View Full Version : BA flies back into profit

2nd Aug 2002, 08:18
From the BBC:


From a business perspective I would say this is encouraging as these results are better than last year's which were before Sept 11th. Despite the profits are mainly as a result of lowering costs it shows two things:

1. Management are taking the action required to get the airline back to profitability.

2. When business does pick up - likely to be the end of the year IMO - then profits should really start to pick up.

Before anyone flames me, I do not work for BA in any shape, size or form (no pun intended:D), I'm merely stating a few facts etc and looking at it from an objective point of view so please don't shout at me because I haven't mentioned why they may be bad management other areas!:) :cool:

2nd Aug 2002, 09:05
The news does look promising, but I think there may be trouble ahead, as the Pilots were unhappy with thier pay before sept11, and it has not gone up since then!

All of the Yank airlines paid off thier pilots in a big way at the beggining of last year and I'm sure the BA fly boys were hoping for the same. If they start making extravegant pay claims, without helping to reduce costs, it may get turbulent

Better fasten that seatbelt!

2nd Aug 2002, 11:26
Short term results. BA have lowered their fares that they cant sustain. In the mean time easyJet are about to take on and probably end BA shorthaul all but a few feeder detinations. BA has a long way to go.

How sad for our flag carrier, the airline we should be proud of, the innovator. The airline that can't attract good management. Perhaps our former CEO Babs will take the helm and sort it out.

Good Luck BA- your going to need it.

2nd Aug 2002, 12:16
London, Aug. 2 (Bloomberg)

-- British Airways Plc said fiscal full-year sales will decline as air travel fails to recover after the Sept. 11 attacks and Europe's biggest airline faces competition from Ryanair Holdings Plc and other low-fare rivals.

Fiscal first-quarter revenue fell 11 percent to 2.05 billion pounds ($3.2 billion) amid a "soft'' market and will remain lower over the 12 months, Chief Executive Rod Eddington said on a conference call. The carrier posted a 54 percent increase in profit for the quarter ended June 30 after cutting costs 15 percent.

"It did very well on the cost side as it cut capacity, but I have mixed feelings about the warning that there will be further pressure on revenues,'' said Martin Borghetto, an analyst at Morgan Stanley who rates the stock neutral.''

British Airways is firing more than 11,000 workers, cutting routes and grounding planes after the Sept. 11 attacks reduced air travel by as much as one-third. It's lowered fares on 108 routes as it loses passengers to low-cost rivals including EasyJet Plc.

The stock fell as much as 10.5 pence, or 7 percent, to 139.5p, after earlier rising as much as 3.3 percent to 155p. It traded at 140p at 12.18 p.m. in London. The shares are down 28 percent this year, compared with a 7 percent drop in the Bloomberg Europe Airlines Index.

Eddington wouldn't say whether the airline expects to post a profit for the full fiscal year, which ends March 31.

"I think what happens on the revenue front will answer the question for us,'' he said. "No one in the industry expects the revenue to recover anytime soon.''

1st-Quarter Net

First-quarter net income rose to 40 million pounds, or 3.7 pence a share, from 26 million pounds, or 2.4p, a year earlier. That beat the 24 million-pound loss predicted by a Bloomberg News survey of analysts.

"These are a very strong set of figures, driven very much by cost reductions,'' said Tim Rees, a fund manager at Clerical Medical Investment, which owns about 3.25 percent of the shares of the U.K. carrier.

British Airways said it cut labor costs by 14 percent, fuel costs by 24 percent, selling costs by 15 percent and other operating costs by 20 percent in the quarter.

The U.K. carrier has cut 7,562 of 10,000 jobs it aims to eliminate by the end of its fiscal year, Eddington said. A restructuring charge of 120 million pounds, which the airline had already announced, will be spread over the rest of the fiscal year.

The disposal of planes and other assets contributed 19 million pounds to first-quarter net profit, compared with 92 million pounds last year, when it sold low-cost unit Go Fly Ltd.

B clam
2nd Aug 2002, 13:07
Moving in the right direction. There are still a lot of costs that can be brought down (CC, MT etc) but, subject to another event out of BAs control, traffic will pick up and things will improve.

BTW, the new fares will have to be sustainable to compete in the SH market. With the new online search engine and other initiatives, there is no reason for these fares to be uncompetetive.

The major issue BA will have to contend with is the rising frustration of the pilots. There are many valid concerns that need to be addressed namely pay, scope and pensions.

Bottomline though is don't write them off yet you 'schaden Fraude' lot. (Excuse spelling).

2nd Aug 2002, 13:25
B calm,

it is not just the pilot's who are frustrated with Pay, or pensions, wroking hours etc... All staff should be treated the same.

With out the Pilot the company would be going nowhere, with out the other staff the pilots would be going nowhere. Sort of need each other don't they!?

Notso Fantastic
2nd Aug 2002, 15:38
Mr. C & B, you wouldn't by any chance be 'other staff' would you? Could you explain WHY ALL staff should be treated the same? For years pilots have watched other 'favoured' groups in BA receive special treatment. WHY do pilots HAVE to be treated 'the same' as all these other people now? I'm afraid the BA pilots are the only essential group in BA- nobody else is needed- their services can be bought in. Pilots are authorised by the CAA to operate BA services- if other pilots can be bought in and operating BA planes on worldwide routes in 6 months- well I'll believe it when I see it!

The pilots don't need other staff. There are far too many 'other staff'. Most of us would like to see fewer staff than the giant American airlines with far more planes than BA that have fewer staff than BA. So please stop trying to hang onto BA pilots and hope some goodies will fall to other staff if the pilots are going to get any (of course, that's if you're 'other staff'!)! What is needed desperately in BA is a LOT of ruthless culling- we could lose 20,000 staff and still not reach the efficiency levels of British low cost operators or the big American carriers. Ayling's legacy to BA was to create a giant 'Civil Service' of non-productive and useless staff doing pretend jobs (not surprising considering his background of the Civil Service doing.........), and until BA gets rid of that drag to revenue, it will carry on being crippled and obese and have a lousy share price! Sorry if it hurts, but just compare staff numbers with competitor airlines.
Skippy tried, Skippy failed, now resign!

Jet II
2nd Aug 2002, 16:44

For years pilots have watched other 'favoured' groups in BA receive special treatment

Exactly who are the these other people in BA who have got much better treatment than the pilots - As a member of the groundstaff of BA who works mainly with other airlines I can assure you that BA flight crew are some of the most pampered people I have ever come across. There are very few companies that supply limo's, nights in hotels if you have an early flight, excessively long stopovers, etc. etc

I think that you would be better off trying to ensure the survival of the company by cutting out some of the spanish practises rather than slagging off other hard working members of staff who are paid considerably less than you.

I do not begrudge any pilot in BA his money - but if there is money in the company available for pay-rises it should be shared amongst all the staff.

We all know that every department in the company is overmaned (including aircrew) and that there are an excessive amount of managers. We are also aware that skippy has failed and should go - bring back Babs perhaps?

So Notso, please try and remain calm and hope for the best.


2nd Aug 2002, 16:51

Shape:between Orange and Pear

Size:Orange on steroids

Suggested treatment:drop the aussie diet / bring on babs.;)

Hand Solo
2nd Aug 2002, 17:18
Hmmm, been reading too much BA News again have you Jet II.Let me debunk some of the utter garbage you've just spouted:

Exactly who are the these other people in BA who have got much better treatment than the pilots - As a member of the groundstaff of BA who works mainly with other airlines I can assure you that BA flight crew are some of the most pampered people I have ever come across

CSDs(big pay rise), IM staff (superior staff travel), middle managers (superior staff travel, health care, bonuses), etc etc. I'd love to think I was pampered but, staying in the same hotels as other crews I just can't see it. No limo to work like EK, no 6 figure salary like the Americans, no share options like Go, fewer days off and less pay than KL, LH, AF, no 3 crew ops on all transatlantic flights. I could go on.

There are very few companies that supply limo's, nights in hotels if you have an early flight, excessively long stopovers, etc. etc

Limos? Haven't been in a limo since a friends stag night. Do you mean private hire taxis, of the ilk used by many major organisations which set up long term contracts due to the daily requirement for many journeys to and from airports. Or Perhaps you mean a minibus that we often get. How would you prefer us to get to the airport on a nightstop? By train?
Nights in hotels if you have an early flight? Don't remember one of those last time I had the 05:30 CDG. Perhaps you refer to the one off agreement to allow LHR based long haul crew to have the previous night in an LGW hotel if, and only if, they have a very early report the next day. Much the same way as you'd get a hotel from BA if you were sent to work away from your base with an early start the next day. I should think the corporate discount rate on a hotel is a bargain compeared to paying US rates of pilot pay.
Excessively long stopovers? Would you care to specify which? Stopovers are dictated in the first instance by CAA regulated minimum rest times, then by the BA schedule. I'd hardly call one night in New York, two nights in Singapore or 12 hours in Sydney excessive. If somebody finds themselves somewhere for a long time its because BA don't have a return flight for a long time.

Incidentally all these things you describe are pretty much bog standard in most airlines.

I think that you would be better off trying to ensure the survival of the company by cutting out some of the spanish practises rather than slagging off other hard working members of staff who are paid considerably less than you.

Tell that to the tug drivers who earn more than the CEPs. Did you know the average wage in BA is £27000, whereas the starting wage of a CEP is around £19000? Why not specify some of these spanish practices instead of just slagging people off? Care to name any other departments which have produced the same level of productivity increases over the last five years?

I do not begrudge any pilot in BA his money - but if there is money in the company available for pay-rises it should be shared amongst all the staff.

What is this, communist Russia? I can't think of any other company that operates in this way, why should BA? I think you do begrudge BA pilots their money.

We all know that every department in the company is overmaned (including aircrew)
An interesting but utterly wrong misconception. The company know the schedules, the Flight Time Limitations, the retirements, the new hires (none at the moment) and they crank them all into a large supercomputer each year to produce a forecast of how many pilots we need. Flight Ops has the most exact figures for staff requirements of any department, and they have the minimum number of staff they can get away with. Know of any other departments that do this? If we have so many staff, why aren't we letting any go? Why are we desperately short of pilots on the Airbus and the 744? Overmanning is rife in BA, but not in Flight Ops.

2nd Aug 2002, 17:44

He said"overmaned". I assumed he meant we brushed our hair too much......maybe that's where mine went.

As to the rest of your post, if I could support it more than 100%, I would.

2nd Aug 2002, 18:58

An interesting point about the low cost fares - I believe that the prices will be sustainable. Firstly because, as B clam says, they will have to be sstainable in order to compete with the likes of easyJet, otherwise they may as well return to BOAC. But, more importantly, they are sustainable as the reduction in manpower means that the costs are lower, enabling a lower price as well as aircraft utilisation increasing from approximately 7 hours per day to 9 hours per day (short haul). Therefore, the prices will be sustainable.

Another point that I believe is a valid point not to be overlooked is that if BA continues with prices similar to those of easyJet, Ryanair and Go etc, but with with customer service that BA is renowned for, then I believe that they will start to attract passengers back from the low-cost carriers. I know that if I had the choice of flying to, for example, Paris with fares the same price, I would go with BA over easy. That doesn't even go into the airports I could use which would be more convenient or other bits and bobs like frequent flyer programmes.

You can see then, that this could then lead to BA's business on short-haul increasing and therefore revenues increasing which would again increase the sustainability of the fares.

Also, I believe that easyJet in particular will start to struggle in the years to come. This is primarily due to its expansion inreasing at too great a rate. If they buy Deutche BA as well as Go I don't think that they will be able to cope with such a large expansion without inreasing its costs base greatly. For example, they will need to utilise all of the easy and Go aircraft a hell of a lot to keep fares low - not to mention the 100 or so new aircraft that may be ordered. With more arcraft comes more paperwork, maintenance, spare parts, pilots etc etc which all adds up to a far larger cost base. On top of that, is the demand really going to be there. In particular, with 100 new aircraft, despite deliveries over several years, will demand really increase that much? I think not, but if it were to come from somewhere then it would come from pax swapping to easy from other carriers, such as BA and BMI for example. However, as I have already mentioned, they are cutting their costs dramatically to come into line with low-cost carriers. Therefore, I don't think that the low-cost carriers will have as easy a time as some may think... (no pun intended :D)

Food for thought anyway.... :) :D :cool:

2nd Aug 2002, 19:46
So only pilots are responsible for the ultimate success of BA. Other staff are pretty much non existant at LGW. Not enough baggage handlers (pilots going to do it?) not enough checkin staff, not enough gate staff, not enough ramp staff, not enough pax bus drivers and those that are there are working their @rses off so you can do the flying, so unless you pilot folk plan on doing it all yourselves you'd better believe that someone else is going to have to do it and would like to be paid properly.

Admittedly nobody goes anywhere unless the pilot goes too but you don't do all this yourselves.
To imply that the rest of BA are all hangers on is pretty mean.

If you say your pay and conditions are not as good as any other pilots then I can accept that and believe you all should really be pushing for an improvement but don't start ripping into your fellow workers and imagine that it doesn't offend us.

All staff shouldn't be treated the same because we all have different jobs and different unions to represent us and each union goes to the company with a different agenda for it's members. If pilots haven't got a union with the balls to stand up for their rights then thats their problem.

To the best of my knowledge I haven't worked on a delayed flight at Gatwick because of a lack of pilots or cabin crew. I have had delayed flights because there are no bus drivers, tug drivers, baggage loaders, gate staff, checkin staff, dispatchers, engineers.

...and before anyone starts I never have had nor will have the desire to pilot an aeroplane (much prefer the helicopter idea but can't afford). I have never been rejected by any companies that any of you work for, I enjoy my job (still), I have no sour feelings towards anybody I just don't like it when other peoples contributions are treated with such derision. I work as a purser for BA my salary is approx 13K plus allowances, I get approx 9-11 days off a month...I'm not twenty one and just out of college, this is so that when you all start flaming me you won't have to guess what I do.

Finally I have to agree with zoru.

2nd Aug 2002, 20:59
Jet II

Your posting displays a TOTAL lack of understanding of any of this issues involved in this debate - I am glad you are on the ground and NO I don't work for BA!

Please don't rise to this sort of junk !

2nd Aug 2002, 21:45
Someone explain why "Profits exceeded City expert forecasts" yet the share price went down 7%?

In response to what Notso said, we're ALL to blame for our own supposed Archaic agreements, its just that no-one in BA but the pilots can claim to have achieved a 25% improvement in productivity, whilst at the same time shaving millions off their budget.

There may be a number of 'front line' departments who have had their numbers whittled down to unmanageable levels, but their agreements are still cast in the stone that they were carved in 20 years ago. Particularly the Mainline Cabin Crew. Worldwide agreements are an embarrasment to the company.

For the media - A British Airways Stewardess with no title such as Purser or Cabin Service Director, will earn over £600 to operate to Tel Aviv and back on one day. They will then be guaranteed 3 days off for their troubles. Now that's Archaic! Your response, MainFrog2?

2nd Aug 2002, 22:27
I imagine BA's management would be rubbing their hands with glee if they happen to read this thread. Pilots slagging off all other staff, groundstaff complaining about their lot. The truth is all BA staff have seen pay and conditions eroded - and having a pop at each other doesn't help anyone. FSAS has hurt some areas more than others, the Waterworld community have suffered cuts of 30 per cent and even 'frontline' sections have lost around 20 per cent of staff, to be honest I don't know the figures for Crew. I work in a 'frontline' Operational area and it has to be said that there are still glaring cases of the 'haves' and the 'have nots'. Our 'Management' have tabled a 'FSAS roster' where its possible to work 42 days with only 7 days off in that time!!! Naturally, its being resisted but this roster could be imposed - How many other areas face this type of work pattern??? At the moment, when people have gone sick, their desks go uncovered or are only covered by 'time off in lieu' - getting overtime is like gold dust and yet we many other allied areas being offered O/T. LGW groudstaff are really suffering, there simply isn't enough staff to cope, the RJ/ATR fleet cannot seemingly operate for more than 10 mins without going Tech and the LGW Engineers are demoralised, are short in number and spares. Working for BA, you will always see, meet or hear people who are better off and worse off than yourself - lets not play into the Mgmt hands and have a totally divided workforce, its depressing enough as it is! Yes, BA needs its pilots but without ground staff support there would be no operation or passengers.
The fairest pay option is an 'across the board' pay settlement, ALL staff deserve it.

Harry Wragg
3rd Aug 2002, 00:42
BA is very much like communist Russia, some people are doing very well but the majority are only just getting by. It is large, system led, archaic, overmanned, undermanned, with too many passengers in the company and not enough on the aircraft.

Nice to know that the Stasi have fostered paranoia and unrest. On the bright side, if and when it goes the gap will be filled by others, who knows, they may even pay more!!


Jet II
3rd Aug 2002, 06:13
Hand Solo

Good to see that you are back with all your old misconceptions again. I see that you are still trying to say that you should have the same pay and conditions as American flight crew - this does not happen to any other worker so why should it be the case with you - you should compare your T & C's with other BRITISH flight crew.

As for nights in hotels I was talking about the crews who have a 07.00 flight from LHR on a Sunday morning and are bussed up from LGW on the FRIDAY for 2 nights in a hotel (on expenses of course!)

Ecessive stopovers? I returned from IAH last year with a crew that had done a 5 day stopover - most US carries that you like to model yourself on tend to arrive in UK one day and go back the next.

Overmanned departments - as Mainfrog2 has said, there are flights cancelled or delayed regularly for lack of serviceable A/C due to not enough engineers, loaders, check-in etc. etc. but never for lack of flight crew.

As I said before, I do not begrudge the flight crew community any sort of pay rise. I do not even believe that everyone should have the same pay increase but I do believe that if there is money available, other hardworking departments deserve a share - flight crew are not the only people who do any work in BA.

As for Flight crews supposed massive increase in productivity I can tell you that all the senior managers say the same things about their own departments and produce reams of statistics to support their case - it seems that the pilots are the only ones who believe this bullshit. Remember statistics can be made to prove anything - especially in BA.

:D :D

B clam
3rd Aug 2002, 08:04
Jet 11,

Flts are not cx due to a lack of flt crew because we are efficient AND flexible. I know the former because I have flown for both mil and other civ companies and can compare.

In terms of flexibility you should watch aircrew running from one a/c to another on LHR T/Rs in order to make schedule.

If we, as an entity, displayed the same amount of inefficiency and apathy as some (note: some!) elements of the Company, you will, indeed, see flts cx due flt crew!

B Clam

Jet II
3rd Aug 2002, 08:14
B Clam

I am sorry, but I have NEVER seen any flight crew working for ANY company "running from one a/c to another"


Notso Fantastic
3rd Aug 2002, 08:38
>>The fairest pay option is an 'across the board' pay settlement, ALL staff deserve it.<<

I'm afraid I most certainly beg to differ. Funny how suddenly everybody wants to tie themselves for a free ride onto a pilots contract this time. Never known it before! The truth is, nobody else is NEEDED in BA. I'm afraid all you need to run an airline is a Board and pilots approved to operate aircraft on BA routes by the CAA- anybody else is essentially unimportant as their services can be contracted out. Even Cabin Crew, engineers, check-in, operations.....you name it, their jobs can be contracted. So why on Earth the above communist ideals are suddenly felt to be important I don't know. The truth is BA desperately needs to be totally without Waterside, without at LEAST 20,000 staff, possibly even 30,000. Then BA would be viable with a share price worth investing in. But for now, please end this 'let's all go down the plughole together!' mentality. This thread seems to be hijacked by a small community of 'I want some too' people. It should no longer be in Reporting Points.......is there a section called 'Other staff wanting to hang onto a pilots contract'?

3rd Aug 2002, 09:00
Mr Land: assuming you fly for BA (and that is what I infer from what you post) and you are not a member of Danny's 'Red Brigade' from page bottom, can I ask a few questions?

£600 - is this figure total pay or are you talking about allowances only? If the first, is that actually unreasonable when viewed over a year's work, if the latter, WOW! I don't want MY pilots or cabin crew thinking they will get that sort of money :cool:

In view of the fact that the pilots are apparently getting a bit 'agitated' about THEIR pay, could you tell us (for the media, of course) what payments they get for the same flight? It may be hard work for cabin crew but it is a bit of a doddle for pilots, isn't it? What are we talking here, 11 hrs flying, around 14-15 hours duty? A nice little trip really.

Is there any significance in the words 'on one day' relating to the Tel-Aviv flight? It is not unusual to operate that flight 'on one day', and most flight and cabin crew would get roughly between £30 and £40 in flight pay for that duty (for the media).

I'm sure that the media will benefit from a clearer picture of BA's crew operating costs if you could oblige please?

3rd Aug 2002, 09:31
Jet II You are being very selective in quoting anomalies that you have observed and then making it soound as though it is generally the case.

I do not dispute that there are several areas (dispatch, engineering, check-in) where people feel as aggrieved and frustrated as pilots do.

Unfortunately as pilots we are tied, rightly or wrongly, by seniority. We sink or swim with the company. To be fair, virtually any other employee can move to another airline in their respective job without going from the equivalent of captain to junior first officer. The only reason most don't is because BA offer the best package!

I tend to agree that our pay should be compared to British flight crew. Junior first officers would then get a £17,000 pay rise to bring them to Easyjet levels. After 5 years as a shorthaul captain my basic is less than an Easyjet captain. I concede that I do earn more overall but not by a massive margin.

To debunk some of your other myths:

I know the cabin crew get bussed to LHR from LGW for two nights hotel before an early Sunday report but am unaware that it applies to pilots too. Most pilots would not want that and the whole arrangement is truly bizarre.

The excessive stopover you quote in IAH must have been because either there was no flight returning to the UK sooner OR the aircraft type was changed. Ie a 777 replaced a 744 or similar. Believe me, we virtually always return after minimum rest on the first available aircraft. But what the hell,if the pilots are tired and make a mistake BA can always buy another aircraft. Most shorthaul european slips are 12 -14 hours.

It was mentioned before that if the company could run the operation with less pilots it would. We are rostered with ruthless efficiency. We are presented with trips and if it is legal we have to fly it. Very few archaic rules and practises there. An example we fly a 767 to Tel Aviv with a 2140 report, arrive and hang around to catch a CY flight to Larnaca. Arrive at hotel at around 0630 UK time. Pick up 0215 UK time (round 19 hours later) to catch a flight back to Tel Aviv to operate straight home, landing at around 1240 local. Two pilots, no extra payments and very tiring but we do it because it is legal. It goes with the territory.

If you believe that the wealth of statistical data about our productivity and efficiency is false then I challenge you to prove it because I am sure our Director of Flight Crew would be delighted if you could. It has been acknowledged that most of our historic archaic working practises and inflexibility of old have long gone. It is also acknowledged that many 744 flight crew are up against legal maximum hour constraints and that generally we cannot be much more efficient in terms of sectors flown than we are at present.

Finally, I have on more than one occasion had less than 30 minutes to transfer from one aircraft to another, usually due to a late inbound and tight turnaround. I may not actually run but certainly it is a fast walk. It happens.

Sorry to undermine your pre-conceptions.

3rd Aug 2002, 09:39
What are we talking here, 11 hrs flying, around 14-15 hours duty? A nice little trip really.

God preserve us from managers!:o :o :o :o

Nobody should routinely be flying that sort of day two crew.

3rd Aug 2002, 10:20
Jet 11
Just one little, niggly point ...

I was one of those pampered B.A.minions who operated the 5 day oh-so- luxurious IAH last year. Surprisingly it wasn't rostered as a result of overweening unions stamping their fist on the huddled masses that is our rostering department...no...shockingly enough it was actually as a result of September 11th. Fewer pax unwilling to play russian roulette with Bin and his chums = fewer flights. Who would have thought it?

P.S. Anyone know where I can sign up for that TLV?

3rd Aug 2002, 10:41
Easyjet fly 737s from international airports to other international airports
British Airways fly 737s from international airports to other international airports

Easy jet 737s use jet fuel
BA 737s use jet fuel

Easyjet pay passenger handling, navigation and landing fees
BA pay passenger handling, navigation and landing fees

Easyjet have to pay crews
BA have to pay crews but they pay them less

Easyjet have a slim structure with small overheads and so can charge competitive fares
BA have a leviathan civil service style structure with massive overheads and have to charge high fares to keep thousands of unnecessary staff in comfy dead end jobs

Easyjet fly 4447 passengers per employee
BA fly 625

Easy jet are profitable and are able to expand by clearly defined goals and sensibly financing
BA have to make £400m each year just to pay for the interest on Aylingís flights of fancy

Easyjet have been straight with their investors
BA have strung the investors along with empty promises of reform, and reneging on pledges to reduce the size of the company. Nearly one year on, we have still yet to see the 13500 people leave the employ of BA. King and his team specified an ideal size of 43000 heads for BA, we are still not even in the same galaxy.The staff alone cost BA £2.4bn.

BA is suffering from a tired and withered corporate culture where everyone believes the same old mantras that keep being recycled over and over again. They are weary from years of change for changes sake to preserve the illusion of activity, without any inspired and incisive leadership. The board is conservative and reactionary, and reels against any attempts to tear down the bastion empires of the nationalised corporation.

I desperately want the company to succeed, but with entrenched attitudes and petty interdepartmental bollitics that we have seen even right here, the future is not a rosy one. Sack suits - it's the only way

Iíll take on the opposition anyday. Itís my management I canít beat!

Notso Fantastic
3rd Aug 2002, 12:10
Chaps- this is the bad side of Pprune. Outsiders with probably no airline connection (but would have desperately liked one- usually on the FD) are able to post their beliefs and prejudices here anonymously, and pull peoples legs ruthlessly- hiding behind anonymity. It's going on here. In what is happening this year, no other staff group has any valid opinion or desire that affects pilots in any way, especially desires to hang onto our backs with a pay deal. We don't have to explain ourselves to outsiders. I suggest we just ignore!

3rd Aug 2002, 15:56
"but with with customer service that BA is renowned for"......

Yes- B***dy Awefoul...........

BA fare are low? No- the current "low fares" they are offering are the middle to high end of GO/easyJets pricing. The lowest BA offer to Nice for example is 100 pounds return. Go/ easy £25. BA at LHR can't compete with Stansted and Luton. Where do you REALLY think the new runways will be built?

Hand Solo
3rd Aug 2002, 16:29
Heathrow, because thats where the vast majority of passengers fly into the UK. If Stansted is so great then why don't they have any decent scheduled long haul services? Its all well and good knocking BAs 'low' fares, but you know as well as I do that for every lower 'low cost' fare, I can find you an example of BA being cheaper than the low cost operators. It all depends how late you need to book and comparisons like yours are totally meaningless unless you specify a particular flight on a particular date and a particular time-frame for booking.

3rd Aug 2002, 16:49
i don`t actually think NotSoFantasic is really a pilot, is he the one pulling our legs !!!!

Jet II
3rd Aug 2002, 16:51

I'm afraid that you are sounding a lot like dear old Bob Ayling (your not really Bob are you?), what with your dreams of a 'virtual airline'.

Can you name one succesfull airline that operates like that. EasyJet and Ryanair have both tried that approach to contract out maintenance, check-in operations, etc. etc and both are gradually realising that if you do not have control of your operation your relibility will suffer. Both Easy and Ryanair are starting their own maintenance organisations and it probably won't be long before they create their own check-in/ops department.

As for any pay rises - you should remember that you are part of a failing, unprofitable airline that is saddled with massive debts - do you seriously think there is cash floating around for pay rises?


Hand Solo
3rd Aug 2002, 17:17
Well I think you've answered your own question there jet II. Easy and Ryanair have been massively succesful with almost everything contracted out. Several years down the line Easy are starting to set up their own maintenance operation, but there's no guarantee that will overcome any problems they may be facing. As for spare cash floating around the airline, I think we're all quite aware that there isn't any, but then there wasn't any floating around for pay rises when we were profitable. BA management will just have to make a tough choice. Either they find some cash from somewhere to meet our claim, or they cease to operate as an airline for a few days, and there's nothing they, or you, can do to stop it.:p

Oh forgot to add that Virgin seem to do rather well and I believe they only employ check in staff and dispatchers. Everything else is contracted out.

3rd Aug 2002, 17:23
There are a few points to remember when looking at this profit just announced:
1. It is during the one of the summer quarters. The next quarter is also likely to see profit given the high loads carried during the summer holidays.
2. A real acid test will be to see if BA makes a profit in the last quarter of the fiscal year during the UK winter post Christmas.
3. The desire of George "Dubya" Bush to take military action in Iraq may yet lead to another massive downtown in the industry, so this may yet just prove to be a blip.
4. Lets remember, and please correct me if I am wrong, BA has received no government subsidy (life Air France which announced profits in the quarter ending April I believe), no government financial assistance as in the USA, and has achieved a profit in its last quarter. BA has, temporarily at least, succeeded when others like Sabena and Swissair failed. Lufthansa's latest finacial results were a 600 million euro loss I believe (albeit of 1 fiscal year, vice BA £65m profit for one quarter.
5. There is still a long way to go, and the competition between BA and the low costs will really hot up over the next 12 months I believe, but at least those that are still working for BA can take a little heart that their company has made some money after a tough year.

Finally - I dont work for BA, I work for a low cost airline.

Jet II
3rd Aug 2002, 17:31
Hand Solo

That massive Virgin hangar at LHR and all the engineers at LHR and LGW must be mirages then.

The fact that Easy and Ryan are starting to operate their own maintenance/operations shows that once airlines get to a certain size the 'virtual airline' concept does not work.

GB Airways are already finding that having to rely on contracts with BA is not doing there operation any good and are considering their other options.


GE 90
3rd Aug 2002, 17:54
A few more points. BA engineering only started to realy lose money after more and more work was contracted out. Wheels and brakes are harder to come by. Engines are turning up half complete. What used to take a quick walk to the workshops to fix now has to be sent away to an outside contractor. All this costs BA and the money is going the wrong way.
When BA decided to sell off Engine Overhaul the new contractors said they would do th boroscopes free for a year. Imagine the accountants face when a year later we are being charged £1000 for something we were doing for nothing.
We have little control over Quality or how fast things are turned round and have to accept that our suplliers have us by the preverbials.
Next time you are sitting on a collapsed seat swab for the 7th day remember we don't do our own seats any more. Just think "on paper we saved money".

There are lies, damn lies and accounts. :rolleyes:

4th Aug 2002, 08:39
<sitting here whistling "We shall overcome.....">

Airbus Girl
4th Aug 2002, 08:42
M.Mouse. Just like to raise a couple of points from your posting. You say that junior FOs would get a £17,000 rise to match EasyJets salary. Firstly, all Easyjet pilots will have paid for their own licences, not been sponsored (I believe direct entry FOs at BA get more money than those for whom BA have covered all training and licence costs from ab initio). Secondly, I believe EasyJet's salaries are not incremental. Thirdly, I believe that much of BA pilot's salaries is paid as allowances (most airlines pay in the region of £2 per hour for duty hours and there is absolutely no way that any pilot could earn the hundreds of pounds that most BA pilots seem to make in allowances).
Finally, I would like to mention your complaint about Tel Aviv and similar length flights. It must be really hard having only 19 hours rest before operating a return sector.
The airline I work for operates a flight, at night, to Paphos in Cyprus. As you know its rather a long way, particularly in an Airbus. We go there, we have a 1 hour turn around and we fly (ie. operate) straight back. We then drive home. I believe the same occurs for our Tel Aviv flights.
I also know that BA stops over when doing flights to Cyprus.
I think you will find that most other UK airlines operate like us, so I am afraid you might not get much sympathy over having "only" 19 hours rest before the 5 hour flight home.
I remember meeting an ex BA pilot recently who could not believe that all airlines didn't have bid systems.
Another world I think.

4th Aug 2002, 10:34
Airbus Girl,

BA cadets are on reduced salaries to help pay back training costs.

The airline in the UK that pays good salaries is Ryanair (before 9/11 contracts)...

Wee Weasley Welshman
4th Aug 2002, 10:47
Personally I am rooting for BA flightcrew. If they get their 25% raise then the rest of us will follow.

A UK scene whereby BA provide world class long haul and premium shorthaul alongside a large reliable low cost service from Ryan and Easy would be a very healthy state. Especially compared to some of our continental cousins with their monolithic state owned airlines and marginal fragmented second tier players.

BA is the first large airline to have to deal with low cost airlines. Air France, Iberia, Lufty, Alitalia et al will all face the same challenge over the next decade. Hopefully, with BA emerging first from the battle it will be in a position to take pole position amongst the large flag carriers.


4th Aug 2002, 11:15
Airbus Girl

It is another bone of contention that self sponsored direct entry pilots in BA start on the same abysmal salaries as those that have been lucky enough to achieve sponsorship.

I accept that Easy salaries are not incremental and that overall I am better off. But the margin is not as large as many believe. My basic is circa £64K and last year I made, including ALL allowances £74K. That is as a captain on the 757/767 and after nearly 14 years service. There are a very few at the top of the seniority list on the 747-400 making a reasonable salary ie £100K+ but unfortunately there is so much rumour and innuendo that this truth is rarely believed.

Reference Tel Aviv I pesonally would like to operate straight back because I think it would be less tiring but it is outside of Flight Time Limitations. Two sectors overnight allows a maximum of 11 hours 15 minutes FDP. If it was possible we would be rostered there and back in one duty. Anybody who has done that sort of duty will appreciate how physically exhausting it is.

Incidentally, when I am a passenger I prefer the person responsible for my safety to be well rested!

BA does indeed stopover in LCA. You are correct that by standards of other airlines that is rather cushy. We could operate there and back but I think the emphasis should be on reducing the tiring trips that those such as yourself have to endure rather than BA striving to make us work to the same appalling schedules.

It is indeed another world and I am fortunate? in having worked for other airlines before BA. I appreciate that my life in BA is preferable to that in many other airlines. However, I do know that I am working far harder than I was ten years ago for little extra reward and we are trying to resist the ever increasing drive to erode our lifestyle and rumuneration.

What drives salaries up is when companies are unable to retain pilots because they are leaving for greener pastures. Historically, in the UK, that was pilots leaving the smaller operators to join BA. The advantages, especially in the early years, are now so minimal that this flow is stopping.

This lack of differential, and continuing erosion of it, is not helping the cause of any pilot in the UK.

If I was starting over I would choose a different career path and indulge my passion for flying privately. The rewards are no longer commensurate with the responsibility and fatiguing nature of the work.

4th Aug 2002, 12:48
M Mouse.
I do virtually exactly the same job as you -
routes,aircraft,responsibilities. I am paid a bit less (market rate for the job). My pension will almost certainly be less than yours when you retire.
Why not recognise that you are very lucky to have what you do have. If you and your colleagues rock the BA boat much harder, it won't be long before you, and all the people who depend on BA are swimming.

4th Aug 2002, 14:11
I am really an outsider here, working in Computer Software sales, but I do have a strong interest in my favorite 'frills' airlines surviving.

How do you guys feel about a variable pay scheme ?

In the IT business many made a furtune in 98-99, but at the moment revenue is quite low - and our income follows revenue.

I do feel however, that a nice base pay combined with a variable pay depending on company financial results is the most fair way to compensate those who are responsible for generating revenue.

Rather than asking say pilots to accept a lower wage in order to reduce costs, a new scheme with an acceptable base + an unlimited bonus depending on profit should fit both parties.

It would be motivating for all, making unions think twice before increasing cost by demanding extra headcounts for a given task.

At the same time, wages would automatically go up, when profit is back - without the requirement for new wage negotiations.

If base pay is say 65% and variable pay 35%, the bonus would automatically increase with seniority and the variable pay would not be so large that you are at serious fincancial risk if you miss the bonus one year.

Typically in the IT industry, bonus is increased by accelerator factors, giving much more than a linear increase in bonus when profit exceeds a set target.

Good luck


In trim
4th Aug 2002, 15:57
When are BA going to stand up to the unions within the handling? Despatchers who have been there for 15+ years on old-style escalation contracts, earning a fortune, are doing 2-3 turnrounds on a 10 hour shift. That's great utilisation.

Yet at the same time LGW appear to be short of passenger service staff?? How many flights are being delayed because the whole North Terminal is operating on 'check release' (i.e. Do not call the flight to the gate until staff are available.....often long after STD.)

And don't even start me on the inefficiencies with the ramp staff.

And how much ground equipment just sits there for weeks on end without ever moving. What a waste of assets.

Look under your noses BA....you haven't even started trying to tackle your ground handling cost problems.

And anyone can maintain market share by offering low fares, but only some airlines can sustain those low fares in the long term by making money on them....and BA are a long way from achieving that!

4th Aug 2002, 16:11

I didn't say I didn't appreciate what I have and for what it is worth I am against pursuing an unrealistic pay claim given the state of the airline at the moment but there are very, very many pilots within BA - EOG, cadets, etc. - far more disillusioned, angry and militant than I.

Appalling waste and mis-management in the company has been prevalent for years and is now crippling us.

In real terms we have been slowly slipping behind on the pay front, working a good deal harder than ever before and in fact many in the company cannot legally work any harder.

Pilots in BA have been left behind when it comes to even keeping pace with the cost of living, in reality we have fallen way behind.

For reasons stated previously I believe it is in everybody's interest that we are paid appropriately.

If you and your colleagues rock the BA boat much harder, it won't be long before you, and all the people who depend on BA are swimming.


4th Aug 2002, 22:15
Airbus Girl

I work for BA and have done Tel Aviv there and back in a day on both the 737 and 777.
The 737 was a scheduled day trip (40 min turnround) but often we had to divert on the way home as even with discretion we were out of hours. It happened so often that the company saw sense and moved it to 75/6 and then 777.

On the 777 I have to admit we did carry an extra heavy pilot as again the duty day exceeded limits with 2 crew. Remember you cant turn around a 777 in less than about 2 hrs if its a full one rather than a transit.

One of our aism is to provide a robust operation for our premium passengers and a reliable sceduled service is what they pay a premium for. Delaying/diverting/cancelling flights due to crew hour problems is not acceptable. Yes other crews do work harder than us in certain areas but OUR pax pay for increased reliability of the schedule by having crews able to complete sectors even after delays.

Not having a go....

5th Aug 2002, 07:46
Good news....

I have created NotSo Fantastic Virtual airline for all to see in the Jet Blast Forum.

I didn't think such a silly topic belong in the main forum.

Come, read, enjoy, comment

Notso, please take a look, your dreams come true.............

5th Aug 2002, 08:22
A couple of points.

Jet II, only last week I was to be seen running, if my memory serves me, from N78 to A5. Sadly though we managed to get the a/c set up on time (because we ran) the a/c was delayed due to the inability of the engineers to get an engineer ou to a/c even with 2 hours notice (requested by the last crew). Would you believe it, when he arrived he was walking, not running.

Bodstrup, I would love to be paid like the IT industry. Mr Pandora is in the IT industry, and his basic is more than my pay and allowances together. When bonus day comes - wahey, shopping :D

gas path
5th Aug 2002, 09:51
Sorry Pandora
The engr was walking because.-
a). He was too knackered.
b). He's been dicked about so much by a retarded management that he probably doesn't care anyway.
c). He's been told to walk and not run as it doesn't look professional. :rolleyes:

5th Aug 2002, 12:20
Pandora, you just have to be prepared for the 'off' years as well. My income in 99 was 3 x 2001.

Luckily 2002 looks a lot better than 2001, but no way near 99, those days are probably gone

But, I like the idea, as - at least my company - has had very limited lay-offs, as they save on comission when income is low.

Companies I work with who have a fixed wage policy appear to be quicker to lay-off staff when the going gets tough.


5th Aug 2002, 12:46
As a regular BA passenger travelling full fare twice a week between LHR and NCL I have to say that if the deterioration in service and staff morale is anything to go by then BA is in big trouble. 8/10 flights are delayed and 4/10 delay greater than 2 hours on a 45min ETE flight.

On holiday to Turkey with Air 2 bob happy crew and on time both ways.

BA can only market themselves in the premium sector if they can deliver, and at the moment they cannot. I feel sorry for the aircrew who work for this shambolic organisiation.

5th Aug 2002, 13:05
We share your concerns.

A couple of points about delays though.

It is company policy that we tell you the truth about the cause of the delays. At LHR airfield congestion, ATC slot delays, baggage having to be offloaded due passenger not appearing at gate, etc, etc, continually cause delays. We know that punctuality is at the top of regular travellers wish lists. For that reason it it high on our list of priorities.

It would be my guess that less than 10% of delays into or out of LHR are due to causes that we can control.

We have to endure these problems day in day out and up to four times a day.

5th Aug 2002, 23:21
Ok maybe you pilots do deserve a raise. But maybe we should wait until the company has sorted itself out a bit more first? Everyone at B.A. is losing out at the moment! PAX included. You can't bite the hand that feeds you. We're all struggling with our lots at B.A. if the pilots suddenly get a magical windfall I think there will be a lot of bad feeling throughout the company especially as we are all giving up so much (PAX especially!). I don't have any imeadiate solutions but I reckon pushing for a more cash right now is a bad move.

Instead - push for more sackings at waterslide!!!!:D

6th Aug 2002, 00:30
Benchmark your earnings with other airlines. We have benchmarked ours, and find that we are well behind. Cabin crew in BA are streets ahead of most other airlines. BA recruit from Virgin, BMI, easy Jet, Go etc.

<<We're all struggling with our lots at B.A.>> I think you may find that as cabin crew you are well ahead.

Good luck to you, but remember luck will not last forever.

<<if the pilots suddenly get a magical windfall I think there will be a lot of bad feeling throughout the company especially as we are all giving up so much>> Oh deary, deary me.

By the way what is it that you are giving up? I haven't seen our cabin crew give up a scrap so far.

However I do agree with you with regard to Waterside


Jet II
6th Aug 2002, 05:02

We have benchmarked ours, and find that we are well behind

Are you seriously saying that you want the same Terms & Conditions as Easy and BMI? - or do you just want their headline basic pay and still keep all your allowances?

If you read some of the other threads in this forum there is a lot of talk of strike action at both these airlines by the flight crew - things are not as rosy at other British airlines as some in this forum would have you beleive. So be very careful what you wish for.


Eddington the Rodger
6th Aug 2002, 06:38
Whinge whinge whinge
The pays not enough.
The Unions are useless.
Conditions are going South.
We are all mushrooms....being kept in the dark and being fed
s++t all day.
If its all too much then lump it.

6th Aug 2002, 10:17
Well speaking from a shorthaul LGW point of view we've not given up much because we haven't got much in the first place. But i can tell you that with route cuts and nightstops going to there and backs, our earnings has have gone way down. YES as far as crew is concerned in the UK BA is the benchmark for crew and earnings, and does get people from all other airlines - BUT thats at fortress LHR. As for LGW and I suspect at other bases too it's certainly a different gravy, as things certainly have changed. I myself am now earning the same as PSR as I was as main crew a year ago some times less!. Most people at SH LGW are in the same boat too and as for LH LGW well... their lucky to get more than two flights on their roster at the moment. Crewing levels have also been reduced as well on both fleets increasing our workloads, never to be reinstated to previous levels

So the upshot? BA are certainly saving roughly about £200 per crew member at SH LGW, and we are working harder.


6th Aug 2002, 13:25

Your last statement. <<their lucky to get more than two flights on their roster at the moment. Crewing levels have also been reduced as well on both fleets increasing our workloads, never to be reinstated to previous levels>>

There seems some contradiction there in those few words, or maybe I've misunderstood.


6th Aug 2002, 20:54
Np exeng

LH LGW have so little work they are lucky to get 2 rostered flights a month at the moment - rest is normally 24hr sby.

Crewing levels at SH and LH LGW have been reduced - but the service hasn't - so we are all now working harder when we actually do get to fly!. The pervious crewing levels will not be brought back.

Hope that clarifies things?? Sorry if last post was badly worded.

Curious Pax
9th Aug 2002, 13:10
I'm sure there must be a good reason for it, but Citiexpress at MAN seem to have gone subcharter mad which can't be helping the bottom line. I flew AMS-MAN yesterday on a Titan 146 (and very nice it was too - 5 seats across rather than the 6 that I think the Citiexpress examples have IIRC), and they also seemed to have pressed a Flightline 146 and a Titan ATR into service. Seems to have been going on for a few days.

9th Aug 2002, 22:34
And on and on it goes...I've been with the airlines for over 25 years and still the same old whinge goes around and around. An airline exists for what? For pilots ,engineers cabin crew , ground staff etc- to practise their skills? NO --it exists to make money, period. If you can extract (as a group) a bigger share of that dosh for yourselves then "good luck". Your employer can obviously afford to pay it. The value of each group to the employer will be determined by both market forces and the resolve of that group to look after its own interests. Thats just the way it is. At BA ,however, they have to contend with some agreements that have lead to some groups not conforming to the above . Namely- SOME BA cabin crew groups. I don't give a hoot how much they EARN but there has to be something wrong in an airline when being cabin crew is aspirational to other more qualified groups.

Am I wronger than usual?

10th Aug 2002, 09:22
WWW-BAs longhaul pax will not tolerate the quality/reliabilty of service offered by the Low Cost Carriers.It may offer good value for money for the average bod/self employed businessman but it is companies not the individuals who pay BAs fares- they want frills not hassle.
It would be suicide for a company so heavily dependant on continental travel to rely on LCCs to feed London(if that is what you are suggesting).
Unless the British Airways Pilots Association suddenly starts to take an interest the future of regional flying outside London it will become high frequency in a/c smaller than the 737.

The Footsoldier
16th Aug 2002, 23:02
Have been driven to this forum by rumblings throughout the Industry, created by Mr Notso's selfish and stupid comments.

Having worked closely with Pilots in general all my career, I have met very few who have such a narrow minded attitude as Mr Notso's, and I know for a fact that he is indeed in the minority and incidentally obviously doesn't understand the Industry very well, hasn't he heard of Contract Pilots, because they are out there. You need me Mr Notso, like I need you.( unfortunately) Whether I be a Contractor or not. Rools are rools, especially when they are C.A.A. Rools. So next time you see a baggage handler crawling round the cargo bay, or a dispatcher running around like a headless chicken, or the poor Engineer up to his arms in manky brake dust. Spare a thought and be thankful that your parents had enough money to sponser you through your training. And just before you get all warm and cosy, here's a true story. I was flight Engineer for a Company and would accompany the flight crew in the Cockpit or Control Cabin as we call it nowadays. One day the Managing Director was on the flight and requested to sit in the Cockpit, like a good footsoldier I gave up the hard and uncomfortable seat to allow the M.D. his wish. 20 minutes into the flight when I was called to the cockpit, I heard the M.D. say to the Captain. You don't actually do much up here do you, DO WE REALLY NEED BOTH OF YOU !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

So Mr Notso, If Mr M.D. has his way, half of you'se will be out on yer A&3es. So be thankfull for Rools and show some RESPECT to all Footsoldiers of various disciplines, You might not have earned it, but we certainly have.

Wee Weasley Welshman
17th Aug 2002, 01:18
Filtonman - I was not suggesting that.

The UK could be EU leader in air transport if it had the best Low Cost scheduled sector AND the best full service sheduled sector.


Notso Fantastic
17th Aug 2002, 07:32
Wow Footsoldier! Feel better for getting that off your chest? Good one. FYI, I do actually show a lot of respect for my colleagues. But when members of other pay groups, sensing that pilots have a case for a better rise this year try and 'attach themselves' to the pilots bandwagon, then I'm afraid it needs saying. These groundstaff (of which I would say there are AT LEAST 20,000 SURPLUS heads in BA) have no hold over pilots. Eddington should have had blood flowing through that stream in Waterside (in fact there should not be a Waterside). Move some desks back into TBA or similar, leave the people in Waterside to work for Tesco who should be the natural owners of such a place. Large scale redundancies are the only way to get BA to survive this crisis. As for other groups trying to hitch themselves to pilots for a free pay ride - forget it. Things are developing at the moment- we shall see more in the next couple of weeks. But as far as worrying about you and other suits in your departments that quite possibly would be better subcontracted out, I won't lose any sleep! If you understood airline procedures better, I think you may see the problem with licensing pilots to fly worldwide BA routes. Can't be done to subcontract in I'm afraid.

But I hope you feel better getting that nonsense off your chest!

The Footsoldier
17th Aug 2002, 21:35
Thanks for your prompt reply Mr Notso, don't get me wrong, in one hand I totally agree with you. Until B.A. or nowadays big bad Rod who apparently only earned £497,000 this year, get their act together and take the redundancy issue seriously and get rid of the 20,000 people who you quite rightly say, could be done without. Then B.A. will continue to head downwards on that slippery spiral. I mean have you ever worked for a Company that has so many job titles or middle management positions ?.
But you are being naive if you think that contracting everything out is the answer. The idea of the virtual airline has never actually been taken on by any Airline, this has already been proved within Engineering, all you get is more cost and more inefficiency. That is why for example even the no-frill airlines i.e. Ryanair, are starting their own Maintenance facilties, because in some of the ground staff area's, ultimately it is more cost efficient, and they are in control of their own destiny.

B.A. has suffered years of mis-management and is now paying the price, because it doesn't have the millions to waste as it used to have.

The no-frills are poaching our business customers, and until that changes, God help us all.

We are told that the biggest cost problem within B.A. is the wage bill. The problem that B.A. has is that it pays, the unqualified end of the payscale, well over and above the Industry average. That is not to include the Licensed area, as B.A. are about to find out in the Glasgow area as soon as Ryanair open up for business. Being a C.A.A. qualified professional I too expect like yourself, a certain salary. B.A. is now falling short of what I expect to earn, and B.A. will ultimately lose my services and many like me.

As someone has already mentioned, we belong to our own Unions, and if these Unions can get a good deal for ourselves, then good for us. But please change your attitude, Pilots are not the be and end all, whatever Airline we work for, we are all part of the one Industry, and ultimately all reliant on one another, and yes our wage slips should reflect our own personal qualifications and disciplines.

As the song says " I am not a bitter man ". I am not originally B.A.. and therefore have operated in the big wide world. B.A. is definately the most F**ked up Company I have worked for, mainly based upon the Ar****les who manage us.

I have tried to change that for the better. I have failed !!!!!!!

B.A. does not want to change, the people who manage us are more into self-interest, than improving B.A. the Company.

B.P.R. really does stand for Be Prepared for Redundancy.

I am !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

18th Aug 2002, 21:04
Not So Fantastic.

Are you by any chance ex RAF as your mightier than thou attitude stinks:mad:

Only CAA approved pilots to fly BA routes! So what are Atlas doing flying BA freighter routes then.

Air Atlanta regurlarly fly for UK operators using "TF" registered aircraft and multi-national crews, what makes you think they could not take your job away if it suited BA management?

I can only speak from an engineering point of view and must ask you if you want some under paid subcontract engineer, who has no care if the flight goes on time etc maintaining the aircraft in which you fly or are you going to maintain and CERTIFY it yourself? Thought not

I am sure BA could get rid of many admin/support staff but please don't think that all non pilots are unqualified low life:mad:

The Footsoldier
18th Aug 2002, 21:18
You've got it spot on Denzil,

Human Factor
18th Aug 2002, 22:32
Jet II:

The benchmarking was done against other European national carriers including Air France, Lufthansa and KLM. Like for like, only fair really.


In order to hold a United Kingdom Air Operator's Certificate (ie. to be a British airline), the pilots must be employed by that operator. It's all in JAR-OPS 1 apparently.

[Corrected for finger trouble]

19th Aug 2002, 15:49
OK Human Factor, but that doesn't explain the "TF" registered aircraft currently operating for VS & Excel. What stops BA flagging out services (like it did with freighter ops). I know this is never going to happen, just saying that its not impossible! Thus we can ALL be contracted out to a point!!!

Hand Solo
19th Aug 2002, 20:41
Size is what stops BA flagging out. You'd probably need the entire civil air fleet of Iceland to make a dent in an operation of BAs size. BA operate over 50 744s, around 50 777s, 40ish A319/320s, 20 or so 757/767 , around 40 737s and 7 Concordes. There aren't that many spare pilots floating around Europe with the necessary type ratings to replace the whole operation so they might as well stick with the economies of scale of keeping their own flight crew.

Super Stall
19th Aug 2002, 21:18
....AND 5 Atr's. :D

Super Stall

from the forgotten fleet.;)

19th Aug 2002, 22:25
You also forgot the RJ's - although they don't work very often nowadays - I'm actually contemplating asking if I can work on the ATR - sounds like a laugh - flasks of hot water for coffee and tea - back to basics but loads of split duties!!!