelevant. It's done, dusted, and although remembered, we can't do anything about it. We're in the middle of a rescession, whether you want to believe it or not. Billions are being given in aid to the banks as I write. The problem for us is that the goverment will not bail us out if it comes to it. Companies are going bust right, left and centre, and we're not immune, no matter how healthy we look on paper.

Do you think that the crew from Zoom et al thought they'd lose their job when they did? Probably not. A company would never publish if they were in financial difficulties, as that would send investors running for the hills and the banks sweating and demanding their money asap.

Basically, what I'm trying to say (in a long winded way) is to look at this with a business head on your shoulders. I don't necessarily agree with what the company wants to do, but I understand why they want to do it.

It's not all bad. As to what I said earlier, there are positive aspects to this draft, you just have to dig through the emotions and predictions of doom to find it.

I personally think that if Bassa wants to be taken seriously (by company, crew and outside world), they need to grow up and put facts on the table. They stamp their feet too soon too often. They walk out of meetings when they don't agree with something. How can you discuss issues when you're not there? I'm not saying lay down and say "yes, ok, fine" to whatever the company wants, but at least stay and discuss it. It will give you respect.

Incoming......

Gg

Sorry for spelling mistakes

Ps. To save anyone accusing me, no I'm not management

[OzzieO]

Glamgirl very interesting reading.

Can I ask you, do you work for BA? And how long have you worked for them if you do?

[13 please]

I was going to ask something similar Ozzie.

Glamgirl,
You mentioned bidding on shorthaul, they already do bid.
Then, you mentioned box payments in the same sentence.
There's no such thing on shorthaul.

And nothing is "done and dusted". Not quite sure what you meant by that.

(Apologies for not being able to work out how to copy posts yet.!:\)

[Glamgirl]

Yes, I do work for them. A bit over 10 years. Does this help?

Gg

[Carnage Matey!]

There are/were CAT payments on short haul.

[Glamgirl]

13,

I'm fully aware that EF has a bidding system. Apologies for calling the allowances by the wrong name. Breakfast/lunch/dinner allowance or whatever they're called is what I meant. Hope this clarifies.

Gg

[Glamgirl]

CM,

EF no longer has CAT lounge/payments

Gg

[13 please]

Box payments, meal allowances, completely different ..!!!

You can't possibly be crew, so don't, please, tell us what we should accept.

People have lives, whichever fleet they're on, for god's sake.!!

Most people I know would like to have more control over WHEN they work.

It's not all about the money, despite what people think.

[Glamgirl]

13,

I am actually CC, believe it or not. I know everyone has lives to live and not everyone is in it for the money. I do, however have friends on EF who purely bid to get as many meal allowances as possible to earn as much money as possible. Nothing wrong with that as such, but they have uttered a wish to feel able to go to other destinations which may not have as "high" value as what they're bidding for now.

To keep it clear, I'm not trying to tell you or anyone what to choose and accept. All I'm doing is putting it in a different light, to allow for individuals to think for themselves instead of listening to Galley FM and/or unions alone. I wouldn't dream of telling yourself or anyone in this position what to do, as that would be ridiculous.

Gg

[jacquelinee]

It could become more efficient and sometimes crew do bend their T&C's to suit them.

I have seen crew begging over the desk to let them keep the rest of their trip (I believe it was to GVA) even though the inbound flight had been delayed and it meant they had to go straight to the aircraft. No problem for them! On another occassion, the crew refused to do it because it was "only a there and back to MAN", and the inbound trip had been delayed with only a few minutes.

Still, these allowances and payments do make up a HUGE amount of the pay check, and some months are a real struggle (spare me the comment of going shopping and using the crew card). If you get a month of DEL, BLR, MIA and IAH, it's not that easy!

[galanjal]

um glamgirl, another correction. whilst we no longer have the CAT lounge, we still do have CAT payments. I know, I have 5 of them on my Feb roster! may I ask what fleet you're on, you seem to have little idea about how LHR works

[jacquelinee]

The CAT payments do exist!

[Glamgirl]

Apologies again. I was just going by what friends at EF have told me (I'm not EF).

Looking away from the details of whether allowances are made up from meal/box/cat etc. The whole point of me posting was to make you think and that was it. Nothing sinister, no hidden agenda.

I've specifically not posted my fleet (although you can easily find out) as then that would turn this into another issue which has been discussed to the end of the earth, and it isn't the topic for this thread.

Gg

[newbagr]

I am sorry GlamGirl, I am from the same base as you are and I do not wish to struggle on pocketmoney until I retire. Earning 1300-1500 every month is not an option specially if someone does not live with parents/ husband.I fully understand my colleagues at LHR, they make some good money but life isnt cheap either.

[Carnage Matey!]

Glamgirl - do EF still get short turnaround payments?

[Glamgirl]

Newbagirl,

I've never said I wanted LHR crew to earn as little as other bases. I didn't involve my own base for that reason. Our pay structure is not the topic of this thread.

All I wanted, was for crew to consider other options, instead of saying "no, we're not doing that - we're going on strike", before any facts are known.

What we have to remember in this whole saga, is that the "leaked" document was a draft. Not a proposal, not a final offer. It's nowhere near the negotiating table yet, and it won't necessarily be as bad as people think when it does. We do though, as much as we don't want to, realise that things have to change. As an example, Singapore Airlines has announced that they're cutting over 200 flights between now and March. It's a scary, uncertain future and we need to try to protect our jobs to be able to pay our mortgages/rent and bills.

Gg

[Glamgirl]

CM,

To be perfectly honest, I'm not sure.

Gg

[galanjal]

again yes we do get the short turnaround payments, they are known as CAT payments.
glamgirl, if you took the time to speak to crew at LHR you would quickly discover that few of us are in the mood for striking. we are keenly aware that times are tough within the industry and also accept that some parts of our operations at LHR could do with modernising. but a wholescale downgrading of our pay is not something any of us can accept. I don't mind working more if it means maintaining my salary but we all live to our means and I really cannot afford a pay cut- and I do not live lavishly believe me!

[Carnage Matey!]

Nobody's suggested a wholesale downgrading of pay though, have they?

[Glamgirl]

Galanjal,

I speak to LHR based crew several times a week, so please don't assume I don't. An alarming amount of LHR based crew I've talked to are saying things like "over my dead body/no way/not in my lifetime" etc. I'm fully aware that some of the LHR community would like hourly pay, others wouldn't. We're all different, and that's what makes the world go round.

If you have a look at the company forum, you can see for yourself, that a heck of a lot of differences are around, and tempers running high. I'm just trying to have an adult discussion.

You saying you don't mind working a bit more for same amount of money is a great step for discussion. I'd hate for anyone at LHR to lose out on money, and I think very few of us, regardless which base we're at are living the high life (unless it's on credit).

Gg

[galanjal]

I take your point that nothing has been said officially said by the company

glamgirl you are right when you say there are crew who say 'over my dead body' but the majority that i fly with accept that changes are coming and indeed are needed to keep us competative in the current climate.

[The Moo]

GG to be honest you have made yourself look a bit of a fool, posting about things you obviously know nothing about ie. no bidding on shorthaul , box payments on shothaul , no more cat payments. I already work to my max legal hours and for a salary ( ex allowences ) that is barley Min wage just over 200 pw. therfore £5 ph based on a 40hr week.

[Carnage Matey!]

I beg to differ. I think GG has been one of the few crew who've actually posted a realistic perspective on what lies ahead rather than the 'Just say NO' attitude many seem to have. So what if she's got the names of payments wrong, we all know WW get Box and Destination payments and EF have a bidding system and CAT (aka short turnaround) payments. Bearing in mind that you don't earn minimum wage (nobody in BA does) and you supplement your income handsomely with allowances and other payments I think you should be rather careful about who you call a fool, especially as you clearly haven't read GGs posts properly.

[Hotel Mode]

I already work to my max legal hours and for a salary ( ex allowences ) that is barley Min wage just over 200 pw. therfore £5 ph based on a 40hr week.

But the fact is you'll double it with allowances. Just because being based elsewhere GG gets some of the semantics muddled (lets face it how many LHR crew know all the ins and outs of those prehistoric agreements?), doesnt make her wrong.

[The Moo]

I agree but if I,m off sick. I earn less than min wage. £ 5.73 is current min wage and i earn £5.06

[Carnage Matey!]

Given that it's illegal to pay you less than minimum wage (there are no exemptions for transport workers) I think your calculations are a little askew. How are you calculating that?

[frontcheck]

I doubt there is anybody in BA who works for amything like the minimum wage.:hmm:

[The Moo]

as stated figs are net. 863 pm x 12 = 10356/52 = 199.15 pw dived by 40 = £4.97 or 35 hr week = 5.69 or 37.5hrs = 5.31.
I think that the main focus of FOC is the old contract. people are earning 3 times my basic and thats just as main crew.

No other industry would you expect people to earn less than they were employed to .
Comparing to other areas of the industry is just silly. we all joined our jobs knowing what we signed up for and thats it.
You would not employ a doctor or bin man and then say "well you earn a lot more than a polish doctor/binman therefore we are going to cut your salary"

Future Employees may be employed on a different set of conditions but don't affect mine, we all live to our means .

[PC767]

The Moo. Basic starting salary for new recruits is £11400. Are you part time?

Glamgirl. You've been at BA for 10 years and have no knowledge of how IFS works. It somewhat devalues you post. However I do agree that when a proposal is forwarded then there will be something to be discussed. Quite a few of us at LHR would consider an hourly rate, if it was the correct and compensating rate for other lost payments. But, as was shown with the creation of single fleet and, as was contained within the draft document this would not be the case. Oh, and BASSA do speak for 8000 of the 11000 crew at LHR and they haven't made calls for strike action, 'over our dead bodies' statements or similar. What they have done is brought the document to the early attention of their membership and asked the company (at the last NSP) to respond accordingly. My understanding is that the company chose to ignore discussion about the document. Until then we can only, and pointlessly speculate about the pros and cons of Columbus.

Lets wait and see, then start the discussion.

Top Bunk. I did mis-interpret yor post. Sorry. It was 'bills through the letterbox day'. Not a good day for any of us I'm certain.

[Glamgirl]

PC767,

I'd beg to differ in regards to whether I know anything about IFS. I don't know how you can see that I know nothing about it, to be honest.

For those who say how didn't I know EF had a bidding system, I haven't said they don't, I just said the bidding can be improved with people bidding for different trips instead of bidding for the ones that earn them the most money.

LHR crew are obviously sensitive about this subject, and rightly so, but accusing others of knowing nothing and claiming to know what myself and other posters are thinking is not well thought out and plainly not here nor there.

Gg

Ps. Apologies again for getting some terminology wrong, but nobody's perfect :ouch:

[DarkStar]

As HZ123 and PC767 have already alluded to, the biggest problem for current CC is that there appears to be an endless queue of potential new CC who seem to ignore the T & C in their belief that just by wearing the uniform whilst shopping in Sainsbury's, Tesco's or more likely Lidl will somehow make up for the lack of money at the end of the month. Indeed, I had a beer with one of the CC recruiters who openly said BA are looking at 'new to Crew' starters rather than other CC as these 'newies' are far more impressionable and in her words 'starstruck'.

The question is how low can BA dare go with their knife to CC's T & C's before people refuse to keep knocking at the CC door. :(

[The Moo]

PC. obviously can't read prop. My figs are net as stated many times. I'm on 13,000

[frontcheck]

Do any crew actually work 37.5 hours a week?
£10356/900 = £11.50 per hr

[Glamgirl]

So if we take £13k as an example.

Take away minimum days off and leave days. Average the rest on a 37.5 hour week, it comes to 1140.75 hours a year, which we can't do due to EU legislation. That leaves 900 hours as per legislation, which then gives you £14.44 per hour (before tax). Yes, I know not all duty hours are flying hours (SEP, ITF, PST etc), so let's say £12/hour. Bear in mind that this is using just the basic salary, and allowances (however much or little) comes on top of that.

Minimum wage is never calculated after tax, always before. So I think you'll find that you're well above minimum wage. Also, keep in mind the tax break we get...

Not critisising your wage, I'm sure you deserve every penny, but please don't say you earn less than minimum wage.

Going sick means statutory sick pay, ie basic salary.

I'd like to see us get paid holidays, but that's still but a dream, unfortunately.

Gg

[Cough]

G/Girl....

The 900 hours are purely flying hours - from leaving the gate until arrival. So take a typical 3 sector day - AMS there and back followed by AGP n/s. You would probably only do 5 hours flying but your duty hours would probably be around 9. We are only allowed to do 900 flying hours per year, but believe it or not, 2000 is the max duty hour restriction.

So when you are doing your hourly rate calculation, bear in mind that its the duty hours that count...

[stormin norman]

Rumour has it some ex Flight engineers are on £80K + allowances working as cabin crew.

[Re-Heat]

PC. obviously can't read prop. My figs are net as stated many times. I'm on 13,000
Hence the confusion. Nobody in their right mind compares salaries on a net basis!

[EYXW]

Nobody earns less than minimum wage at BA - period. To suggest so is quite ridiculous as it would be illegal and they wouldn't get away with it - The current minimum wage is £5.73 an hour BA employ us on the basis of working 1200 hours per year (900 flying hours) legally we could work up to 2000 so worse case scenario 2000 x £5.73 = £11,460 p.a. If you are telling me you earn less than this as CC then may I suggest you are doing your sums wrong!

On the basis they work on 1200 x £5.73 = £6876 - well below even a new joiners base rate - and most new joiners being in EF will struggle to achieve even 1200 hours per year.

All this said - do I want to see CC pay reduced - hell no - it is unreasonable to expect someone who has been employed on the understanding they will receive X amount remuneration to then be told they will now get less. HOWEVER do I think the ancient and restrictive terms and conditions need to be changed to be more productive - certainly - £200 per crew member per sector for a one light payment (WW) is, I am sorry, insane.

Hitting anything less than 900 a year flying time on EF is equally unproductive, as are CAT payments for having a break that means getting back to compass would take to long, these were bizarre before T5 now they are just silly.

Box Payments/Over Time Rates/Destination Payments on WW - er why?

How about if allowances were based on the work you put in and how productive it is. Hourly rate doesn't have to be your enemy - but playing with the suggestion of an hourly rate the same way the American's played with the metric system will leave you behind, whilst everyone else gets involved, adapts, moves forward and has an improved system.

I don't think people should earn less, but working harder has been a long time coming at BA. No it's not a charter airline, but nor can it continue to work to the legacy carrier model.

Blame Loco's, blame the financial climate, blame Willy Walsh - I don't care! but we all have to realise that air transportation has changed (for a long time now) and we need to catch up.

Sorry If I seem blunt, or you disagree, but I find it hard to see anything in the document which isn't routed in fact......

[PC767]

EYXW. The one light payment may seem insane but the point of the payment is not to reward crew, but to ensure correct and agreed crew levels on flights. The problem with BA, as with other large UK companies - so it seems, is that if they can get away with less than agreed they will. Without the payment clause it is not unreasonable to expect BA to start routinely under-rostering flights to save cash. In previous employment it was routine to under-roster flights because the payment/fine to crew was far less than employing another crew member and thus it was cost effect, though not passenger friendly, to do so.

[EYXW]

may I take it then you agree with the rest? ;)

But seriously if flights were intentionally rostered one light - this payment as a stick for BA is fine - but it rarely/never is intentional (the company can't afford for it to be) occasionally it is even another crew members fault, or, an unavoidable operational reason yet with a crew of 15 on a 747 on a simple round trip the extra costs are £6000 - this money doesn't come from nowhere - and that effects our colleagues beyond the CRC.

Careful and effective IR could achieve the same goal as this carte blanche allowance - and then there are diversion payments...... These unusual one offs don't form part of our regular or predicted pay packets so they are non-painful ways the crew community could bargain..

[Human Factor]

Rumour has it some ex Flight engineers are on £80K + allowances working as cabin crew.

Great rumour! Some ex-Flight Engineers remain with BA in several operational roles including as pilots, although not as cabin crew. Their salary was frozen at the point at which their role ended and they have not continued up the incremental FE pay structure. Where they have taken on a position which has a lower pay grade, their final FE basic pay was retained. Clearly no allowances were payable. Where they joined a different scale (such as pilot), their pay was fixed at their final FE grade until the equivalent pilot grade exceeded it.

Obviously there were no directly equivalent positions for them to be moved to (other than pilot, which would require expensive re-training) so I don't consider it unfair that they continue to receive an element of their original package. Not sure any were on £80k + allowances in the first place. Even if there were, they would all have retired long ago.;)

Not sure how any of the above is related to the Columbus debate though? The cabin crew role is not ending. It's just proposed to alter some terms and conditions.:confused:

[yaletown]

Glamgirl, a duty day can be 16 hours, so it would actually break down to less than 11.75. Not to mention, try spending 21 days in LUN as a forgotten crew (back in the 90's) where you just want to kill yourself. Some the trips we did and they still do are so bloody horrid in third world countries where you can barely leave the hotel facility, staying at a hotel, mind you, that is 4 stars in Africa, but like a one star in the UK. In Africa dear, you cannot get shower water in your eyes, have to brush your teeth with bottled water, cannot eat any salad, and avoid vegatables. Try sitting in blighty for half a month only eating beef and potatoes. Most of Africa is not like South Africa. I could go on and on...I used to love how I would always get Delhi bellie each time in India..oh and my fave was when I got Hep A in HRE! Did I mention you live on anti malarial tablets? TRY DOING THIS EVERY MONTH!! There were months where I was home literally 8 days only. The pay should compensate people for being away for so long, not to mention the many many health hazards you get exposed to. In my estimation, cabin crew are not paid enough these days, but our execs bonuses and salaries just keep getting bigger and bigger....

[1000 to go]

Its good to see that the majority here are taking a practical approach to the yet unproposed changes. To the minority, with quotes like 'over my dead body', Im afraid youll have no choice.

No one here wants to lose any money, and I sincerely hope that is not what happens.

Any changes BA wants are to eliminate the box payments, CATS's, destination payments and uneven allowances across similar pay grades. A practical approach to helping ourselves and BA to achieve its goals must be a priority.

This may ultimately be to our advantage. No more worry about not getting SIN,SYD,NRT,HKG,GVA,ZRH to bump up the pay. One pay structure will stop this, decrease sickness levels and stop the unseen rostering to certain peoples advantage.

BASSA have not helped but blurting out 'NO' at every chance over the last 5 yrs. BA want us to be more productive offering them savings, lets get what we can on a realistic basis.

Sitting back and saying 'No' and worrying about Pilots/Willie Walsh and everyone else will achieve precisely zero for our futures.

(or just continue being personal and unrealistic and ultimately lose out more)

[Hotel Mode]

Wow!

Glamgirl, a duty day can be 16 hours, so it would actually break down to less than 11.75. Not to mention,

Only on longhaul (and then rarely) and longhaul crew never do 2000 duty hr years.

staying at a hotel, mind you, that is 4 stars in Africa, but like a one star in the UK.

Having fairly intimate knowledge of many BA african hotels thats simply rubbish.

Did I mention you live on anti malarial tablets?

No you dont, they are only recommended under very specific circumstances and not in any crew hotels we stay at.

There were months where I was home literally 8 days only.

Again, simply not possible on any BA roster. Especially with the 900hr limit.

[Human Factor]

Having spent several years on longhaul as a decidedly junior FO at one stage, I've seen quite a lot of Africa, including the delights of LUN (Lusaka for anyone who doesn't speak IATA). Great place FWIW.

...you cannot get shower water in your eyes...

... is no more of a problem in LUN as it is in LON. Having spent time in LAD (not to be confused with IAD as a few people did :}), I can vouch for the fact that it wasn't a problem there either. Granted, I brushed my teeth with bottled water (good advice) but I can still see ok.:E

As for malaria tablets, you pays your money you takes your choice. Taking them for long-term use (including Malarone) can potentially cause more of a problem than getting malaria (non-BA medical advice).

:=

PS: Never had Delhi belly either but then I never ate in the hotels.:yuk:

[sevenforeseven]

CARNAGE MATEY, Do you ever work? You seem to spend a lot of time on PPrune. You must have a "good" job.:D

[Carnage Matey!]

I work plenty. Still on the 900 hour list in my airline. Whats your excuse?

[Maus]

Gosh! I have been away from this site for years, it seems - and now I remember why. Same old 'faces' (hi CarnageMatey!) with clearly nothing better to do than to comment on the t&cs of other departments- to what end, I always wonder? No social life then? Answer: "Oh, I lead a robust and exciting social life". hmmmmmm...
I am LHR WW crew on the new contract. I used to love my job, but sadly, the job has changed so much so I am organising myself to leave. I know I am good at my job, I (almost without exception) love the passengers and I would want to be served by me! (putting trumpet away now) I work a lot on the upper deck and enjoy a good relationship (almost without exception) with the Flight Crew. I try and keep them happy and do whatever I can to help them out. The few times I have been on this site, have made me so mad with the self-righteous posts from Flight Crew, that I have battled to keep muttering the mantra, "It's only a few who are like that..."
I used to work for other big organisations (Marks & Spencer's Head Office amongst others) and have been privy to what is on the chopping block when the chips are down. I am no Communist, but funny how when pay cuts are bandied about, they rarely seem to be across the board. Those at the bottom of the pile that have the most to lose, are targeted first.
I have worked for BA for almost 12 years now, with many upsets along the way, but overall, it has been good. Changes to my T&cs have taught me not to trust the management. They are there to cut costs at any price and then move on. Quite how a customer-service oriented business and shareholders can work together, is beyond me. It seems all very pyramidal to me: cut costs repeatedly to make a profit in order to pay shareholders dividends, until there is no more blood to be wrung from the stone. Then what? I'm guessing sub-contracting to third-world countries? Oooh paranoia. I can't pretend to be an Economics graduate, though, so maybe I'll keep my mouth shut on that...
My (rather long-winded) point (apologies) is that nothing was ever suggested to us by the management to do anything but cut my wages or my t&cs. What fool would believe that although BA needs to cut costs in IFS, we would hardly notice the difference in our pay packet? I am open to discussion and I am realistic. But when I see what cuts management are taking in order that we all shoulder this burden, I might feel even more open to negotiation.
I am off now to pursue MY hectic social life :) so happy flying one and all! Peace and all that....

[Ten West]

Observation:

Every time I read most any cabin Crew forum thread, it's comprised almost entirely of CC's moaning and whingeing about what a tough life it is, how poorly paid, what martyrs they are, etc. etc.

Quick solution:

Why not go and do something else then?

It's not like it's a vocation, is it? Like being a Nurse or a Missionary. Nobody has an inbuilt desire to make the world a better place for humanity by serving coffee and biscuits. It's a JOB. A way of EARNING A LIVING and doing a bit of travelling for free at the same time.

I had a job I hated. I realised that I was working for w****rs and that nothing would ever change, so...
I kept my mouth shut, saved up some money to live on, left my job, retrained and got the one I wanted.

"If you do what you've always done then you'll get what you've always got".

Standing by for flaming. :rolleyes:

[Ten West]

...The question is how low can BA dare go with their knife to CC's T & C's before people refuse to keep knocking at the CC door. http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/sowee.gif

Plenty low. That's the inescapable truth. Look how many people out there want work.
maybe the T's and C's aren't what they were in the "Good Old Days" but to someone looking to get out of burger-flipping and arguing with Chavs in Maccy D's it'll seem like the promised land.

There will always be someone out there who will be willing to do your job for less money. I think in a case of playing "Chicken" with a major employer from a position of little or no advantage it isn't going to take a genius to work out who's going to blink first.

[Ludo]

So, basically any management who wants to slash my T&C (BA or else, I'm not BA) is entitled to do that, and all I'd have to do is find another job?
Who says that management is right in wanting to slash and I'm wrong wanting to keep my T&C?
Why should I go and they stay? That would be easy, huh?It is obvious that the more we let them get away with slashing anything they want, they'll be back for more next round.
I'll tell you something: I'm staying, I'm talking and discussing about what doesn't seem right, and I'm prepared to take action if necessary. They can always change job if they don't like it that way :E

[Carnage Matey!]

Perhaps because if things don't adapt everyone will have to go? When you're just about the only department in the company that hasn't dragged it's working practices into this century (and we're 8 years into it now) it can hardy be a surprise when everyone else starts to ask why they are carrying you.

[captcat]

Please! :rolleyes:

That's the stupidest excuse on earth, BA is hardly on the verge of bankruptcy, and crew salaries are only a small portion of an airline's expenses anyway. It is not by saving on our salaries that the company will avoid losses. There are better ways to save/make money like, say, good management? It is easy to mismanage an airline then blaming it on the CC because they earn too much.
When management want to save money, it is always our way they are looking, because they know it is relatively easy. Let's say no for once, and let them look another way.

[Ten West]

So, to continue playing "Devil's Avocado" for a few minutes:

...So, basically any management who wants to slash my T&C (BA or else, I'm not BA) is entitled to do that, and all I'd have to do is find another job?

Look up "management" in a dictionary and then tell me who runs the company. Fair has nothing to do with it.

... Who says that management is right in wanting to slash and I'm wrong wanting to keep my T&C?

Market forces, that's who. Again, Right and Wrong has no bearing on it. I had a job once where I used to make double what I do now. The market changed and I had to move on and accept that the good times were over. Reality rearing its ugly head I'm afraid.

Why should I go and they stay? That would be easy, huh?

Because in spite of what BASSA may want to beieve, Cabin Crews do not run airlines. Again, an easy answer.

It is obvious that the more we let them get away with slashing anything they want, they'll be back for more next round.

Way of the world mate. British Leyland workers made the same demands all through the '70s. They were still demanding them when the company failed as the competition overtook them and left them for dead.
Inserting your fingers in your ears and saying "La La La, I'm not listening" won't help.

I'll tell you something: I'm staying, I'm talking and discussing about what doesn't seem right

Good. That's the way it should be. I really hope you get a favourable resolution. But all I'm saying is, have a back-up plan in case it goes the way of the pear.

..and I'm prepared to take action if necessary.

I bet they're quaking in their boots at the prospect of that. Take a look at the queues of wannabes behind you who have never known the good times. They see the current deals on the table and they'll happily take a slice of it if you don't want it. You can train new starters to become competent Cabin Crew very quickly.

They can always change job if they don't like it that way http://static.pprune.org/images/smilies/evil.gif

Yep. I can really see that happening too. :rolleyes:

[Carnage Matey!]

So are you saying cabin crew should be exempted from all cost saving measures? Lets look at who's changed their work practices in BA in the last 5 years:

Terminal staff: major reforms to work practices prior and post T5.
GTS drivers: Major reforms prior T5 and outsourcing of some work to 3rd party operators:
Ramp staff: New work practices and removal of old T4/T1 procedures.
TRMs: New work practices for T5.
Pilots: Switch to hourly rate prior T5, major reform to work practices last year and ongoing.
Managers: one third of all senior managers axed. A further 400+ given severance on 31st Dec 08. Junior managers required to reapply for their own jobs.
Customer Service: Jobs cut, call centres closed and relocated to Newcastle.

Everyones been chipping in so you can hardly say they are only coming after cabin crew for savings. It's not crew salaries that cripple the BA operation, it's their rigid inflexibility. It's that inflexibility which means we fly empty jumbos back from Singapore stranding our passengers when BKK airport was occupied. It's that which means we can't make more money by putting a 777 on the Moscow route because the crew won't do a there and back without 2 days off. It's that which means we have to cancel flights every time there's disruption on the East coast of the US because BASSA won't let flights leave LHR one crew member down. The idea of 'just saying no for once' is ludicrous as thats been BASSAs stock answer for the last decade.

[1000 to go]

Im afraid some here saying, BA can afford it so why should I, over my dead body, not in my lifetime, go for another dept first. You are all amazingly naive!

Nobody wants to lose their jobs or take a pay cut. We all agree there.

Its about savings by increasing flexibility and reducing complexity. The losers will be CC with 'nice' monied rosters and CC who say 'its not in the agreement' etc.

Years of No No No will ensure a swift correction to CC agreements by introducing the new fleet. No one is forcing you to change over so just stay as you are! The money routes will go to new aircraft/routes and there is nothing you can do about it.

The profitability of BA is key for all our survival and everyone has to chip in. If you are not going to change fleets, why worry!!

Just wait a few years until you are in the minority having 'low money' trips and you move over.

Please keep saying to the realists, blah blah blah, or just go stick your head in the sand, or both............Good luck

Im not flight crew before the mud starts being slung by the clever ones

[Human Factor]

I am no Communist, but funny how when pay cuts are bandied about, they rarely seem to be across the board. Those at the bottom of the pile that have the most to lose, are targeted first.

This is true of any industry. Invariably, those towards the top of the salary pile are paid more because they have greater, more desirable and hence more marketable qualifications. There are fewer of these people simply because greater qualifications weed out those who either can't or won't achieve them. Those who remain are then able to command higher salaries on the basis that they are difficult to replace. Market forces.

Rightly or wrongly, those at the bottom of the pile will always be targeted first as they are the easiest to replace if they leave because the new terms and conditions don't suit them.

This is not unique to airlines. A person working on a checkout is easier to replace than a qualified accountant hence gets a lower salary.

[galanjal]

what is coming is coming I suppose. personally I am more than willing to work harder and be more flexible to maintain my salary. what disappoints me are some of the almost gleeful attitudes out there that we might lose our benefits and T+Cs. and as a new contract crew member on eurofleet, trust me the cash aint that great, friends in different airlines earn more. and yes I know I can go and find a new job (and thanks for that particularly transparent piece of advice by the way!) but I actually like working for BA for all sorts of reasons. but I have to say that enjoyment is gradually being eroded and not just because of the managments determination to downgrade our pay. as a cabin crew community we are supportive of each other and still, as the front line staff, offer great customer service. 16 years in the business and having worked for a few different airlines I can honestly say that the BA cabin crew are the best I have worked with. what always disappoints me is our relationship (or lack of) with the flight crew. at every other airline I've worked for we have all been one big team, always got along and always supported each other no matter what side of the door we worked on. not so at BA and I will never understand that

[OzzieO]

Well we all will have a clearer picture on the 6th February when the annocument is made.

Just hope both sides can find a compromise.

[747-436]

These sort of things don't normally have a date set for an announcement!

As far as I know the 6th of Feb is when BA announces Q3 results, are people getting confused??

[SFBdolly]

Now... let it be said (by me) this person has the right idea...As I look out of my window (nice view) I see a BIG change coming. NO, not change...BUT SHAKE-UP.. and those members of the CC community who can not or will not accept change, had better take a very long good look at themselves. Cos in this area CCc (cabin crew costs) are higher for BA than any other comparable airline. It's got to be said... the gavey train is coming to an end.:ok:

[Ten West]

Well, we can only hope that reason prevails and everyone compromises to some degree so that no-one loses out more than they have to.

And "Compromise" is another new word that BASSA are going to have to learn unfortunately for them.

Still, added to "No" it means they'll have doubled their vocabulary. :ok:

[galanjal]

sfbdolly thankyou for that 'lovely' post. may i ask who you work for? you seem to be part of that gleeful group

[VS-LHRCSA]

A lot of people here seem to think along the lines that if other airlines don't pay as much for their cabin crew, why should BA? It's not really fair to compare BA to other airlines as the nature of our flying and service is very different to many airlines. The pay is broken down into:

Basic: starts low but increases with increments (nothing wrong with rewarding your staff for loyal service)

Box payments: payments for long duties (nothing wrong with that, if I did a 14 hour shift at Sainsburys, I'd expect to be financially compensated. because of our geographic location, we fly more longer routes. bunk rest does not count, this is often allocated when you least need it)

Destination payment: payment for acknowledged 'difficult' flights (on a get-what-you're-given roster, if two crew are reporting for flights, one to Miami and one to Houston, two VERY different passenger profiles, it's fair enough to financially reward the crew member going to Miami as they are going to be working a lot harder).

Back to back payment: doing two trips in a row to increase crew productivity (these are awfully tiring, mentally and physically, so crew are financially compensated for this and given hotac)

Meal allowances: common among most long haul airlines and are paid in local currency to cover the cost of eating and drinking in the hotel downroute (fair enough, how many employers send their staff away on company duties without covering their expenses in some way)

Our closest competitor for crew patterns and routes would probably be Virgin Atlantic. From experience, their top complaints are pay and fatigue. The way I see it, if Virgin choose not to look after their crew as well as they could, why should BA crew suffer for it?

You could compare our patterns to the likes of EK and EY but their crew are given a tax free salary and housing or housing allowance, so it pretty much balances out.

Where we DO need to compromise however is on issues of flexibility. Having spent time in customer relations (ironically, one of the lowest paid jobs in the company) I have seen time and again where a cancellation could have been avoided. Lack of flexibility also cuts at crew pay and disrupts rosters, not to mention the havoc it wreaks in the operation and the costs involved. This is definitely an area where we have to be more competitive. It's not so much paying crew less but using crew better. That has to come from both sides.

[Ten West]

Very succinctly put. Keep the money for sure, but be more flexible. Come to work with an attitude of "Can Do" rather than "The agreement says No" and things will be better for everyone.

I've met CC who have openly told me that they hate flying and will do everything they can to get out of a duty. Why the Hell become cabin crew if that is your mindset?? Because they've been allowed to, that's why.

So we're agreed then folks. Pay everyone fairly, look after everyone and in return benefit from some flexibility and a workforce that wants to work so that the company succeeds and guarantees eveyone's future (Well, as much as you ever can in this industry).

Excellent. :ok:

Now, are you going to tell the dinosaurs or am I? :\

[SFBdolly]

Yes, of course you may ask... but will I tell you. NO. ! ... Why .. Because, does it help.. No, on this site I can put over my own options/views (informed or other wise) on this matter. Ok, I am gonner say it. CC (some) are paid way over the odds, in the current market. And I think it's way over due that a correction is made. Time to cut the wheat form the chaff..

[SFBdolly]

DA...that's cos it takes six (give or take a bit of faffing around) weeks to train a dolly .. (F.O.C) and oh, let me guess how long to train to be a Nigel !.. and ya want the same pay..look 16 years ... and ya love it great. You've got mates working for other airlines, getting more dosh...Oh I wold love to know WHY .. or WHAT your other reasons for working for BA are .. Did ya ... did ya jion up for the dosh... NA,, ?

[jacquelinee]

VH-LHRCSA: IAH and MIA are probably not the best examples as both of them are entitled to Des Payment. Also take into consideration that the MIA flights are compensated with having an additional cabin crew member on those flights.

[VS-LHRCSA]

Since when does IAH get a destination payment? Bloody typical, never got one at WW LGW.

OK, MIA vs DFW, then. Failing that, ATL. You get my point. I've used the US flights because:

1. They are in the same country (for sake of comparison) and the argument can't be clouded by down-route issues.
2. They are less controversial than others, the thread can't be distored down the whole 'racism' track.

I am well aware of the 'extra' crew member. We reliquished the Number 16 after 9/11, except on the 'destination payment' routes. It can still be a bun-fight on these routes and the necessity for the 16 just proves my point. Off the top of my head, I would say we get the most complaints (relevant to crew issues) from MIA and probably MRU but don't quote me on that. The 'extra' crew member is a commercial decision for the sake of customer service.

[1000 to go]

The destination payment and your arguements for it are frankly absurd. Payment for harder flights indeed! Flt crew will want a payment for a harder approach under your logic.

Get rid of all the this and that payments, add it all up, divide it into an hourly flying rate and thats it. More flexiblility, less sickness, and an even share for all. Destinations therefore become equal.

BA will save due to the focus away from 'where am I going/how much' and everyones a winner. Surely you can see this! Your list of payments and rationale behind it show you as a BA CC ostrich

I guess the issue is BA will try to reduce the overall 'pot'......

[VS-LHRCSA]

1000 to go. I think you've got me wrong. I am far from a 'head in the sand, over my dead body' crew member, I'm just explaining the payment types and the rationale behind them. I'm doing this in good humour, not having a go, or being on the defensive, just explaing the facts as I see them.

The point of my previous posts was to question the claim that just because Airline X and Airline Y don't pay certain payments, why should BA? Most airlines have some sort of basic plus benefits scheme, many of them different to BA. QFUK pay sector pay, BA don't. Other airlines pay grooming allowances, BA don't. Some airlines give you a taxi home after a long duty, BA don't. Some crew earn significant commissions from their buy-on-board product. At BA, with some exceptions, commission are generally neither here nor there. Some airlines pay you extra to work in the premium cabins, BA don't.

In a nutshell, this is what works for us. These payments are relative to type of flying we do. Who else does enforced back to backs. Apart from Virgin, who else does 4 sector Australias?

It's the type of flying. When I was on charter, I would earn £30 for a TFS night return, around USD$800 for a 9 day CUN and up to £3000 for 28 day round-the-world trip. Some charter companies didn't do round the world charter, should I be begrudged my allowances just because we got that contract instead of Airtours? We got an extra day off for doing a TLV return because they were so hard going. Should I be penalised for that? Jetstar crew do MEL-DPS-MEL in a single day trip, back of the clock, no crew rest. Should BA crew be forced to do LHR-BOS-LHR because JQ do something similar?

I do take your point about the destination payments, however, they can make up for a very low allowance on some of these flights. We all remember the 6 day HRE, with £62 in allowances. With an hourly rate, it would probably come out in the wash anyway.

I can see your point of view and once I get the all clear to fly again, I will consider joining a new 'mid-fleet' if it means flexibility for me but you can't expect someone to do, say, a 9 day 4 sector SYD, or a 5 day JKF/JFK without being appropriately compensated, whether it be by allowances or an hourly rate. No matter what the airline.

[PC767]

Just a quick recall on destination payments. These came about after BEP in the 90's and amount to a pot of money which was allocated to IFS by the company in lieu of other savings. The money became destination payments as a way of trying to fairly allocate the money back to crew. It was considered fair to place the money on low earning routes or routes which just missed out on premium payments. I know it seems an anomaly and the term destination payment perhaps doesn't help but IFS acknowledge that this is a legitimate part of the budget. If there is a fairer way, and a meaningful way, to allocate the money across the board then I am more than willing to discuss this.

[1000 to go]

Totally. All I would like to see is improvements in productivity that generates the best for our customers.

If CC end up no worse off over 12 months but the spread is fairer, equal (ish) and ensures a more flexible working environment, Im all for it.

Im sure BA will have different ideas on this.

No one is attacking the BA CC, just trying to open peoples eyes to a necessary change from which everyone can benefit.

Maybe now Im being too naive!!

[Gatwickba]

We all know BA are currently attempting to fill a "pool" of cabin crew on the new T&C. I for one hope that the old school cabin crew will walk, the ones I hear day after day "hate" their job, but are quite happy to take the pay cheque.

Let BA flush out all the old fossils who should be put in a museum. Lets get some new blood in BA WW LHR. Doesnt matter about the wages, the people who are applying RIGHT NOW, are more than happy to just do the job on the new T&C, because ITS A JOB. The offer is simple, take it or leave it.

Go on strike. Thats it, you voluntarily terminate your contract, end of story. Next candidate please.

[TheKabaka]

Jetstar crew do MEL-DPS-MEL in a single day trip, back of the clock, no crew rest. Should BA crew be forced to do LHR-BOS-LHR because JQ do something similar?

I think BA will say yes. We are in competition with other airlines and need to compete with them from a similar cost base.

I have said before I think BA crew are great, but changes to working practises are essential for us to be a lean mean company to compete with all the other airlines out there. I hope the discussions will result in fewer crew who do more hours and create less disruption (requiring large numbers on standby). Those remaining will hopefully not lose out too much financially. The saving therefore come from a lower headcount.

[Dick Deadeye]

Some ex-Flight Engineers remain with BA in several operational roles including as pilots, although not as cabin crew.

Wrong. Some are still cabin crew. Probably shouldn't name names, but if you're interested, ask any ex-rocket cabin crew who they are.

Not sure any were on £80k + allowances in the first place.

Wrong. A small number were, mainly those who had been training E/Os

Even if there were, they would all have retired long ago.

Wrong, (at least) three still remain, including the one I had a pint with last week. Not all on SH!

Not sure how any of the above is related to the Columbus debate

Neither am I, just don't like seeing misinformation passed off as fact.

As regards the Columbus debate:

I have very happy memories of the cabin crew I flew with during my many years in BA. Somehow, I never seemed to encounter the attitudes and problems that seem to be recounted ad nauseam by some pilots, although no doubt those attitudes did exist amongst a few cabin crew.

In the main, I flew with delightful cabin crew, who looked after the passengers and me very well and caused very few problems. They spoiled me rotten, if the truth be known.

So I have no axe to grind, and I don't wish to see their T&Cs decimated.

However, they appear to have been represented, for many years, by a union that has a firm grasp of the inessential and is rooted firmly in the industrial mindset of the 1980s, when many of the reps joined!

Cabin crew costs are way out of line with any other UK airline, around double according to the latest CAA figures. Don't take my word for it, look them up for yourselves.

Willie will not let that state of affairs continue.

Unless their union get serious, about negotiating sensibly on the inevitable changes that are coming, Willie is going to have a field day!

And that, believe it or not, I wouldn't like to see happen to such a great bunch of people.

[VS-LHRCSA]

Again, it goes back to BA's unique route network and on board product. In the UK, I can only think of Qantas that offers a true four class configuration on their long haul routes, crewed by UK based crew. By its very nature, crew costs are going to be higher at BA because the service can be labour intensive.

As for operating LHR-BOS-LHR as a day return, putting aside the moral and legal issue surrounding such a duty (we'd be looking at around a 16-18 hour duty day, barring delays) while you may save on allowances downroute and hotac, you wouldn't be any better off with the head count factor as crew would reach 900 hours a lot quicker.

[Carnage Matey!]

Where did the whole LHR-BOS-LHR day trip idea come from? Thats never going to happen, you couldn't get close under FTLs. BA's crew costs are not high because of the complexity of service, they're high because of the reasons in the Columbus document:

Crew on legacy pay scales thar are double the industry average.
4 supervisory grades out of 15 crew on a 747.
Rigid inflexibility and sky high costs when off schedule.

Having 4 cabins doesn't make the crew cost more, the complexity only means it takes longer to do the service.

[VS-LHRCSA]

Of course we wouldn't do LHR-BOS-LHR. I was making a comparison in an earlier post with Jetstar operating MEL-DPS-MEL as one duty, back of the clock. Another posted suggested that BA should do the same. That was my rebuttal.

Flexibility has also been mentioned and I take your point about supervisory grades. I am well aware of the costs involved with our crew and why they are higher than other airlines. My point regarding crew ratio to service classes is still valid - it is mathematics. For example, we have more crew on a Friday night FRA than say, easyJet because we could have around 100 or so Club Europe passengers. Our service requires extra crew to be able to deliver the product within the time constraints. easyJet can go with minimum crew because their product allows for it.

Out of the UK, only BA and QF have a First product with a UK based crew. You need 3 crew to operate a decent First service with 14 pax. A combined 'business/first' product as offered by Virgin and Air New Zealand can be operated with a slightly lower crew per pax ratio. Then again, ask anyone who flies for Air New Zealand and they will all say that an extra crew member is drastically needed. Qantas have their dedicated crew in the premium cabins, which BA is trying to copy with it's 'Premium Academy'.

You also have to factor in the physical limitations of the upper deck of the 747. 20 club pax to two crew members does distort the whole crew to pax ratio. As the services run simultaneously downstairs, it's not like one of them can break away and help in another cabin until their own service is finished.

Our crew costs are high because of the nature of our service and flying. If easyJet, for example, decided to go long haul, they would also have to pay their crew allowances. If they threw in a business cabin, they would need another crew member. What is all that going to do to their crew costs? Is anyone who stays at easyJet longer than 10 years going to be branded an 'easyJet dinosaur'? Are people going to be calling for them to retire because they earn too much?

[Carnage Matey!]

I still disagree that crew costs are high because of the nature of the flying and the product. I wonder how Qantas' UK costs compare to BA, or Virgins when factored per head. The reality is that given a set number of crew, BAs costs are still way above the others. It's not just about the 747 either. Crew costs are higher on 4 and 3 class 777s and 3 class 767s.

The cabin complexity argument also falls down when you consider that we always leave London with a full complement of crew regardless of the booked loads. If you flew over the Christmas period you'd have seen flights with barely anyone on them and low single figures in the premium cabins. Does that require a full 15 crew? When you've only two people in first do we we need 3 crew members to serve them, or could we leave London with 14 crew and crew First with 2? I don't have an issue with using extra crew on EF services with high Club loads, you can only do so much given the flight time, but we wouldn't routinely but 6 crew on an A319 from Frankfurt regardless of load so why put 15 on a jumbo regardless of load?

[FlyingTom]

Hmm. After operation Columbine-High has blown through, I wonder which staff group will be looked at next? I'm for the cabin crew on this one. If profit is good for business then how come austerity is good for workers :confused:

[13 please]

Carnage Matey,

What about the return flight ?

Yes they may also be booked as light, but we're talking about a flight 24hrs later most of the time. So many times, another carrier flying the same route home has gone tech, and we've filled up with their pax.

The only times I've left short of a normal complement of crew, was when BA were 'capping' flights.
F would be only half (I think) booked, and 2 crew. Sometimes F would be closed.

[bermudatriangle]

Carnage matey,remember the 747 has 12 doors,therefore a minimum of 12 cabin crew regardless of load,unless the upper deck cabin is not used.Rostering crew numbers related to expected booked loads is fraught with potential disaster,as delays and cancellations can result in half full aircraft ending up being oversold.15 cabin crew on a 4 class 747 is proved to work extremely well,baring in mind the crew compliment used to be 16 prior to 9-11,and the reduction to 15 was based on economic pressures.BA can make savings by introducing new contracts,terms and conditions for new starters or offering financial incentives for current employees to switch to whatever new conditions are proposed.It will suit some and not others,the key to change is making it voluntary,not imposing drastic changes to current working practices.Cabin crew are front line ,customer contact staff and at BA provide service to the highest end of premium travellers,who expect to be looked after by,professional,friendly,competent and enthusiastic crew.Those attributes would evaporate if any attempt was made to devalue the contribution they make to the success of the company.

[Da Dog]

who expect to be looked after by,professional,friendly,competent and enthusiastic crew.

I thought we were talking about BA:zzz::zzz:

remember the 747 has 12 doors,therefore a minimum of 12 cabin crew regardless of load,unless the upper deck cabin is not used

If that is the case how do easy jet get away with 3 crew on some of their flights?, indeed I have done flights from LGW on a 737 with just 3 crew, albeit not the norm:rolleyes::rolleyes:

[jacquelinee]

It's actually a minimum of 11 crew on the 747 and in that case the UD must have no passengers. Otherwise it's a minimum of 12. I can't see it working with manning the flights depending on the number of passengers booked on a flight. As mentioned, a lot can happen over a period of 24 hours. The figures given on the briefing sheet for the return sector are almost never accurate in my experience.

Most airlines also seem to operate with in average 2 supervisory grades in their cabins. The CSD would have been assisted, usually, with a PSR in Economy. Apart from that, galley operator (main crew) to run the galleys. So, I can understand BA's point of view as to why they say that things are expensive. Also keep in mind that most PSRs on BA actually work in the cabin (F and J cabins) as opposed to taking care of the galley. The only PSR that actually works in the galley is in the Y cabin.

[yaletown]

Human factor, I was with BA and in LUN when the crew got bricked on the bus to the airport and had to get airlifted to JNB. This was all going on when they moved those routes down to LGW long haul in the 90's. We also had a stewardess get raped by one of the security guards and was why we had to move from the Intercontinental to the Pomadzi. As far as water, run the water in LOS and then tell me how pristine it is. When I meant closing your eyes, your eyes are a mucous membrane, and bacteria can get into your bloodstream from your eyes. Anyhow, I am glad suddenly life in Africa has turned all 5 stars. Been walking in downtown Jo'burg lately? Give it a try and get back to us.

[jacquelinee]

I have been walking downtown in JNB. I actually went to Top of Africa (Carlton Centre) with another crew member last year and nothing happened!

[jetset lady]

indeed I have done flights from LGW on a 737 with just 3 crew, albeit not the norm

Actually, 3 is the norm on the 737 at LGW. Most flights are operated by three crew, unless the club load goes over 21 (or 40 on some flights).

VS-LHRCSA,

You seem very keen on comparing us with different airlines, to confirm your impression that LHR is unique.
Again, it goes back to BA's unique route network and on board product. In the UK, I can only think of Qantas that offers a true four class configuration on their long haul routes, crewed by UK based crew. By its very nature, crew costs are going to be higher at BA because the service can be labour intensive.
My point regarding crew ratio to service classes is still valid - it is mathematics. For example, we have more crew on a Friday night FRA than say, easyJet because we could have around 100 or so Club Europe passengers. Our service requires extra crew to be able to deliver the product within the time constraints.
Our crew costs are high because of the nature of our service and flying. If easyJet, for example, decided to go long haul, they would also have to pay their crew allowances. If they threw in a business cabin, they would need another crew member.

Ok, so lets really compare like with like. You know what's coming now, don't you? ;)

BA LHR compared to BA LGW



3 and 4 class configurations?
LHR - Check
LGW - Check

Premium passengers?
LHR - Check
LGW - Check (despite popular opinion!)

Business Routes?
LHR - Check
LGW - Check (see above)

So far, it seems to me, a pretty similiar set up. But...

Working with minimum crew,despite having a business cabin?
LHR - Erm...
LGW - Check

Destination Payments?
LHR - Check
LGW - Destination what?

Box Payments?
LHR - Check
LGW - Where's the box?

One Down Payments?
LHR - Check (not sure of amount but £200 has been quoted)
LGW - Check (know that amount - £30)

Mixed flying and the associated fatigue?
LHR - Mixed flying?
LGW - Check



Do you see what I'm getting at here? You appear to be basing the majority of your argument on the fact that BA routes and services are unique. So where does Gatwick come into that argument?

I am well aware that this is not about LGW v LHR but, look at it from a management and shareholder point of view. As far as they are concerned, why should LHR be any different to LGW?

Jsl

[whattimedoweland]

Always good to see the normal few of our pilots on here,running down their Cabin Crew.Always the same 5 or 6!!.

Happy to read threads but I now rarely post.

I was recently in HKG (NO WHERE NEAR £1000)!!...wish it was.I was having a beer with 5 of our finest in Dickens Bar.One of the F/O's said to one of the others,'it's got to be your round,you're on Forced Draught'.

When I asked why they were all laughing and asked what Forced Draught was I never got an answer.

That was ages ago and I still have'nt found out!!.Simple and probably an ignorant question,but what is Forced Draught?.

Please say it is not a Beer or I'll not be able to come on here again.:O

WTDWL.

[Hotel Mode]

One of the F/O's said to one of the others,'it's got to be your round,you're on Forced Draught'.

It means he was forced to come to work (on pain of the sack) on days off to work for less than his annual hourly rate. Is there a cabin crew agreement that would allow this?

[OzzieO]

Hotel Mode. No there isn't a cabin crew agreement that would allow it..................thank god. And that is due largely to BASSA.

[VS-LHRCSA]

Hi jetset lady, yes best not turn this into a LHR vs LGW debate. That debate has been going on since 1991. We all know where it ends and is usually forgotten once said crew member has transfered to LHR, where LGW and it's plight are a distant memory. It's always been LGW vs LHR, EOG vs WW LGW, WW LGW vs WW LHR. For the record, I've always been a staunch supporter of LGW and it's where my heart is - and don't assume that I am WW LHR. I consider myself between fleets at the moment.

I'll try to explain how I see things at BA in the spirt of healthy debate. I'm not having a go at anyone or thinking that one base is better than another. I'm debating from the point of view of an observer and as an aviation student rather than a BA employee.

For a start, I am well aware that there is a premium product at LGW. I've helped deliver it myself over the years and it's a darn good one. I've also had to deal with the aftermath of the crew crisis late 2007/early 2008 when we were sub-contracting flights out to Monarch and Astraeus. We were having to downgrade many Club Europe pax and the reason given was crew shortage.

The crew shortage at the time was caused by a higher than normal attrition rate and the 900 hour rule. So why the higher attrition rate? It was the first year of the SF LGW contract (which we all know is the EOG contract dating back to the Dan-Air purchase - but with long haul) and crew were leaving because of 'mixed flying and the associated fatigue'.

Part of the 'new' contract allowed for less MBTs after long haul flights which meant not only were crew worked harder and suffering from fatigue but they were hitting the 900 hour limit quickly and then being forced to sit around on their basic for months on end. In the end, it turned out to be a HUGE false economy. People were sacked over it.

As for operating minimum crew on the 737, ok fair point, you've proved that you can do it. Does this mean that the 777 will now go out with 8 crew, keeping in line with Thomas Cook and Thomson? No, of course not, and why not?

If you think it's fair to take away terms and conditions from WW just because LGW don't have it, you may need take on board a couple of points.

1. You may well be at LHR one day, if you choose to be. With LGW finally being part of the NSP, movement will happen in bigger numbers over the next couple of years. After all these years of fighting to be part of the NSP, it would be such a shame to find that the option to transfer to WW on its current terms and conditions no longer exists.

2. SF LGW is by no means the bottom of the rung when it comes to pay and conditions. A lot of people in the company have it a lot harder than you do.

For example, as crew or ground staff, if you go sick, you at least get your basic. Go sick in any other department, you get zero. Depending on where you work, you may get SSP (£75) for 6 weeks if you've served enough time, possibly more if you've been around for a while but it runs out at some point. Get a long term illness, you're on your own and possibly out the door. How is that fair? It's not but it's in the terms and conditions.

In the end, we know why LGW is different and we know why SF LGW was created. We know why the company are trying to create a version at LHR and fair dues. I can see the business case for it, especially the flexibility aspect of it. What I don't agree with is taking away terms and conditions from an existing contract just because another airline doesn't have them, or in your case, another fleet. Wouldn't it be better to concentrate on making life better at LGW and fighting for improvements there rather than bringing down another fleet who's only crime seems to be its very existance?

Anyway, that's just my opinion. I guess time will tell.

[jetset lady]

VS-LHRCSA,

In the end, we know why LGW is different and we know why SF LGW was created. We know why the company are trying to create a version at LHR and fair dues. I can see the business case for it, especially the flexibility aspect of it.

Exactly. From a business point of view, it unfortunately makes sense.

What I don't agree with is taking away terms and conditions from an existing contract just because another airline doesn't have them, or in your case, another fleet. Wouldn't it be better to concentrate on making life better at LGW and fighting for improvements there rather than bringing down another fleet who's only crime seems to be its very existance?

As far as I'm aware, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, they are not actually planning to take away anything from the existing contracts. The contracts and fleets will run side by side, until eventually, as people leave, retire, transfer etc, the old fleets at LHR will cease to exist. Yes, the chances are high that the most lucrative trips will go to the new fleet but at the end of the day, BA has a responsibility towards it's share holders and the managment have to be seen to making the move towards improved efficiency, flexibility and, ultimately, profitability.

I'd love to be able to concentrate on improving LGW's terms, but, realistically, I know that's never going to happen. The recent MOA negotiations have proved that. No one, apart from a bitter minority, wants to see you guys lose what you have fought so hard for, but times have changed and the old days are well and truly gone for all airlines and all fleets. I wish it wasn't so, but it is. :(

Jsl

[OzzieO]

As far as I'm aware, and feel free to correct me if I'm wrong, they are not actually planning to take away anything from the existing contracts

Errrrrr not true. If the lucrative routes like you say are going to the new fleet the crewmembers earning potential is being taken away from them?

[whattimedoweland]

Quote:
One of the F/O's said to one of the others,'it's got to be your round,you're on Forced Draught'.

It means he was forced to come to work (on pain of the sack) on days off to work for less than his annual hourly rate. Is there a cabin crew agreement that would allow this?



Less than their annual hourly rate!!....are you sure?.;)

WTDWL.

[jetset lady]

OzzieO,

I meant technically, as in terms and conditions rather than earning potential, hence my next sentence regarding the lucrative routes. Our earning potential is constantly going up and down, whether it be down to market forces, wars, natural disasters and all the other things that can affect the operation. It always has and it always will. Sometimes, it will work to our advantage, other times it won't. That's the nature of the job. If you can't handle that, then maybe you'd be better off in a fixed salary job.

Things have to change, that much is obvious. So what do you suggest they do instead?

[PC767]

JSL.

Your posts overlook the fact that, as it seems, your income is not under any form of threat. Bringing terms and conditions into line with SFG is not the end game. It is written in the 'leak' that LGW is still too expensive for the company. Ask any LGW crew how they feel about that. Willing to take home less to run their households on to help Willie out? 3/4 of LGW expressing an interest to transfer to LHR is not because they want to try some new routes.

[Hotel Mode]

Less than their annual hourly rate!!....are you sure?.

Yup, draft rates were based on pensionable pay which is significantly less than salary, they were also frozen for a couple of years, so even with the 25% premium element it doesnt reflect the true hourly rate.

[whattimedoweland]

Thanks for that Hotel Mode.

So what would a F/O and a Captain (on forced draught) get for say a 5 day HKG on Worldwide and a European duty of say 36 hours.

Just asking as everyone seems quite happy to discuss Cabin Crew pay on here.

WTDWL.

[Hotel Mode]

Just asking as everyone seems quite happy to discuss Cabin Crew pay on here.


Well, what with it being a thread about Cabin Crew terms and conditions and all... :rolleyes: Feel free to start another thread.

Bottom line is if you want pilot terms and conditions then become a pilot. BA cabin crew costs (note not wages) are double the industry average. If WW didnt do something about it he'd be ridiculed.

[OzzieO]

JSL - Oh don't get me wrong I agree things do have to change.

But how about looking at the way we are rostered and letting the company having a bit more flexibility?

OC is going to be far to dramatic (if rumours are to be believed) and it will cause upset amongst the community. Especially while our CEO enjoys his £700K per year salary ( + plus bonuses).