IAG: BA restructuring may cost 12,000 jobs [Archive] - Page 7

bex88

9th Aug 2020, 09:06

WhatTheDeuce

No you are correct the FAN is clear. As your statement reads.

The LGW argument is complicated by employment law, company precedent during closure of BA and bmi outstations and the fact that a LGW contract does exists. Separate pay structure and rates, rostering and scheduling. Where I understand the anger is that if you move base you are not presented with a new contract to read and sign. The same can be said when you pass a command course though. I completely understand Rex’s anger in that respect because I was fuming when the proposal was fleet and seat. The difficulty is LGW pilots cannot simply displace LHR pilots due to legal agreements and the somewhat questionable bumping of others with the same qualifications.

I again would say this is not driven by BALPA, I would probably say it is not even driven by the company but by legal advise.

We have to look what BALPA has achieved. 1255 down to estimated 270. 985 jobs theoretically saved. A employee group which has come together to save jobs and provide a income for some 300HCE in the CRS. How many did BA let go? 10750 I saw in a press report, down from 12,000. The mitigation came from us by working together. If you are CR right now you will no doubt be angry. I would too! Maybe 8 weeks ago I was hoping I would get out of this mess with a career break and a protected return into BA. I am pleased we have that option for those who find themselves in that position.

We talk about junior guys taking the hit. We envisage young guys and girls fresh out of flight school with little commitments and forget about the training loan. The reality is many do not fit into this category. I have flown with some really interesting and experienced people from different careers or military backgrounds and I hope they are still with us.

bex88

9th Aug 2020, 09:08

RexBanner

Yep, baffles me. I bet it is legal advise again on that part.

Survival Cot

9th Aug 2020, 09:12

The root of all of this unease stems from the MOA being out of date and kilter with the law when it comes to redundancy.

All pilots are now paying for this in all of the ways (and more) being discussed here. Until this “Elephant In The Room” is truly addressed with transparency and aligned properly with UK law, the complexities of this mess will become more and more entangled. Misguided efforts to maintain sole LIFO (or tokens) as per the outdated MOA only costs the employees, not the employer...as is unfolding. Priority needs application on this point, before the crisis deepens...

3Greens

9th Aug 2020, 09:30

how is it “out of date”? And what would you suggest as a replacement? Just cull those on by fleet? By age? By cost? Fancy a career forever looking over your shoulder or being killed in the rush for the most modern fleet ?
LIFO isn’t perfect, but IMO it’s about the best thing we have.
could you explain how it’s at odds with the law too? Perhaps BAs retained lawyers have made a mistake and should have looked on Pprune for their legal advice?

wiggy

9th Aug 2020, 09:56

Fancy a career forever looking over your shoulder or being killed in the rush for the most modern fleet ?

I think the ring fencing of the 787/350 fleet is a game changer...and I do think it's highly unfair to be potentially CR'ing pilots who might have been online for some time whilst protecting those who perhaps haven't.

But OTOH there might now need to be some recognition that there has always been a danger, even in BA, of the practice some have indulged in- i.e. hanging on in a slowly shrinking fleet because they didn't fancy another course "just yet", wanted to optimise their move for Fleet seniority/destination selection purposes or simply because they wanted to continue to fly an iconic aircraft.

Survival Cot

9th Aug 2020, 10:11

3Greens

Reality check needed.

LIFO has not been used as a sole means.

Where in the MOA is the now applied selection procedure written?

3Greens

9th Aug 2020, 10:57

I didn’t say it had. In fact the MOA doesn’t say anything of the sort either.
I believe we have used the general principles of LIFO, whilst recognising high efficiency workers and BOTH sides lawyers are confident that those general Principles respect the agreements and are legally sound. But perhaps you have a better legal opinion?

FlipFlapFlop

9th Aug 2020, 11:16

Could they have chosen a more divisive phrase than “high efficiency workers” ? Yuk.

3Greens

9th Aug 2020, 11:42

I know. And I’m hearing that an unfortunate quirk of that is that some very recent joiners who were lucky enough to be placed on the 787/350, And haven’t even started their courses Are being kept on due to this and longer serving pilots let go. This doesn’t sit comfortably with me as how are they high efficiency when they aren’t flying the line

GS-Alpha

9th Aug 2020, 12:22

I have no problem with BA choosing to protect pilot jobs, be they ‘efficient’ or otherwise. However, if these pilots haven’t actually started their training yet, courses should really be allocated in seniority according to the currently open supplementary bid, and the remainder then placed in the CRS. The problem then of course is why couldn’t the upper seniority of CRd pilots enter the CRS rather than these most junior? It is a bit of a can of worms which most people find uncomfortable, however the fact of the matter is, it is extra jobs saved, and that is a good thing. (I did read somewhere, that any pilot currently on a course, who does not have the seniority for that course when the bid has been processed, will be removed from said course. So it may yet be their destiny to enter for the CRS).

777JRM

9th Aug 2020, 19:21

Walnut

Started already/starting soon at LGW July/August: BDA, BGI, UVF, KIN, ANU, CUN.
777-200

Maxfli

9th Aug 2020, 19:48

.....This doesn’t sit comfortably with me as how are they high efficiency when they aren’t flying the line

I think in this instance, efficiency can be defined as their potential to fulfil a function, at considerably lower cost.

Pickled

10th Aug 2020, 05:13

LIFO+ is vital, a career in BA is a very long term bet. Without LIFO+ pilots would constantly be vulnerable to being considered inefficient and at risk of fire and rehire. It wasn’t long ago that 787s were grounded with engine problems, pilots sitting at home for prolonged periods and 747s covering their work.

Survival Cot

10th Aug 2020, 09:25

Agreed. So long as the 2010 equality act is adhered to and understood on both sides of the fence .......ideally written into any agreement..

3Greens

10th Aug 2020, 09:29

i would think both sides legal teams wouldn’t have sanctioned the method if it wasn’t legally sound.

Busdriver01

10th Aug 2020, 09:46

a career in BA is a very long term bet.

And after this catastrophe, it's abundantly clear that management intend to turn the airline into a place no one would want to spend an entire career...

GKOC41

10th Aug 2020, 13:58

RexBanner

Could it be that BALPA / BA Flight Ops have done some smoke n mirrors on the numbers to try and protect a few more crews perhaps?

clvf88

11th Aug 2020, 08:06

RexBanner

To be fair, a lot of 787 pilots are flying almost full rosters. Can't speak for the 350.

However, the key here is training. With the new 787 deliveries, the training department allegedly was unable to deliver enough courses to get enough pilots on line to cover this. So the idea of then chopping further 787 pilots would be nothing but damaging to the business.

I can't argue a case for the, albeit tiny, number of pilots yet to complete training. However, I'd guess its just for legal simplicity.

wiggy

11th Aug 2020, 10:47

Which then raises the contentious issue of training some new joiners from scratch onto the type whilst potentially dumping some 777 pilots/those with previous 787 rating...

clvf88

11th Aug 2020, 21:32

Wiggy, that was what I was referring to in my last sentence above. It is contentious - but then again, what about the whole process isn't.

8029848s

12th Aug 2020, 10:25

BALPA have raised the issue with Flt Ops and awaiting a reply....problem as ever is Flt Ops Management are not the quickest, or smartest.

It cost more in the short term to train the new guys and so makes no sense against BAs mantra of wanting to save money....

Walnut

12th Aug 2020, 11:54

Could the problem be a legal one, as I understand it a company has to give 45 days notice if it wishes to dismiss staff If these people were either not employed when BA started the process or had just been given a contract with no break clause at that point, there is a conundrum

PC767

12th Aug 2020, 11:55

IAG do not wish to save money, half the cabin crew are getting a pay rise! They want to cut T&Cs, union representation, contractual rights and obligations and the remaining legacy staff. If it was about saving money and the business a large proportion of post 2010 contracts have a lay off clause without pay included. At the drop of a hat millions could have been saved. This is about profits which equal better dividends (as demanded) and leadership bonuses,

Bergerie1

12th Aug 2020, 12:08

PC767, It is about survival, both in the short term and the long term.

wiggy

12th Aug 2020, 12:19

PC767

Did you look at loads, number of flights, especially on the North Atlantic, and the number of aircraft parked up at LHR and elsewhere before forming that opinion?

Given the antics threatened by UNITE I’d suggest keeping the some of the cabin crew sweet was probably a smart move.

8029848s

12th Aug 2020, 12:22

Lawyer....possibly. If their contracts stipulate A350 they will be wary of braeaking it. That said lawyer only ever offer the most conservative advice. It is up to managers to apply common sense....or not. A previous Flt Ops management team would of seen common sense and understand the costings.

monkey.tennis

12th Aug 2020, 14:12

until you have served 2 years at a company you have essentially no right to claim unfair dismissal, so BA could do what they like. Presumably the BA contract also has some form of probationary period, which could easily be deployed in this scenario.

Sick

12th Aug 2020, 18:39

City forming the opinion that the baseline scenario (2019 capacity minus 35%) is too optimistic.

autothrottle

12th Aug 2020, 22:45

Baseline for 2021 or for the rest of 2020?

AirUK

12th Aug 2020, 23:38

monkey.tennis

It’s unfair if you’ve been dismissed from an active fleet when there are others from a redundant fleet hanging on doing nothing useful for the company instead...

3Greens

13th Aug 2020, 07:44

no; what would be unfair (as you put it) is if we disregarded the Co tract we all signed on joining. Why should someone who’s done 30years be made redundant because someone who’s been here 5 minutes is on a more active fleet.?
If you want to see what unfair looks like, join Wizz or Emirates where you can enjoy a career of looking over your shoulder for the spectre of redundancy until the day you retire.
My wife is is HR, and she said at the start that if a business is trying to preserve immediate cash flow then you make those redundant to whom you don’t have to pay a severance. I.e those who have served less than 2 years & those who are on probabtion. No tribunals, no cash leaving the business right now. Long term is makes little sense to cut your cheapest people, but in a crisis long term thinking goes out the window.

Timmy Tomkins

13th Aug 2020, 10:28

PC767

Spot on and has been the point from Day Uno

wiggy

13th Aug 2020, 11:00

Sure they want to cut T&Cs, but to say that the moment BA/IAG don't need to save money simply displays a blind unwillingness to face the facts, facts that are available out there in the real world beyond theUNITE/BASSA bubble.

Next thing is we'll be hearing claims that BA only grounded the 744s to give themselves an excuse to cut T&Cs/reduce numbers in legacy fleets...oh hang on, we've had that one ...

PC767

13th Aug 2020, 12:56

No we haven’t had that one and nor shall we. Nobody from unite/bassa is suggesting that things are rosy, the current situation is dire and required decisive action, in March. I read elsewhere that the A scale ground staff have agreed a solution to cut cost, on a temporary basis. Unite/bassa are requesting temporary solutions and an agreement to when and how staff loses now can be restored over time, later on. While elements of the BALPA deal are harsh to some, overall the underlaying figure is an 8% reduction on salary, Negotiations for cabin crew have not yet commenced but I would be beyond flabbergasted if a similar deal was agreed. It won’t be.

3Greens

13th Aug 2020, 13:16

GKOC41

13th Aug 2020, 13:26

Likely a daft question but will the 747 crews get put onto the A320 assuming that's where the slots will be, or does a game of musical chairs start.

richardwpprn

13th Aug 2020, 13:38

My guess is if the Airbus narrow body fleet needs crews, they’ll get offered opportunities.

Ancient Observer

13th Aug 2020, 13:40

Given that BA have, as 3 greens put it, moved to implementation stage, I am most unclear why, and about what, BA would negotiate with BASSA.
I am also very unclear about who BASSA now represent..................given that they have represented no-one for the last few weeks.

richardwpprn

13th Aug 2020, 13:42

One or more of their members may have cancelled their subs.

wiggy

13th Aug 2020, 14:00

No we haven’t had that one and nor shall we. Nobody from unite/bassa is suggesting that things are rosy, the current situation is dire and required decisive action, in March.

And yet upthread, at the start of this particular exchange, your very first words were: "IAG do not wish to save money".

So do you think the situation is now improved, and that now there is no need for them to "save money" as you put it?

I'll happily agree with you that the company's attitude to all of it's staff, not just the legacy fleets, may well have been "sub-optimal", especially in the light of the fact that it didn't really reward the work staff put in over previous years that led to record profits, but the financial outlook now is looking even worse than it was in the spring - IMVHO you're misleading yourself if you suddenly think there's now no need to save money....

autothrottle

13th Aug 2020, 19:49

PC, are you saying that BA are now working with BASSA/Unite on reemploying those CC that took VR or who were CR? Are Unite saying that the changes to contracts are likely to be temporary and when traffic recovers, they will revert back to old ‘legacy’ contracts?

Whitemonk Returns

13th Aug 2020, 20:47

It's far beyond that stage, CC long haul who were made redundant were last week 'selected' to rejoin on the new mixed fleet contract. Lucky them, lower pay and totally screws up their childcare.

3Greens

13th Aug 2020, 22:15

i don’t think “childcare” features too prominently when trying to save a business. As harsh as it sounds, it’s not a housewives club.

TURIN

13th Aug 2020, 23:08

Have I misunderstood? BA Have moved to the implementation stage because bassa&UNITE refused to engage. There is to be no further negotiations. BA have set out their proposals on ONE and offers of employment have been sent out to those crew who didn’t take VR and weren’t made CR. Are you now saying you think BA are going to sit and negotiate after 5months of waiting?

Unite have engaged with BA over the last 4 weeks on behalf of engineering and secured a reasonable solution which is many times better than the original BA proposal. The CR notices have been put on hold pending the results from a ballot currently taking place. Basically a 5% cut in basic pay for two years and a reduction of 3 days annual leave to mitigate CR.

So, yes, after many months of banging heads and poor relations between TU and management, it seems we have an accord.

autothrottle

14th Aug 2020, 06:55

So not on the new contracts? Old contracts reinstated but with a 5% pay cut with loss of 3 days A/L? No 20% pay cuts or 40% for CSD’s? What a mess.

wiggy

14th Aug 2020, 07:08

PC, are you saying that BA are now working with BASSA/Unite on reemploying those CC that took VR

Be interesting to know - I'm not hearing that suggested yet from my CC contacts...I am however hearing that their whole VR admin process seems to be somewhat struggling at the moment due to, amongst other things poor/slow/non existent provision of legal advice. As a result whilst many expressed an intent to leave ("pressed the button" in their parlance) I'm not sure how many CC can have been deemed to have actually left the company...

I'm now picking up talk/?rumour of significant periods of unpaid leave being on offer to CC but whether that is with a view to ultimately returning to some iteration of old style T&Cs, or they'd come back on "new fleet rules" seems to be an unknown as far as I can tell.

Glad to hear TURINs news....

GS-Alpha

14th Aug 2020, 07:49

So not on the new contracts? Old contracts reinstated but with a 5% pay cut with loss of 3 days A/L? No 20% pay cuts or 40% for CSD’s? What a mess.
I have not yet come across any CSDs who work in engineering ;o)

stormin norman

14th Aug 2020, 08:49

TURIN

The amount of qualified/ experienced licenced Engineers that have left the industry recently is alarming . Its last group of people you want walking out of the door.

bex88

14th Aug 2020, 09:04

The cabin crew deal seems done and dusted. My crew yesterday were all ex mixed fleet. They were very happy to have a job, they were happy with the contract and had no interest in any IA. Sure it could be better but they seem fare more balanced.

Yesterday the place allocation was published. Long story short. FO 320 = loads of places at LHR, moderate vacancy Cap 320 LHR. Vacancies on 787,350 both status and 777 captain only. No 380 places.

LGW displaced pilots would be first in line to sweep up the airbus positions.

autothrottle

14th Aug 2020, 09:23

I have not yet come across any CSDs who work in engineering ;o)

obviously I was referring to the Cabin Crew getting something off the back of a renegotiation with engineers. Whichever way you look at it, it’s a shambles.

Ancient Observer

14th Aug 2020, 12:48

Turin was referring to Engineering.

BASSA have not engaged, so the omni shambles of VR and CR continues. Not aided by BASSA.

Have BA got any planes to run? One wonders................

TURIN

14th Aug 2020, 16:08

The amount of qualified/ experienced licenced Engineers that have left the industry recently is alarming . Its last group of people you want walking out of the door.

When you look at the demographic, it was a very real risk. Many of the over 55s I spoke to were ready to call it a day, draw the pension and take their chances rather than sign the new OCG contract, especially with the added 'pre nuptual agreement' to discourage any arbitration claims later.

Best of luck to all those still with an uncertain future.

PC767

15th Aug 2020, 08:51

The cabin crew deal seems done and dusted. My crew yesterday were all ex mixed fleet. They were very happy to have a job, they were happy with the contract and had no interest in any IA. Sure it could be better but they seem fare more balanced..

MF crew haven’t had their contracts terminated and been presented with a devastating and permanent proposal. In fact MF have a pay rise and CSM less responsibilities as a result of the changes. CSMs no longer have teams to manage Andy administration responsibilities. Of course they seem happy. The issue is UNiTE negotiating for both MF and legacy is a conflict of interests. Former MF crew are the future growth, former legacy crew are in decline.

RoyHudd

15th Aug 2020, 09:06

Could someone qualified please enlighten us as to the cabin crew deal at BA with simple examples of old and new basic pay scales, along with allowances and agreed future terms?

autothrottle

15th Aug 2020, 20:09

Roy, I’m not sure you’ll get any takers on that one.

PC767

15th Aug 2020, 22:47

MF cabin crew no new deal per se, reasonable changes to contract. They do not have to agree to anything.
MF CSMs new agreement and contract as they move from A scale managers to cabin crew scales. No longer have teams to manage on the ground.

New proposal equals pay rise for MF.

Legacy CSDs, CSLs, Pursers and main crew have been given notice of termination of contract. Now on 90 days notice. Negotiations with unions current focused on mitigating compulsory redundancies and presenting options to retained crew to allow those with a CR notice to remain employed.

The dire proposal has yet to be subject to negotiation. Agreement has been reached that the new contract will have a 4 week trial period as per the Employment Rights Act 1996 during which crew can reject the employment as unsuitable and claim CR but no PILON.

No temporary measures, for whatever length of time, are being considered by BA.

bex88

16th Aug 2020, 08:05

Efforts would be better spent trying to get the government to understand that there will be no aviation industry left unless they stop putting barriers in our way. Right now I would take the job because I can see a very real possibility of a 100% pay cut thanks to Bojo and Co

Bergerie1

16th Aug 2020, 08:37

Bex,

I agree, all the sectors of the aviation industry are a strategic asset to the UK. Bojo and Co do not seem to realise that. Whereas France takes an opposite view. I wish the UK government would so something similar.

https://www.ainonline.com/aviation-news/aerospace/2020-06-09/france-unveils-eu15-billion-aid-package-aviation-industry

FlipFlapFlop

16th Aug 2020, 09:19

Absolutely Bex and Bergerie. The biggest threat lies within. Boris is desperate to build up a portfolio of “good deeds” he can use to offset all the atrocious decisions made to date that have cost thousands of lives. He needs to be seen doing the “right thing” in the eyes of COVID paranoid public. He could not care less at this juncture about aviation as he is demonstrating admirably.

RJ100

19th Aug 2020, 11:48

BA Cityflyer pilots have just voted to decimate terms and conditions to save fewer than 10 jobs! Turkeys voting for Christmas. Everything that we’ve spent the last 10+ years fighting for gone.

cheesycol

19th Aug 2020, 12:52

Care to expand? What are the changes?

stormin norman

19th Aug 2020, 13:03

There will be no Aviation jobs soon, unless this Government get their act together.

RJ100

19th Aug 2020, 13:33

- Reduction of rest down route to 11hours.
- Airport Hotels - also loss of breakfast provision.
- Trump days off reduced back to 4 per year.

- Extra loyalty week leave (after 5 years) gone for new joiners, those who already have it reduced from 5 to 3 days. Those who’ve yet to qualify for it now only get 1 Day for each year over 5 years until year year 8 when you get the full 3 days. (30 days with a max of 33)

- Leave periods realigned 5 months Summer and 7 months Winter.
- Disruption payments gone and no right to refuse changes less than 3 hours.
- Change to Standby duties now called reserve. If not changed the night before automatically becomes a 07:30-19:30 standby. If the duty starts prior to 08:00 then only 10 hours notice required!
- Protection around start and finish time of Leave days and trump days removed.
- Changes to variable pay and holiday pay.
Holiday pay now only 20 days per year at £14.90 a day. Variable pay £2.49 an hour away from base.

oh oh but we get 1 extra day off a month.

sunnychase

19th Aug 2020, 16:49

What a joke. Quite simply Ts and Cs should not be destroyed like RJ100 has quoted. Those items will never be recovered (we know how BA/Cityflyer management behave). It should be LIFO for those who unfortunately have just joined, the rest should not be taking permanent contractual changes like the ones quoted above. What a disgrace.

GKOC41

19th Aug 2020, 17:17

RJ
Min rest away from base is 11hrs under EASA same as reserve the old available for those with long enough memories.
Most Hotels don't do room only rates not sure why Airlines go after this mind you if your heading to a Holiday Inn then...
Its crap time all round

macdo

19th Aug 2020, 18:18

Just a minor correction. Most hotac can be booked Room Only. I did 21 years international hotac and no breakfast was totally written into our t&c's .Rarely got a breakfast, usually in an ad hoc booking. In the Uk, this is usually justified with the explanation that you are paid duty pay down route to pay for food, so HMRC will look at taxing duty pay if you get free brekkie. Which is true, because they did!

A rotten reduction in T&C's. Typical mean spirited airline management tactic.

Jonty

19th Aug 2020, 18:29

I seem to remember that sometimes TCX paid more for the room just so it’s crews didn’t get breakfast included. But then we had “that” sort of management.

DC10RealMan

19th Aug 2020, 18:54

Johnson was quoted as saying "*** business" do you really think that he cares for the aviation industry and your jobs. He couldn't care less and Prime Minister Cummings even less.

Out Of Trim

19th Aug 2020, 21:40

Unfortunately, I think you are indeed correct! It is now too late for many of us already...

I'm sure we will remember this; when the UK aviation industry has failed and we are casting our votes at the next General Election!

macdo

19th Aug 2020, 22:27

LoL, I can't see that Jezza and his mates would have been out there throwing money towards the aviation sector. More likely to see it as a covid dividend if they took all the contrails out of the sky. They are all useless, the UK has elected mediocre politicians for 2 generations and we are seeing the results.

ZFT

19th Aug 2020, 23:31

Calling them mediocre is far too generous.

Busdriver01

20th Aug 2020, 10:44

Solid info that the bottom 340 ish (less any 787/350 pilots) have just received their CR notice. A dark day for aviation.

HEJT2015

20th Aug 2020, 11:30

You would be correct, we have. A very dark day.

Max Angle

20th Aug 2020, 11:47

Unfortunately they are both mediocre AND inexperienced which, just as in aviation, is a bad combination.

blimey

20th Aug 2020, 12:37

Solid info that the bottom 340 ish (less any 787/350 pilots) have just received their CR notice.

They would have been better taking VR rather than being strung along with the promise of VR/PT saving jobs. So questions need asking:

Did BALPA know before VR closed on those who'd end up with only a month's pay, that this amount of CR was almost certain to happen?
Did BALPA know before VR closed that those taking it could still join the PRP?
And, was CR 0 possible at the right price to BA but an unpalatable one to the BACC?

Best wishes to those affected.

Northern Monkey

20th Aug 2020, 12:46

I’m really not sure how much clearer JM could have been. Zero CR was never an option. Not sure what else he can say to convince people?

Thoughts are with everyone receiving the awful news today.

blimey

20th Aug 2020, 12:52

was CR 0 possible at the right price to BA but an unpalatable one to the BACC?
I’m really not sure how much clearer JM could have been. Zero CR was never an option. Not sure what else he can say to convince people?

Everything has a price in business.

cityflyer123

20th Aug 2020, 14:13

With regard to the gatwick pilots, does anyone know their future yet? Has the bid been forgotten or are they all swimming?

TURIN

20th Aug 2020, 22:27

What a balls up i'm hearing about.
People being called at home to be told they are being made redundant only to be called the next day to be told there's been an error we want you back.

Unbelievable!

JulietSierra6

21st Aug 2020, 05:19

To clarify, Pilots?

wiggy

21st Aug 2020, 05:37

Given when the pilot CRs were announced relative to the timing of TURINs post I doubt it's pilots..

Lordflasheart

21st Aug 2020, 08:42

Probably this lot ......

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/12459930/british-airways-workers-strikes/

Or this lot ?

https://www.independent.co.uk/travel/news-and-advice/british-airways-ba-unite-union-industrial-action-redundancies-pilots-cabin-crew-a9679336.html

...

TURIN

21st Aug 2020, 09:20

I was refering to the Licenced Engineers, Techs, Mechs and Maintenance workers who have been totally shafted over the last few days. LGW and LHR.

From what I'm hearing there is going to be very little left at LGW after this.

wiggy

21st Aug 2020, 09:39

Good luck TURIN, sounds like you all need it.

In other news it looks like the wheels have come off the BALPA BA company council overnight.

Atlantic Explorer

21st Aug 2020, 09:53

Pray tell!

stormin norman

21st Aug 2020, 09:54

Now is the time for all the unions to be on the same wavelength at BA, but as usual their not even in the same room.

Anybody even thinking of booking will think twice with the threat of strikes on the horizon.

autothrottle

21st Aug 2020, 10:00

Industrial suicide by Unite.Good old Len, the ship is sinking so let’s blow a massive hole in the side. You’re right, who will book anything now. I know I won’t.

A real sh*t sandwich for most. Stuck between Unite on one side and Walsh the other.

PC767

21st Aug 2020, 11:06

indeed it is a sh#t sandwich and all the proud creation of Mr Walsh (a CEO taking his golden handshake and not perturbed at the carnage he leaves behind, as it is for the chairman and his €4 million ‘VR’). This could have been handled very differently without kicking the wasps nest within industrial relations. The issue now is that the majority of BA staff having endured a highly emotional roller coaster, are being presented with contracts or proposals which are unaffordable and not worth having. For my part, the current proposal I have from BA will not be workable or affordable. I hope a compromise can be found or I shall be off with a constructive dismissal claim in hand. The majority of BA staff currently have nothing to gain by helping keep BA solvent, not even future payback. So when, if, 2019 levels of business and profitability return in 2023/2024 as indicated by Walsh, most staff will remain on covid crisis 2020 pay and conditions. Nothing to gain, nothing to lose.

Icanseeclearly

21st Aug 2020, 11:52

PC767.

You are correct in saying this has been a horrendous time for all of us within BA but it is a very real crisis, just driving round to TBA or TBC and seeing the sheer number of aircraft all buttoned up at both the engineering site and the south side is astounding.

You then claim current staff have nothing to gain from keeping BA solvent and finish your post by claiming there is nothing to lose... We have everything to lose, should, heaven forbid, BA go under we all lose our jobs it’s as simple as that so the talk of strikes and removal of slots is just not what we need right now, We need to try and Create confidence in our customers, no customers means no jobs.

i am not defending the management their approach to this has been underhand and appalling but in my mind there will be a round 2 and UNiTE are asking us to shoot ourselves in the foot, they need to tone down their aggression before it’s too late.

777aviator

21st Aug 2020, 12:43

I guess a critical temperature has been reached as Balpa has just spontaneously combusted.....- WTAF as the kids might ask....

PC767

21st Aug 2020, 13:17

The saddest part for me is that I agree with you I need principle that slot removal and strike action is the last thing the company need. Many of us, like yourself, are passionate about our commercial alma mater and wish to see it continue and thrive when this crisis is over. But no so passionate that we are willing to lose of homes, holidays and lifestyles and more to keep her going. I’m not prepared to sell my family home and downsize, disrupting my children for a PERMANENT contract change which will ultimately only financially benefit shareholders and senior management, who by gift of the company are also shareholders.

Being reasonable and talking to Cruz et al hasn’t helped BALPA. I hear BA are reneging or altering the settlement agreement for those taking VR and that the chair of the BACC has resigned. Other reps suspended.

The only point of consideration is whether Walsh and his cronies actually want to push BA to a devastating strike, bringing the company down into administration and being able to restart with a totally clean sheet of t&cs for all. Doing so isn’t hardly disruptive to a business which does not have any current business. The dangerous downside could be a government re-nationalization of BA as an important British infrastructure. Unless Walsh has already agreed terms with Boris & Co.

wiggy

21st Aug 2020, 13:50

I hear BA are reneging or altering the settlement agreement for those taking VR and that the chair of the BACC has resigned. Other reps suspended.

I have not heard anything, rumour or otherwise, about any VR settlements being changed...

But OTOH, yes, the BACC chair resigned earlier this PM, and yes, several reps were suspended earlier in the day or last night. I'm not privy to the exact circumstances..I'm obviously not in the right Whatsapp group..

GS-Alpha

21st Aug 2020, 13:53

I am reminded of the demise of the coal industry when I hear of people demanding temporary change, and wanting to strike at the moment. It is pure insanity.

The Moo

21st Aug 2020, 14:09

I love this. Balpa has been a management boys club for years. It just serves the few at the top. I know many a BA pilot that hate Bapla and everything about it but stay in for the personal protections.Look at the way it handled its strike and last internal disagreements. I hope the whole house of cards comes tumbling down.

Walnut

21st Aug 2020, 14:20

A source tells me several senior BACC reps have been having behind the bike shed chats with the other side
High Treason

wiggy

21st Aug 2020, 14:37

From what I'm now hearing I'm not sure it would be fair to describe what possibly went on as "High Treason" but the real problem seems to be some on the BACC and the NEC seem to want to label it as such for reasons I can't begin to fathom...:oh:.

What I do know is that two or three of the most experienced long term BACC Reps have benched, hardly a smart move in the current circumstances..

Icanseeclearly

21st Aug 2020, 14:52

PC767

None of us want to accept permanent contract changes, but I have to disagree with you with regards Slot removal and strike action, bringing down the company and getting it into administration would be an unmitigated disaster for all of us, job losses would increase and any Ts&Cs would be far worse than what is currently on the table.

We are all angry but we need cool heads and UNITE are playing with all our jobs not just those they represent, consumer confidence is at an all time low because of COVID and an incompetent UK government and that threat means what little business we have (about 250 flights today) will drift off to Easyjet etc and the spiral continues until the doors are shut. At that point it’s not a permanently changed contract but it’s no contract at all.

Sorry but now is not the time to threaten strike action or round 2 will be far worse than anyone is expecting.

The Moo

21st Aug 2020, 15:35

Dear all,

After careful consideration overnight, I have decided to resign as Chairman of the BACC with immediate effect. I accepted the role at a hugely difficult time when everyone else was looking at their feet and have tried my best to steer a collaborative path despite the underlying tribalism and politics on the CC. Having served on two other CCs, I simply cannot comprehend the level of selfishness and politics on display within this council, undoubtedly in cahoots with members of the NEC, to the point where the events of the last week and settling old scores and personal rivalries are put ahead of focussing on the needs of the members at this critical juncture. Literally on the day we have members made CR from BA for the first time ever, when we should be focussed on them, for internal politics to be seen to take over is grotesque beyond belief.

We are in the midst of the greatest crisis facing our members and association ever and as I have repeatedly said to the CC throughout this process, now is the time to put personal agendas aside and focus on the job at hand. Sadly, this CC is incapable of doing so and I simply cannot continue to be associated with it. For my own sanity and health, remaining chairman of this dysfunctional council, trying to do the impossible and 'do the right thing' ahead of politics is no longer sustainable. Personally, I have never felt so low as I do right now and despite significant wobbles throughout the last few months I have tried to soldier on. I simply can't do it any longer.

Attached is the decision paper I wrote up urging an election, I strongly recommend this is actioned as soon as possible, and for democratic integrity, I demand that the three suspended reps are unsuspended and allowed to stand in election (should they even want to after all this). Otherwise, by excluding them from any election, the association leaves itself open to accusations that this entire charade is timed with that very objective in mind. I note that suspension is not an automatic requirement for an investigation as other complaints have not led to suspension. I understand that some of my colleagues hold grievances and it is right that they can raise them, but democratic accountability is best served at the ballot box and they must make their case with those that truly matter, the members, rather than relying on manoeuvres. I note that some individuals amongst the complainants that were against my intention to delay the election back in April to focus on tackling Covid, have now changed stance completely and want an election delayed to give priority to their complaint.

Regarding the complaint itself, I was approached by the complainants back in June as they wanted to force a vote of no confidence in the three reps. As everyone will appreciate, it was a critical time with huge stakes and, along with our National Officer, so I said 'No, now is not the time for politics - concentrate on the job at hand please.' However, I did have a chat with Nick Brown at the time and accepted his apology for anything that I might have felt put out by (which I didn't) and so moved on and focussed on the real work. The complainants were not happy with this and so it has been bubbling away, which I've tried to keep a lid on in order to keep the show on the rather bumpy road. Now that the reps involved have gone direct to the NEC to try and force things due to my refusal to facilitate and get drawn into politics whilst the house is burning down around us, I cannot see a credible way for me to continue in role. Whilst I appreciate that we all have different views, styles and principles and whilst I have been accused by one of the complainants of 'abdication of responsibility' as a result of my stance and not allowing their thirst for a vote of no confidence to distract us, I maintain that now is absolutely not the time for this politics and therefore, I am left with no choice but to resign. As this now leaves the BACC with no chairman, and the one remaining Vice Chair, the P&P chairman (during the biggest P&P project in a generation) and the scheduling chairman all suspended from rep duties, I once again urge a snap election to populate what was already a zombie parliament but has now moved beyond life support. This CC has no credibility and cannot limp on any longer.

I want to publicly thank those reps that have put their heart and soul into recent months and that despite all the underlying issues, 'carried on regardless'. My decision is with a heavy heart because I believe we need strong representation right now more than ever as things will move on at pace, I'm sure. I remain available as a sounding board if the union believes it will help the members and couldn't in good conscience step away totally right now, but I cannot see any way I can stay as chairman under these conditions.

Regards,

slast

21st Aug 2020, 15:56

For the benefit of those of us who are no longer active BA pilots (and hence no access to company forums) but have friends and relatives who are, is anyone able to give a concise outline of what this is about? I can understand there has been a lot of strong feelings about what changes in T&Cs and employment numbers, but what has triggered this crisis?

hec7or

21st Aug 2020, 19:53

If I understand this correctly, BACC representatives may only consult/talk/converse with managers by pre-arranging a meeting and recording the minutes.

brilliant. I'm sure that works.

Walnut

21st Aug 2020, 21:04

Wiggy judging from the last two posts my High Treason charge is not misplaced
The only way this can be resolved is for the NEC to dissolve the BACC and take charge
themselves. Clearly there are vast numbers of displaced L/H pilots who feel lost,
but rules have to be followed, the whole airline will disappear down a vast black hole
unless you all work together

Juan Tugoh

21st Aug 2020, 21:49

I see that people are happy to post the names of those suspended but those who made the complaint are still hiding behind the veil of anonymity. This is just plain cowardice.

As for suspending the BACC and the NEC taking over within BA, it would kill BALPA. No one would follow reps from another company foisted upon them.

Shaman

22nd Aug 2020, 04:22

hec7or

"Off the record" conversations take place in all industries. They help to clear the air at a senior level and frequently lead to issues being resolved.

wiggy

22nd Aug 2020, 06:06

Wiggy judging from the last two posts my High Treason charge is not misplaced

Yes it is...

From what I've heard the problem was supposedly "off the record" conversation of the type referred to in other posts such as hec7or's and Shaman's. It can just as easily described as the reality of negotiation.

The only way this can be resolved is for the NEC to dissolve the BACC and take charge themselves.

You are having a laugh aren't you?

Trust me, given the way the NEC appear to have handled this many of the BALPA members at BA are in absolutely no mood this AM to have the NEC come stomping in and take charge.....

Instead there is a widespread feeling that some of the ex-BACC Reps who were elevated to the NEC in the last year or two have seen an opportunity to settle old scores.

Once they had lodged a complaint it seems the NEC felt obliged by the rulebook to suspend two/three of the BACCs most effective, knowledgable and highly regarded reps...just at the time there might be another S188 letter coming down the tracks.

As a result I'm sure you'll now understand that any attempt at "Direct Rule" by the NEC (if such a thing were possible) would finish BALPA at BA stone dead, in minutes..and there go a lot of membership subscriptions...and there goes BALPA..or at least it's shiny offices.

BA management, who obviously don't hold the rule book in as high regard as the NEC,must be loving this.:rolleyes:

king surf

22nd Aug 2020, 07:56

Hi wonder what those" settle old scores are" ?
Seems like a lot of growing up is needed by some of the reps.

wiggy

22nd Aug 2020, 08:06

Wouldn't disagree on that particular point.......

For years, even to this non rep, it appeared that some of the reps were capable of getting into an argument with themselves in a locked room....

NoelEvans

22nd Aug 2020, 10:34

I might be rejoining BALPA!

In the past I have been a rep in two large airlines. I have also resigned from BALPA twice over the lack of interest in matters concerning non-BA pilots (and on both occasions, increased my pension contributions by the equivalent of my subs). It looks like time to consider rejoining.

(As I'm sure is quite clear, I am not a BA pilot.)

Walnut

22nd Aug 2020, 11:17

Why has the long explanation of the complainants views been removed, such censorship does not help matters
My suggestion that the only way to resolve this pickle quickly is for the BACC chairman to reconsider his resignation with all sacked members reinstated, with a supervision of the 4 BA NEC members to arbitrate and crucially the Gen Sec to get involved.
As head of the organisation he seems to be invisible
A truly democratic election would take months to organise and run

Fursty Ferret

22nd Aug 2020, 12:55

As head of the organisation he seems to be invisible

Peter Principle, innit?

Uplinker

22nd Aug 2020, 13:29

My 2p, and I am not BA, nor privy to the negotiations:

Covid19 is an unprecedented global situation. Now is NOT the time for the management to be taking advantage. Nor is it the time for infighting, settling old scores, or for crew to threaten strike action.

The most important thing is to get the wheels of the airline turning again, and this will require everyone's cooperation.

Could it not be agreed that as many BA staff as possible return to work under a "lifeboat" system of temporary reduced pay, part time rosters and skeleton Ts & Cs, (same for all, including management), on the express understanding by both sides that this will only be for, say, a year until green shoots start appearing. After this period, talks and negotiations will resume to restore pay and Ts & Cs and take the business forward, and nothing signed, accepted or implied now will be valid or enforceable after the "lifeboat" period.

Would that be feasible? It could get many back to work, earning at least something, with their ratings and SEP etc. current, and hopefully the business will survive.

richardwpprn

22nd Aug 2020, 13:43

Uplinker

That is far too sensible when the people at the top of the business want to cut costs now for two layers of jam tomorrow.

wiggy

22nd Aug 2020, 13:56

Uplinker

Short answer is - No it couldn't be agreed...

That's basically the sort of thing I think the reasonable Unions, cognisant of the world situation, suggested to BA management right at the start of all this and I think would have been prepared to sign off on.

For the reason richardwpprn stated those at the top wanted much more.

Count Niemantznarr

23rd Aug 2020, 07:38

Lordflasheart

Perhaps you might like to inform readers here of exactly what the BA pilots strike was all about in September last year, which caused the company to issue a profit warning? Seemed rather bolshy and petulant behaviour not even worthy of Len McCluskey.

Even more mysterious is what settled the dispute? Nobody seems to know. Hardly covered yourselves in glory.

So I wouldn’t be too critical of other employees in BA who do a have genuine reason for industrial action, rather than simply tossing their toys out of the pram.

FlipFlapFlop

23rd Aug 2020, 09:13

Not a very helpful comment considering you clearly know the answer. In defence the actual existence of the company along with all jobs was not an issue then, following a record profit year following which most of it was chucked at shareholders and top management.

Count Niemantznarr

23rd Aug 2020, 09:32

No not very “helpful”, and about as helpful as many BA flight crew were during the cabin crew dispute who acted as strikebreakers.......feeding the crocodile in the hope it would eat them last.

Some BA pilots were highly critical of BALPA last year and the handling of their dispute. Although there was a settlement of sorts, many BA Flight Crew considered it “unfinished business”.

I was just wondering when this industrial action is likely to start up again?

Icanseeclearly

23rd Aug 2020, 10:27

Count.

Whatever the rights and wrongs of numerous strikes in the past (don’t forget the mixed fleet strike a couple of years ago) now is just not the time to be threatening a strike.

This is very very real, I suggest driving around to TBA / TBC and just seeing the sheer number of aircraft sitting idle, 747 fleet has gone just like that, the word on the street is only 8 380s are coming back and a significant proportion of the 777s are to be stood down for a while. There are 16 A321s sitting in the ground at Glasgow, the list is endless. All airlines are scrambling about for any fares to reduce the enormous losses and any threats from UNITE with regards strikes will undermine what little confidence remains, no passengers = no money = no jobs.

BA have behaved outrageously, Walsh and Cruz have twisted this situation to achieve what they have wanted for years and for that they should hang their heads in shame but UNITE have been no better, burying their heads in the sand and not talking to the company, a political campaign to remove slots (and therefore even more jobs) and now threatening a strike, akin to shooting your sled in the foot.

i have survived round 1, but there will be a round 2, will I survive that? What about a round 3 or round 4? UNITE are playing a dangerous game and need to tone it down for all our sakes or there may just be no jobs at all.

777JRM

23rd Aug 2020, 12:15

PC767

You forgot about the future pensions of many staff.
To avoid going into the PPF, BA/IAG has to remain solvent.

wiggy

23rd Aug 2020, 12:28

Count Niemantznarr

Some were indeed critical but even so there's absolutely zero appetite for that particular industrial action starting up again.

Ancient Observer

23rd Aug 2020, 13:24

777 has a very good point.
NAPS alone has a fund value of about UKP 20 Billion.

The whole of IAG is only worth UKP 3.8 billion. BA is still a pension fund with a little airline attached.

The deficit is about UKP 3 Billion.

BA were supposed to pay in 450m per annum for at least 3 years. Where is that coming from??

Most investments by Pension funds are not in a good place right now.

So let's all have a strike, and pass on Slots to other airlines, and be paid our pensions from the PPF..

Great idea.

TURIN

23rd Aug 2020, 15:09

777JRM

There's a 3 month backlog for a CETV and it currently takes about 8 weeks to get a 'retirement pack' . Makes you wonder why.
There's an awful lot of over 55s looking at taking the money and legging it sharpish just to protect their pension. If the US market doesn't open before Christmas BA are screwed.

Ex Cargo Clown

23rd Aug 2020, 16:25

Lordflasheart

23rd Aug 2020, 18:33

...
Count Niemantznarr -

Originally Posted by Lordflasheart

Probably this lot ......

Greetings, Excellency,

Apologies if one caused any offence with those links, posted in the hope they might answer a couple of earlier questions. No criticism implied, intended (or dare one claim evident ?) in one's post, of any individual or group.

If link content should be the issue, one would recommend referring such matters to their respective Editors.

And one is awfully apologetic that one is quite unable to answer any of your direct or implied questions about the pilots' strike you refer to.

Respectful felicitations, Lord Flasheart.

BTW - One thought Your Excellency had retired to the country years ago. Does one detect a teenzy-weenzy residual chip on the noble shoulder ?
...

Walnut

23rd Aug 2020, 18:55

There seems to be a huge appetite by some to bring BA down. In three weeks, 15/9 I believe,. there is to be a rights issue of €2.75B which Qatar have already pledged to take up their 25% share. If things look bad then lots of the remaining 75% will be left with the underwriters. They will unload them and I can easily see 24% of them being bought by Qatar, 49% is the Max shareholdering they can hold.
This stake could have a profound effect on IAGs future
Will they then seek to offload NAPS into the PPS, as I understand it the PPS would require BA to make good the deficit, unless BA declare bankruptcy, unlikely I feel after the rights issue. So great uncertainty I believe.

M.Mouse

23rd Aug 2020, 19:25

Not sure the NAPS figures are even that good.

Mostly because BA took their "pension holiday".

I suggest you read up on pension law before making incorrect assertions.

stormin norman

23rd Aug 2020, 20:35

Walnut

Great uncertainty but pension funds run over many decades,so although a short term problem a return to profit in a few years should see the NAPS fund back on track.

NoelEvans

23rd Aug 2020, 23:13

I am a 'pensioner' in a pension fund that was under BA's wing once. The BRAL Pension Scheme. We have just had our pension payments cut by 35%. Something worth thinking about. Good night. Sleep happily.

Survival Cot

24th Aug 2020, 05:46

Noel, very sad to hear this situation. Thanks for sharing. I posted recently with concerns of the ill conceived CRS, in particular what happens if there was a further downturn and the view that there are a multitude of more worthy causes to focus on for those fortunate enough to continue working......a poignant example and I am sure more examples of hardship and individual difficulties will surface....as has been said, consciences particularly with regard to self interest in the wider context of hardship need squaring......

Lordflasheart

24th Aug 2020, 10:21

..Noel - Is that the pension fund that's now based in the Isle of Man - outside the jurisdiction of the UK Pension Protection Fund ?

Heart felt commiserations - Sounds like it got a touch of the maxwell.

wiggy

24th Aug 2020, 14:11

Not sure whether this should be here, since BA feature prominently or in UK politics..anyway:

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2020/aug/24/devastation-how-aviation-industrys-covid-crisis-is-hitting-towns-across-uk

Smooth Airperator

25th Aug 2020, 10:18

Is civil war brewing for BA pilots and union BALPA?https://www.headforpoints.com/2020/08/24/balpa-infighting/#commentsContent

stormin norman

25th Aug 2020, 10:38

If its correct, what chance of any deal in round 2 ?

FlipFlapFlop

25th Aug 2020, 12:49

Quite likely. Lots of issues but the core one is a fracture line 34 v 24. Main objective of any BA round Two will almost certainly be to eliminate 34. All depends on the willingness of legacy contracts holders to give up some of their seniority perks and salary. If the answer is no I suspect an awful lot more junior pilots will be paying for these with their jobs.

macdo

25th Aug 2020, 13:06

The article largely reflects the comments on the open BALPA message board. I hate to think what is being said on the BA only one. If the rumours are substantiated there are some awkward questions to be asked. My own long experience of working in a unionised airline was that the senior pilots were reluctant to sacrifice a red cent for the junior ones and a good CC was critical to persuade them to do so. The 24/34 issue was the un-intended by product of the retirement age changing along with the expectation that most pilots would retire close to their original planned ages. Anyone who took the time to speak to older pilots would have soon realised that most would cling on til they had to be carried out, particularly if they had the safety net of Loss of Licence and Loss of Income Insurance. During the past 10 years with a glut of decent jobs and rapid promotion the youngsters have been able to overlook the obvious unfairness of the system by virtue of their own rapid progression. We are all in a very new world now and a workforce split by terms and conditions are going to howl with rage if the perceive that the union is not working equally for all. Own goal for the BACC's and big Balpa.

Sick

25th Aug 2020, 13:30

Can a handful of subs from legacy BA pilots really sustain balpa HQ in the manner to which they have become accustomed? Having been on the receiving end of the BACC and balpa more than once,I do hope not.

Longtimer

25th Aug 2020, 17:30

This thread was started on the 28th of Apr and is titled:

IAG: BA restructuring may cost 12,000 jobs And today in the BBC NEWS American Airlines to cut 19,000 jobs as travel falls United last month said as many as 36,000 jobs were at risk.

Germany's Lufthansa has warned it may cut 22,000 positions
Link to the BBC Article: [url=https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53910936]https://www.bbc.com/news/business-53910936

It's all relative and not good news for our industry and it's workers.

777JRM

25th Aug 2020, 21:52

Let’s hope one of the 140 or so vaccines being developed is successful soon.

The Oxford one has run out of CV19 patients in the UK, so will do its Phase 3 testing in Brazil and S.Africa.
It has few side effects and promotes a strong immune response.
Apparently, Trump has ordered a load, to time with the election perhaps.

Then all we need are the world’s governments to stop trashing their economies.

B744IRE

26th Aug 2020, 07:16

Another UK airline tried to dump BALPA and formed another union. The airline just refused to recognise the new union despite 87% membership and a promise from Mr Blair PM that companies must recognise unions with a membership over 70%?...can’t remember the exact figure.

bex88

26th Aug 2020, 09:36

I hate to admit it but I did not totally disagree with JM’s comments about pay disparity. I was a little concerned by the “ludicrous salaries” quote but based that on my pay on PP34 as a P1. When I looked at year 24 on PP24 I was a bit surprised at the disparity and level of renumeration. What further reinforced this is junior 787 captains (Around 80-85%) have been in the airline for 23 years. Suddenly the argument starts to stack up. The BACC chairman also said the incremental pay system is not compatible with DC pensions and was designed in a era of final salary pension. This again is a very valid argument.

Whats the answer? Probably fixed pay levels, maybe a service bonus like at EJ. I don’t see anyone getting a pay rise out of this though and there is no joy in seeing anyone take a pay cut either. PP24/34 is not a issue but it becomes one unless junior pilots feel represented. There is a lot of anger from the SH RHS directed squarely at senior pilots. Be that right or wrong it’s how they feel. Yes they signed up to LIFO plus but on the flip side anyone Pre 2006 signed up to pay and retirement at 55 based on PP24. It is really up to the latter to look after the junior guys, if for no other reason than to try to protect their own interests by preventing a split between us.

Don’t bark at me about the above, it is not all my own views but a overall assessment of what I hear out on the line.

GS-Alpha

26th Aug 2020, 10:14

Much of what you say is true Bex. What I find sad about the situation is the salary envy from low down the payscales towards those high up the payscales, yet that exact same disparity existed when we were all starting out. We viewed it as, “Well my salary is pretty crap right now, but we’ll get there one day and then it will be great, and it will have all balanced out”. It was not something to envy, but something to look forward to. That is what I find difficult to comprehend. The current generation seem to be of the belief that now that pp24ers are finally starting to taste some jam, they should give it to their more junior colleagues. We have somehow been on the peanuts all this time, but we now do not deserve the jam. I totally acknowledge that I experienced a brief moment of jam before Covid pulled the rug out from underneath me, but I had been waiting over two decades to taste it.

MikeAlpha320

26th Aug 2020, 10:26

We've been on peanuts all this time... :}

ASRAAMTOO

26th Aug 2020, 10:42

From reading the last couple of pages it would seem that BA has suceeded in one of its main aims. It started with the demise of final salary pension for new joiners (perhaps even earlier with the demise of APS) and followed up with a 34 point pay scale. Taken together they have sucessfully created a divided workforce and now that the pressure is on, the pilot workforce is about to start fighting amongst themselves.

Indeed as evidenced in the posts further above the entire workforce (despite this being PPrune) are having a go at each other.

The BA management must be laughing their socks off.

Its time everyone was reminded that the common enemy is BA making an opportunistic grab at terms and conditions for its entire workforce. Don't get me wrong, I know its a HUGE crisis and it may be years before recent levels of profit return BUT does anyone seriously think that anything given up by those on better terms and conditions will be passed on to the rest? Its just a race to the bottom!

thetimesreader84

26th Aug 2020, 10:45

GS-Alpha

The problem is that as a PP3/34 SH FO, I’ll never see the “jam” that you will GS. Not in pay, not in pension, not in lifestyle.

We are / were working 900 hours a year on SH, LH mates were doing 6 trips per month, at the sticky end of a rostering system that gives nothing but dross to those at the bottom. And now redundancy on statutory minimums with the union having the attitude of “we asked, they said no... Gallic shrug”.

I actually don't begrudge you your jam, you’ve worked for it. But a bit of an acknowledgement from your senior colleagues that maybe they’ve had the best years out of this industry, and a bit of soul searching to see if there is anything they can do to level the playing field might help reduce the “current generation’s” desire to take from your pocket.

bex88

26th Aug 2020, 10:57

GS Alpha, I don’t think it’s envy as such. I think they perceive a injustice in the lack of support for them. Whether anything could have been done is debatable and probably doubtful. I have not heard one junior pilot wish to see their colleagues stripped of pay. I do however think when we had pay rises something could have been done to help those lower down. X % of not much is not much. Perhaps under these pay cuts more should have been done to protect the salaries of those at the bottom or those being made CR with retraining loans. Again we don’t know the details.

There is anger that 300 of their friends have been made redundant while those whose roles are redundant will either take their job or earn up to 119k to stay at home. I can see the arguments and I sit in the middle ground. I am not senior but I am not junior (in the company at least) I am content with my deal and do not wish others ill. I do however feel their anger when faced with colleague who talk about “round 2” and just shrug their shoulders with the “I did my time at the bottom quote” There is a danger I think of the pilot group being split, the union in civil war and the company doing anything it wants.

Take the Jam, just enjoy it so it supports others jobs.

GS-Alpha

26th Aug 2020, 12:06

It is all a moot point now anyway, as the CRS is knocking on my door, and I for one, would very much rather be flying.

PC767

26th Aug 2020, 12:34

it is a moot point. Further back in the thread, as I defended my CC pay, I was told quite forcefully that nobody deserves to be paid more for doing the same job just because they have been in position for longer. Pay scales, at least for the non- pilot community, are archaic. I don’t believe that but if I have to accept it so should you.

Survival Cot

27th Aug 2020, 06:42

I totally agree with “thetimesreader84”GS just actually describes the division. You wait over two decades for what you describe as “jam”, & the other group works over 3 decades for the “jam”. Starting at age 31 for PP24 equals to potentially over 10 years of “Jam” working to retirement, PP34 equates to zero years of “jam” to retirement, (joining at age 31).So no, the PP34 joining at over 31 can never aspire to the same, and therefore the argument that the PP24 guys use that “we’ve all been there to reach this position “ is simply mute. PP24 was designed in a bygone era with a compulsory retirement age of 55. It is an obsolete drain on modern resource and certainly does not represent the future, slowly diminishing in size.

Now we have a real hugely sensitive example of one group of colleagues with historical 3 separate types of contracts and huge salary disparities that have been amalgamated into one group as a result of restructuring.

One can assume from this example that any group with sub groups being treated with different terms and yet using the same skill set could be subject to focus and further amalgamation for restructuring efficiencies.

PP34, have nothing to lose, however PP24...........very different story, the latter group may be advised not to be quite so vocal......the price for the creation of this division in the first place may just be on the verge of being realised.

Pickled

27th Aug 2020, 07:03

This is a very long thread and I have lost count how many times the differing pay structures have been debated, are we up to 24 or 34 times now?

Again and again and again people choose to ignore the historical background of how pay, pensions and T&Cs evolved. There were never any easy answers, just a lot of damn hard work by reps to do their best in the circumstances.

bex88

27th Aug 2020, 08:11

Pickled: I think that is untrue. The vote to bring in PP34 and put all new pilots onto it was voted through to keep PP24 and to prevent bmi being set up as a lower cost subsidiary at LHR. The reality is a lower cost subsidiary was set up within. Regardless of PP24/34 the BALPA chairman summed it up very well. The current pay structure was devised in a time of retirement at 55 and defined benefit or final salary contributions. This very set up is detrimental to DC pensions. What’s changed? 2006 retirement age, closure of NAPS and the current situation.

Inadvertently the % pay awards has further highlighted this issue. Pay at the top has run away from that at the bottom. When you consider a very significant proportion of LH captains are on the top pay and will be for a good many years to come you can see the issue. The fleets will become static with nothing other than more pilots joining the top pay bracket.

Answer to this problem. Don’t drag others down from the top, but have those at the top pull the other up. That has not and will not happen. This was voted in by those up there. During the NAPS negotiations it was stated that BARP was a unacceptable pension scheme and not fit for purpose. The problem was it had been deemed fit for purpose for all those that were on it since it’s inception, just not fit for NAPS members.

Through all these pay changes and negotiations in the past 18 months we still have pilots who are not on BA pay, they do not receive flight pay either. Where has the support been for them? Why are white tails who paid for their own training on reduced salaries? Why are some bmi pilots not paid flight pay after all the negotiations that have been conducted on pay?

The above is fact rather than opinion but I have yet to hear a good defence of the current structure. One thing is for sure though, any change will not be a cause to celebrate for anyone. Nobody will see a pay rise in the short term or over the long term.

I feel very fortunate to have a job, I am content with the deal I have and I do not wish to see anyone stripped of their income. I would however like to see those who are on DC pensions receive a salary structure that is more beneficial to that arrangement.

The problem with all of this is most of us (me included) do not know what went on behind the scenes, what leverage and pressure was applied. It may well be despite the above that it was the best available option.

Wirbelsturm

27th Aug 2020, 08:16

Since time immemorial those joining a job have looked at those who are still doing the job just 30 years on and claimed pay disparity and the ubiquitous phrase 'they have had the best years of the job'.

Ironically those who are at the top of the tree said the exact same when they were at the bottom doing exactly the same grind probably for less pay. No one in the airline industry just 'appeared' at the top of the seniority scale. Everyone has a story to tell of how they got there and the hard times overcome to do so. Aircraft were older, less automation, nav aids more basic, approaches more difficult. No GPS, beacon to beacon, unreliable engines etc. etc. etc.

I can tell you that many at the top say of those at the bottom that they don't realise how easy they have it with modern aircraft, ATC and ground systems. It's a completely circular argument.

What I will say though is that those who have worked, waited, flown the dross for years and years to get to a position where remuneration and lifestyle is acceptable/good should be allowed to enjoy that position they have worked for without constant sniping. A position earned through years of work, possibly sacrifices through military time, certainly sacrifices on a family/personal front. PP34 vs PP24 wasn't created by those in receipt of the pay either, it was forced down through the EU and BA mandated a change with the new pay points. Much as the changes to the pension schemes were never 'back dated' future contracts were changed to reflect the new normal. Anyone joining post 2006 knew what contract they were agreeing to. If it angered you so much back then then why sign?

When you have put up with the SH lifestyle for the duration of the freeze, gained some seniority and control over your roster, moved to a fleet which gives you a work life balance that suits you then see if you want to 'level the playing field' for the advantage of those new to the company? It's the movement of pilots through the less popular fleets that keeps the whole system moving. The 10 year freeze is now well gone so the system will start to accelerate with respect to retirements.

As I say to my 2 older kids, just have some patience, your time in the sun will come.

All IMHO of course.

guy_incognito

27th Aug 2020, 09:05

As I say to my 2 older kids, just have some patience, your time in the sun will come.

I'm assuming that they're not in the airline business then, because absolutely nobody is going to have any "time in the sun" in this rotten industry. There's only one way that salaries and working conditions are going across the board. The covid fiasco has presented management teams across the industry with a golden opportunity to drive down pilot Ts&Cs, and they're not going to waste it. Anything lost now will never be regained in the future.

3Greens

27th Aug 2020, 10:05

bex88

could you just expand on your reasons for the introduction of the PP34 scale? If I recall correctly, PP34 came into play just after the financial crash of 2008, and formed part of ongoing permanent structural change demanded by BA to offset redundancies as per a S188 for 188 pilots in surplus.
The takeover of BMI didn’t occur for another 3 years, so how can the two be linked; as per your inference?
When the PP34 Scale was introduced Willie Walsh was CEO of BA.When we took over BMI we had formed IAG.
Perhaps your memory has muddled the timeline, or maybe it was before your time? I remember it well as we had a very clever and astute team on the BACC, Likes of O’Neil, judkins and bretherton. Oh what would we do for that team on the BACC again now....

Wirbelsturm

27th Aug 2020, 10:27

A great deal of contentious information seems to be coming from an unsigned 'electioneering' document doing the rounds pertaining to PP34/PP24.

One of our colleagues with a long history in finance has discredited the vast majority of information contained within said document but it doesn't stop some of the half truths coming through unfortunately.

Max Angle

27th Aug 2020, 10:30

PP34 came into play just after the financial crash of 2008,
That is not correct, it started in 2012 as part of the bmi integration.

M.Mouse

27th Aug 2020, 10:47

The vote to bring in PP34 and put all new pilots onto it was voted through to keep PP24 and to prevent bmi being set up as a lower cost subsidiary at LHR.

Simply not true. With the advent of the age discrimination legislation increasing the retirement age by 10 years BA would not countenance paying a PP24 salary to a pilot for an extra 10 years.

If I recall correctly PP22 - 24 represented a significant jump in salary when compared to earlier incremental rises. This came about to benefit the pilot's defined benefit pension which was based on the salary earned in the last few years.

I think the theory behind the PP34 scales was that individuals would only spend a relatively short period on the top scale, as was the case with PP24 and retirement at 55. Clearly someone already on PP24 when the retirement age changed hit something of a jackpot.

The introduction of PP34 scales took place at the time of other negotiations but the basics above are what actually drove the change.

It was ever thus that there is always a large amount of luck/bad luck involved in aviation careers.

wiggy

27th Aug 2020, 11:23

A great deal of contentious information seems to be coming from an unsigned 'electioneering' document doing the rounds pertaining to PP34/PP24.

^ This..PP24/34 it may be appear to be an open door to push out but there's no doubt somebody is electioneering (aka stirring things up).

My recollection of events ties in with those of 3Greens, Wirbelsturm, Max and M Mouse et. al.

bex88

27th Aug 2020, 11:42

PP34 came in with the bmi integration. All bmi on are PP34, some bmi are still on bmi pay as we all started on PP1. PP34 was part of the package to integrate bmi and therefore not have it standing as a “Trojan horse” or a low cost subsidiary at LHR. It was sold that the growth would come from the lower cost unit at the expense of the established BA unless a package of measures were bought in. Mainly PP34.

M.Mouse. True but it was forced through using the bmi threat. Voted on by PP24 to put all new joiners starting with bmi onto PP34. Fair enough and it’s hard to pretend I would not have done the same. It has however lead to where we are today.

slast

27th Aug 2020, 14:06

The crisis in the airline pilot profession is causing losses of careers which those who came into before the turn of the century could never have envisaged in their worst nightmares. If you think that the attitude of everyone “higher up” is “I’m all right Jack, pull up the ladder”, please be aware that some are not. I just heard from one of the organisers of www.pilotstogether.org (http://www.pilotstogether.org). They are senior pilots who have just set up a charity for pilots in ALL UK airlines.

My friend wrote “a group of us … were appalled at the way both BA and BALPA have deserted the guys at the bottom of our status list who’ve been made redundant ….. 270 people were given no redundancy money as they’d all worked less than 2 years; some of them even only got 1 months’ notice as they’d done less than 6 months. That’s just over £3000 when they have training loans of up to £100,000 to pay back to say nothing of mortgages.”
Although started in BA, it is not just a “help BA” organisation and seems to be eminently worthwhile and non-partisan. So if you are lucky enough to be one of the current or former pilots who still has a decently paid job or secure pension, please consider supporting it.

The Blu Riband

27th Aug 2020, 14:15

bex88

Very disingenuous.

Remember that during each pay negotiation, or change in t&c's, or any event affecting pilot numbers/recruitment or status (eg BMI integration) we have certain options which include acceptance, voting, striking etc. But it's BA who set the agenda generally.

Last year's strike clearly demonstrated that there isnt the leadership or unity to make a stand against the company, no matter the importance of the issue. Who would strike to increase whitetail starter pay? No-one! In fact we've lobbied hard to maintain entry level pay - but when pilots will work for literally nothing to get a rating and hours it's hard to convince the company to raise their pay. Equally why would the company pay for a cadet scheme when cadets will find the money themselves?

In the years 2007 to 2013 BA was really struggling (for many reasons). The BACC's strategy was to maintain the MSL and encourage recruitment.
It was assumed that pilots would still be keen to join BA as the choice was low-cost pay and/or zero hours contracts (or the ME).
Personally, I was keen to support new joiners to BA rather than prevent them from having the option to join us. BARP was sold to us without the fine print and was much poorer than promised - Balpa subsequently lobbied successfully to achieve significant improvements. pp 34 was tagged onto the vote.

The BMI and paypoint 34 vote was NOT to keep paypoint 24! It was to embrace new joiners, or have NONE.

BEX and others are clearly stating that we had a reasonable choice. WE DIDN'T! It was essentially "accept " this or nothing.

Certain BACC reps and others are doing wholesale damage to pilot relations and unity. The "New Guard" have achieved little, other than possibly reducing CR numbers.
Although my suspicion is that it was actually the "old guard" volunteers who negotiated successfully whilst the others were busy squabbling and plotting.

The Blu Riband

27th Aug 2020, 14:31

slast

Very noble... But remember it's the gov that sets statutory redundancy pay, not Balpa, and certainly not me!

And who's paying for the CRS through a "voluntary" pay cut? the pilots! And many pilots took VR or PT to reduce the CR footprint

The notion that no-one cares is false

Juan Tugoh

27th Aug 2020, 19:05

it’s certainly been enlightening to hear from those who were not in BA at the time what the votes were about and the motives of those who voted for the options we had. It’s great to have these retro historians around to tell us what went on when they were not privy to the facts at the time and are now rewriting things to suit themselves.

The Blu Riband

28th Aug 2020, 07:30

Quite

Those unfortunate to be made CR are understandably angry/sad/ bitter but it's no excuse for pilots who joined on pp34 to stir the sh1t in this dangerously divisive way.

There was no vote to " keep" pp24.......

Whilst it would have been great to increase pay across the board, inc new joiners, that has NEVER happened in my 31 years. We are fighting an ongoing deterioration in comp and conditions. eg The cadet scheme. The company is competing against low cost and others where new pilots pay for their rating and their uniforms. And we have people here complaining that whitetails are on a slightly lower salary............... FFS get real!!!

The goal for the last 20 years has been to get them on the MSL , rather than a separate (low cost) alternative.

eg.. Short Haul LGW... those guys are on the MSL and, despite some protestations, they will be treated by MSL seniority.
The alternative was a different "airline", on lower t&c's, and they'd probably all already be unemployed.

Survival Cot

28th Aug 2020, 07:53

Incredible. History yes, not the future, it’s gone. For those that pertaining to fly aircraft with a compass, stopwatch & perhaps 4 Proteus engines they have retired long ago. 40 years ago was 1980, hardly the swashbuckling pioneers venturing out in their De-Havilland Rapide’s for a world tour.....get a grip. To honestly think your remuneration should be based on that work is a pitiful argument. Your pay is for last months work, period. Those getting it should be grateful given the plight of many.

Regarding PP34 & PP24 & any other departments that have evolved into ringfencing T’s & C’s for some, change is inevitable. When is no doubt conjuncture & guesswork. The future day will eventually arrive that allows PP34 the casting majority, when this day does arrive PP24 will be history. Looking at current events we now know there doesn’t even have to be a vote, the company can just impose the change. Covid may just yet facilitate this outcome, the result would be a large group of pilots all on the same terms and conditions. What is wrong with one team with the same skill set treated with equality? We may even have harmony and true “esprit de corps”............

FlipFlapFlop

28th Aug 2020, 09:39

The Blu Riband

No one is making an issue of lower pay for new entrants and more junior pilots And it is not “slightly lower”. You point out that BA is fighting against low cost airlines and presumably accept that change is needed. Maybe the argument that a pilot on PP24 with 31 years service with a huge salary and the pick of perks are better placed to assist the company than those at the bottom of PP34. But then it has nothing to do with assisting the company, does it.

Juan Tugoh

28th Aug 2020, 10:53

You can always assess the merits of an argument when it is essentially backed with a threat! Given that your argument "give us what we want now or we will take it from you as soon as we can," rather than any logical or reasoned case, where does the delusion that once we are all on the same (lower) pay, we will enter the land of milk and honey, we will all be happy, come from?

The Blu Riband

28th Aug 2020, 12:09

I get a paid a fair salary for a long haul captain.

The starter rates, and FO rates are also fair. You knew those when you joined and must have compared those salaries against other career options and other airlines.
Nobody forced you to join!

Your threats are a sad reflection of the type of person you are. If you're the guy who sends out the whatsapp rants then you are selfish and divisive and not at all interested in respecting your colleagues or equality................... "esprit de corps"? Nope; you're the one sh1t-stirring and making threats.

And how will you achieve these equal and fair rates of pay you so desire?
Perhaps you think BA will give you the wage pot and allow you to divide it however you see fit....... Really?? What airlines pay LH P1s the same as new joiners?

We, as a group of employees, are battling to maintain our t&c's as best we can. Change will lead inevitably to a worse position.

Or are you just jealous? You don't care what happens to the pilot body, so long as those earning more than you get hurt..........and you personally get a little more.

My guess is that you're an older DEP (maybe late 30s or 40s).
Or maybe you're ex BMI and bitter about that. The zipper must annoying!

Jwscud

28th Aug 2020, 15:52

BA are happy to make the argument when it suits. LGW crew costs for example are far cheaper than their competitors. PP 6-10 Captains earn up to 35k less per year than the direct competition at EZY and BA use that low cost base to beat LHR SH &c with. Yet we’re also “crazy expensive legacy”. Plus ca change...

The Moo

28th Aug 2020, 23:24

Simple Q. Why is any any Captain worth more than another ? If I climb out of my LHS and go to the hotel. Why should the next guy/female sitting in the same seat with the same responsibilities earn 50k + more ?

FlightDetent

29th Aug 2020, 05:35

Outisder's view: Beacause that what the respective contracts say, or would one prefer to work for a company that does not honour the signed?

Whether or not is it possible to have a motivated, amalgamated workforce with such a wide range of contract conditions for the same work or more work, performed to the same standard or even better standards, is a different question. To which the answer is a simple flying no.

Funny that the managers and owners will claim to be absolved from this mess, saying it is what the workers agreed to and wanted / voted for through the unions. Not so funny they're actually right to a large extent, most definitely there's no way of fixing it.

Have the same shirt, different country of origin.

FlipFlapFlop

29th Aug 2020, 06:54

The Moo

Surely not a serious question. Most industries have variable annual performance rises. Based on loyalty, performance, flexibility, attitude and host of other criteria. Some get a rise, some don’t. This instantly creates pay differential between same roles. Over years the differential increases. A new joiner ten years down the line should get all these rises added to the base salary should he/she ? Happens every where.

Gordomac

29th Aug 2020, 08:13

When I joined, BOAC VC10 Skip got 5000 a year. Second Officer got 1800 a year but went, purely on 6 months fixed term to First Officer on 3000 a year. Annual increments rewarded loyalty. F/O's faced an "ALTP Bar". After five years or so, no ALTP (called ATP now) you hit the bar and stayed on your salary scale for life. No long service increments Now, it was that simple. I am just wondering if, as pilots, through organized groups like Labour Party supporting Trade Unions, have we not messed this all up for ourselves. Of course BA Management have every right to laugh their socks off. Indeed, all, so-called "BALPA" company's Management knew where it would go & laughed their socks off. Non Union companies served up, often better, T&C's and there was regular movement to them from BA.

BALPA was an outlet for those with excess energy unable to enjoy a pretty good deal anyway. Here's the result.

MissChief

29th Aug 2020, 10:12

The avarice of many senior and retired pilots at BA is a sad reflection of today's society in Britain. I have heard of a few 777 Captains announcing that they are paid £...,000/year, full allowances, and a pension pot well in excess of £5 million. They are still flying and have no intention of taking retirement before 65. For pity's sake! And many many retired pilots from BA, who took retirement at 55, or even earlier, are on staggeringly big pensions, well into their 70's and 80's. For these people, a proper and channelled contribution would be a decent thing to do.

Sadly, greed over-rides philanthropy. And pilots can be notably £££-driven. Fair enough, but where is empathy and even generosity?

And with the dreadful collapse of the aviation industry, now is the time for help, not greed. Aviation is not coming back, and with climate issues as well as ruined economies worldwide, it never will.

Count von Altibar

29th Aug 2020, 11:22

FlipFlapFlop

29th Aug 2020, 12:09

You have absolutely no justification for saying that other than you are clearly a very depressive doomster. You clearly know who are the main contributors to this thread so decide to try and spread your own particular brand of negativity for fun. Do you really think everyone is not aware of the seriousness of the current position.

The Blu Riband

29th Aug 2020, 13:09

The avarice.......................................
Sadly, greed over-rides philanthropy. And pilots can be notably £££-driven. Fair enough, but where is empathy and even generosity?

another cabin crew troll

Wirbelsturm

29th Aug 2020, 13:14

IIRC the BMI deal was about getting all pilots onto the MSL and avoid a S/H competitor operating out of LHR. That's how it was sold to us at the time.

BMI were being cast off by Lufthansa, the company from which BA derived most of it's operational back office flight planning software. Lufthansa couldn't make a profit with BMI out of LHR so I was amazed that anyone would even entertain that the silo tower management mentality of BA could make it profitable! My thoughts were outweighed by the vote so we paid BA a large sum in productivity savings to merge BMI into BA S/H. Part of the requirements for the deal from BA was for new contracts to be on 34 pay points not 24 due to the change in NRA. I'm really interested to understand where some people think nefarious deals were done? It was a take it or leave it requirement from the Company.

AFAIK there was no choice but to accept the new contract terms as 34 pay points. Much the same as the changes in pension schemes it was required by the company. Interestingly though I also seem to remember that the pension, money purchase, is STILL based on the PP24 scales thus giving a substantive boost to the defined benefit pension at the end of your career.

However it's all irrelevant as we all appeared at the top of the tree with no investment or work to achieve it so it's understandable to a tiny minority that they should ave everything we have and that we are blocking their careers by selfishly existing!

Wirbelsturm

29th Aug 2020, 13:20

The avarice of many senior and retired pilots at BA is a sad reflection of today's society in Britain.

Except they are merely in receipt of those benefits that were given as a consequence of the contracts that they signed when they joined many years ago. Is that really avarice? Or merely your perception based on ignorance?

BA benefit from increased experience particularly with respect to insurance. Also incremental pay scales reduced dramatically pilots leaving the business thus reducing training costs and wastage.

wiggy

29th Aug 2020, 13:51

Fair enough, but where is empathy and even generosity?
.

The stereotyping going on now by several posters is frankly getting tedious and TBH shows at best that some are either at best woefully ignorant of what is going on behind the scenes or at worse deliberately trying to create friction and discontent.

I suspect part of the problem might be that unlike some communities most pilots ( BA and elsewhere) try to get on with things rather than make a song and dance about how darned important to the airline they think they were on farcebook...

Just to raise awareness of what those greedy and selfish BA pilots are getting up to I'll point out:

BA pilots are setting up a pilot organised, pilot support charity to aid those being made CR,

Some BA pilots with homes in "nice" parts of the UK and the world are offering up accommodation for free for pilots (and families) made CR in need of a break...

Many BA trainers have been trying to organise simulator sessions in their own time to help ensure those laid off leave BA with their ratings as "fresh" as possible - though BA seem to be very resistant to such an idea.

There's more, but that gives a taste.

Personally given some of the attitudes displayed by some here I'm almost regretting applying for VR ......I'm certainly wondering where a £5 million pension pot came from - somebody's CETV??

SID PLATE

29th Aug 2020, 14:29

Vokes55

29th Aug 2020, 15:03

BA management will be licking their chops looking at this thread. As if last year’s capitulation wasn’t bad enough, they now have a successfully divided and in-fighting work force to plot their next, and probably imminent, attack against. Thankfully for the rest of us, the days of benchmarking T&Cs against BA appear to be behind us, so argue away.

From an outsider (non-BA)/insider (same industry) perspective - Anyone at the top of the list has earned the right to choose how and when they ride off into the sunset, however if you’re holding on for no other reason than a deluded sense of self worth or that your life will be meaningless without four stripes on your shoulder, maybe it really is time to take a look in the mirror.

As you were.

wiggy

29th Aug 2020, 15:20

if you’re holding on for no other reason than a deluded sense of self worth or that your life will be meaningless without four stripes on your shoulder, maybe it really is time to take a look in the mirror.

TBH I'm not sure there's too much of that going on Vokes, the problem for some in deciding whether to jump or not is the quality of the VR deal, but nevertheless quite a few right across the seniority spread and from both seats have already left BA or are leaving in the next day or two.

..and you are absolutely right that BA management would love reading this...and yes, considering benchmarking against BA T&Cs has been risky for some time....

FlipFlapFlop

29th Aug 2020, 16:39

I suspect BA management are well aware that the more divisive comments on here have not come from current BA pilots.

slast

29th Aug 2020, 17:52

Except they are merely in receipt of those benefits that were given as a consequence of the contracts that they signed when they joined many years ago..
Actually for those of us lucky enough to be in that position the retirement benefits were not so much "given" as "paid for" by putting between 8.5% and 15% of pretax pay for 35 years into an independent fund that was well managed by independent trustees, with contributions from BA in the years when it didn't take a holiday! And it's readily acknowledged that as we didn't have any choice in the matter, and were advised to think of it as "deferred pay" because of the early compulsory retirement age, we have been extremely fortunate as a result, and some of us are contributing to the scheme I mentioned earlier and also noted by Wiggy..

777JRM

29th Aug 2020, 18:44

MissChief

What a load of nonsense.

Anyone can be £££ driven, not just pilots (how about footballers?)

Nothing wrong with working all your life to benefit from a decent pension, on which income tax will be paid.
This is not greed.

Where are these C777 with £5m pensions?
No evidence, because it is unlikely to be true!

You ask where is the generosity?
Well, the pilots have just set-up a charity to help-out those CR’d.

And aviation will come back; it already is: Wizz announce they’ll be operating at 70% in September, for example.
We also need cargo, mail, or shall we go back to just ships that take weeks to travel the globe?

hec7or

29th Aug 2020, 19:40

https://cimg8.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/596x335/capture_fb8101e1d3dcf530120558645ffc8139a4693077.png
The avarice of many senior and retired pilots at BA is a sad reflection of today's society in Britain. I have heard of a few 777 Captains announcing that they are paid £...,000/year, full allowances, and a pension pot well in excess of £5 million.

I think not

Wirbelsturm

29th Aug 2020, 20:04

Slast,

I believe you have missed my meaning. The pension you received was that which you were contracted to receive and thus paid the contributions necessary, as in that which the details were given within the contract, not that the pension received was a 'given', to use teenager parlance!

Perhaps I should have worded it better!

I also have contributed to the charity you mention above! I only wish my pension pot were the size that some Daily Mail readers tell us all they should be!!!

Vokes55

29th Aug 2020, 20:46

TBH I'm not sure there's too much of that going on Vokes, the problem for some in deciding whether to jump or not is the quality of the VR deal, but nevertheless quite a few right across the seniority spread and from both seats have already left BA or are leaving in the next day or two.

I hope you’re right. I know there’s a few of these types across most airlines, and I’m not sure too many of the people sitting to the right of them or behind the flight deck door will be as impressed with their Porsche, yacht, villa in Cannes or pension pot as they would’ve been 6 months ago.

On a side note wiggy, I’ve always found your posts very balanced and informative and wish you a happy retirement.

3Greens

29th Aug 2020, 22:52

Ancient Observer

Not sure the NAPS figures are even that good.

Mostly because BA took their "pension holiday".

Wait until the 55+ start pulling it out, or crystalizing it. The black hole will become even clearer.
this makes little sense at all. How does one “crystallise” a pension in naps? Or if the 55+ take their pension out, I presume you mean via CETV?, well the trustees are hardly likely to give out sums that leave the scheme funds empty are they

Shaman

29th Aug 2020, 23:37

Has BA permanently closed the LGW A320 base or just reduced it in size?
TIA for the answer.

SkyRocket10

30th Aug 2020, 00:18

wiggy

It’s a very small minority that give BA pilots a bad name. The one that springs to mind is a certain captain who broadcast his refusal to retire a few months early, purely so they could gift their child the last 3mths part time salary- 24k if I remember rightly. How very selfless! 🙄

Longtimer

30th Aug 2020, 00:28

The Blu Riband

30th Aug 2020, 08:04

SkyRocket10

It's not me! But I believe the chap in question had 3 months to retirement. So wasn't offered VR,
Retiring 3 months early may have actually worked against the CR calculations. It was a slightly tasteless remark but his actions didn't "save a job".

GS-Alpha

30th Aug 2020, 09:06

Has BA permanently closed the LGW A320 base or just reduced it in size?
TIA for the answer.
Permanent is a long time so I doubt anyone can answer that, but in the current plan, all Gatwick A320 pilots are officially becoming Heathrow based A320 pilots. A small handful are entering the CRS but I suspect they failed to enter a supplementary bid (for whatever reason) and so have got what the system thinks they wanted. There are actually a handful of 747 Captains becoming A320 FOs, but I do not think it is a case of being given preference because over 250 Gatwick pilots transferred out of seniority so why deny a handful?

Shaman

30th Aug 2020, 10:01

GS_Alpha,
Thank you very much. It must be an awful time for anyone not being able to retain their seat and base. I feel that once a vaccine becomes available things will start returning to as near as normal more quickly than is feared.

Wirbelsturm

30th Aug 2020, 10:10

Shaman,

I feel you're right, things will return quickly. What will drag will be administrations paperwork handwringing as they try to politically 'backside' cover all eventualities.

I just hope that those who have been badly stung by this whole mess will have an opportunity to return if they wish to do so. If they didn't I could fully understand their reticence after the way the company has treated them.

stormin norman

30th Aug 2020, 10:17

I hear a 90 sec Covid test was trailed at LHR .If this test is accurate and can be rolled out, it could be a game changer.

HZ123

30th Aug 2020, 14:07

Not sure about it being a game changer unless it is widely used at numerous airports. It might identify more people with the virus! I am not convinced that people will return to flying, let us hope it prevents a Phase 2 of restructuring

kungfu panda

30th Aug 2020, 14:13

stormin norman

I think that the only game changer will be a 90% effective vaccine taken by 70% of people. Therefore people will need to be paid to take the Vaccine.

777JRM

30th Aug 2020, 14:34

stormin norman

Yes, we need some positive news!

As of today in America, 3,378,859 people have recovered from COVID-19. The media only reports the deaths and new case numbers; remember that the vast majority of people survive.

Since CV19 started, up to Aug 26, 1,390 healthy people (no known pre-conditions) died in England with CV19.
The other 28,141 had a ‘pre-existing condition’.

Data from NHS England on .gov website.

R T Jones

30th Aug 2020, 15:17

Add in the average age of those who've died of Covid 19 in England has been 80 with an average of 3 underlying health conditions.

thetimesreader84

30th Aug 2020, 15:32

2 most common underlying heath conditions with a Covid death? Dementia and Alzheimer’s. A damning indictment on our (in)ability to protect care homes, and a stunning view on who is really at risk from this disease.

FlipFlapFlop

30th Aug 2020, 16:04

Get the gist but the generalisation is not quite right.
Actual ages of UK deaths are.....
45–54 years 2,578
55–64 years 6,813
65–74 years 12,766
75–84 years 18,729

RexBanner

30th Aug 2020, 19:57

Well round 2 will be coming around the corner shortly and there'll be a chance for more in-fighting as BA will no doubt issue another S188 very soon. Let's face it 280 CR and 300 technically redundant pilots in a pool being subsidised by others doesn't measure up to the actual crisis facing the company. Very few are flying and the money ain't coming in, BA are actually cancelling flights compared to what they planned to operate in August/September things ain't good.

Jesus enough with the doom and gloom. Add to those figures the 200 out the door via VR, over 100 retiring in the next 12-18 months and PT measures taken at the outset of the crisis. BA will have rid itself of close to the Headcount equivalent of 1000 pilots shortly. If BA were to “right size” the airline for the actual market as it stands at this precise time probably 70%+ of us would be joining the queue to the dole office. The other thing though is that at that point the economies of scale would completely break down and the airline would fail. BA have to balance carefully between downsizing and being ready for a bounceback, WW already stated at the beginning of the Covid crisis that he would seek to avoid the mistakes of 9/11 and the ‘08 Financial Crisis where too much capacity was cut and the airline was unable to respond to the uptick in the market.

TURIN

30th Aug 2020, 20:06

Er, remind me again how much of BA's revenue comes from transatlantic traffic?

RexBanner

30th Aug 2020, 20:09

And that’s going to last forever, is it? Well might as well call in the receivers now then if that’s the case.

srjumbo747

30th Aug 2020, 20:38

MissChief

A question from the sidelines. Why should a senior pilot be expected to give up his / her retirement dreams and retire early with a reduced pension, so as to allow a junior to continue with their life style? A lot of the "senior pilots" had survived the Airline School of hard knocks in the past.
Because quite a few on those ‘senior’ pilots knew, many years ago, that they were going to have to retire at either 55 or 60. That age limit has been increased to 65 so they’ve had 5 more years of work than they expected when they were in their 30’s and 40’s.
A few of them, not just at BA but at VS too have nice Airforce pensions as well and are hanging on to their last few months whilst others are being made redundant.
Selfish p&i(£s.

TURIN

30th Aug 2020, 21:03

And that’s going to last forever, is it? Well might as well call in the receivers now then if that’s the case.

It doesn't need to last forever, just another few months. Then call in the receivers...or more likely the government and renationalise.

Longtimer

31st Aug 2020, 00:45

srjumbo747

Seems to me that the selfish finger points both ways.

wiggy

31st Aug 2020, 06:25

Sometimes you just can't win .....:ugh:..

Since you haven't mentioned it I take you are not aware that the retention pool that has been set up at BA is in effect partially/fully funded by those pilots still employed giving up some of their cash?

..and TBH why should any pilots still at BA should feel "guilty" in the current circumstances given it's BA who are swinging the axe?

srjumbo 747

A few of them, not just at BA but at VS too have nice Airforce pensions

Care to quantify "nice"..a few hundred a month after Tax? Several thousand? What do you reckon?

777JRM

31st Aug 2020, 06:59

Exactly.
No BA pilot should feel guilty.
Remember who the enemy is.

srjumbo747

31st Aug 2020, 08:51

Well however much it is it’s more than the young guy, way down the seniority list, with a mortgage, loan, kids, etc.
The people, 62+ when they were younger knew they’d be retired at 60 so have had an extra few years of good money.

777JRM

31st Aug 2020, 09:35

They’ve also had an extra few years of giving half of that to the Treasury.

Wirbelsturm

31st Aug 2020, 10:22

I assume that from your position, way up high on your moral high horse, you can clearly ascertain with abject certainty the financial position of all these people who you assume are so much better off than you?

The remaining earnings power of the 62+ year old person is now considerably less than that of the 'young' guy as well. We have all been at the bottom and it has always been that 'those at the top' have it and have had it better. I can only assume that when you feel secure in your chosen profession, whatever that might be, after years of hard work that you will willingly step aside when those beginning their career complain that you're 'bed blocking'. Who is to say that the guy/girl at the end of their career isn't working their nuts off to clear mortgages, loans, kids etc... before they are required, by age, to retire. Perhaps they wish to enjoy their last few years of a 40+ year career in flying that they will miss when they retire. Perhaps they have financial commitments they have to clear?

Redundancy is awful. The system chosen was that which was in the MOA, warts and all. A lot of people took VR even though the package was, frankly, atrocious. A huge amount of people took part time. The 'headline' figure was reduced from 1200 down to 270. Not that it helps the 270 but it certainly helps the 930! The rest of us are taking a 20%, percent hence hits those higher up for a greater sum, quite rightly, paycut to support those without a fleet so as they can retain their jobs.

Aren't we the awful ones eh?

Give me strength.

bex88

31st Aug 2020, 11:18

Different times, different pressures. Gulf war, 15% mortgage rates, rise of the loco’s, Arab spring, financial crash, Covid etc etc. It is easy to assume those on PP24 have had a easy 24 years. Now you can get or at least you could, get into the RHS of a Jet very quickly. Back then most worked some pretty terrible jobs to climb the ladder.

As I said, different times, different pressures. Both have merits to their arguments. The only thing that is reasonable to suggest is that we protect peoples careers. That may mean a bit of give, perhaps that give will not be uniform.

wiggy

31st Aug 2020, 11:31

Ok, jumbo, so I asked you to quantify what these "nice pensions" were that ex RAF in Virgin and BA are getting and you reply

Well however much it is it’s more than the young guy, way down the seniority list, with a mortgage, loan, kids, etc..

How about some facts: to give you a clue somebody who left the services as a junior officer 30'ish years ago after 15 years service could now be drawing a pension of around 600-700STG a month before tax, plus or minus..

And anybody can still be supporting family, have a mortgage, have other outgoings......that can be a factor at all stages of seniority.

NoelEvans

31st Aug 2020, 16:48

I find the vilification of those who 'should be retiring early to make way for others' that I read here to be utterly nauseating.

Yes, some may be showing off about their wealth, they are gits. But how can you possibly assume everyone's circumstances based on those gits?

Somebody who is "62+" (a quoted above here) may have had a very carefully worked out plan for their retirement. Why should that be snatched away from them to make way for someone younger who has a whole lifetime ahead of them to make those plans? There are assumptions about what pensions they might have to live off. As wiggy has pointed out, those may not be as rosy as the 'assumer' thinks. I have already pointed out that there is a final salary pension scheme that has had a 35% reduction in payouts; I know that several of the people who will be relying on that money are now in BA, so how well are your assumptions doing on their perceived wealth there? You should all have seen the graph of 'stored vs active' airliners that has put everyone in this mess -- and for those who have forgotten I will repeat it:
https://cimg3.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/382x216/mainline_jetfleet_evolution_snip_f10063eb4f23588debc2a5970a7 53d47b064308f.jpg
Well, if you want to see another 'cliff edge', have a look at this graph of a few pension funds values ending on that same date:
https://cimg5.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/115x102/pemsion_cliff__fa1400cd6a3564f1beb259264c8b5615d1977b6b.jpg

That "62+" year-old that is being vilified here has to rely on that FOR THE REST OF THEIR LIFE if they are to pack it in now.

By comparison the younger pilots still have a lifetime ahead of them to rectify the situation that they are in now. Should we start making assumptions about how well they will do out of it in the long run? No, let's not stoop to being as low as some who are vilifying the older have stooped.

Everyone is an individual with individual circumstances. Yes, there may be some gits 'at the top'. Just the same as there are some nauseating gits selfishly wanting to push the "62+" out of the way for their own selfish ends.

On another topic, someone saidRemember who the enemy is.The true enemy is a nasty bug from the east that caused that graph on airliners that I posted above.
If you are forgetting that, you have truly lost the plot on this entire matter.

cats_five

31st Aug 2020, 17:25

They’ve also had an extra few years of giving half of that to the Treasury.

It was my ambition to earn enough to pay higher rate income tax. Half of something is better than all of nothing

Icanseeclearly

31st Aug 2020, 19:50

Meanwhile...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/willhorton1/2020/08/31/british-airways-new-low-cost-strategy-isaer-lingus/#142c77742af5

https://airwaysmag.com/airlines/aer-lingus-may-move-trans-atlantic-routes-to-the-uk/

Yet again someone steals a jump on us, this time one of our IAG bed fellows, when will our management start thinking? This is exactly what we should have been doing, thinking out of the box and saving jobs...

Not my job mate

31st Aug 2020, 22:31

It all goes into the same pot, that BA, IBERIA, AER LINGUS are ALL using to survive, so it doesn't really matter what colours are painted on the tail. Why not stop looking to find fault in BA managment and be pleased that IAG who hold the purse strings for ALL of our jobs are looking at different ways of saving our skins.

wiggy

1st Sep 2020, 05:49

So you think if Aer Lingus turned a profit it would help save jobs at BA?

With the set up at IAG I'm not sure it works quite like that when it comes to jobs within the individual OpCos but happy to be corrected.......

Wirbelsturm

1st Sep 2020, 09:52

When it comes to profits the profit is all IAG, when it comes to costs, the costs are all the OpCo's.

Guess where job costs will lie.

OpenCirrus619

1st Sep 2020, 14:08

As of today in America, 3,378,859 people have recovered from COVID-19. The media only reports the deaths and new case numbers; remember that the vast majority of people survive.

183,000 deaths ... so for every 19 that recover 1 dies - not so good news.
That means the probability of one death among those diagnosed with Covid on the TUI flight currently in the news.

Since CV19 started, up to Aug 26, 1,390 healthy people (no known pre-conditions) died in England with CV19.
The other 28,141 had a ‘pre-existing condition’.

Data from NHS England on .gov website.
Could you provide the link?
When I look at the UK GOV website I see 36,844 deaths in England up to 26 August.

The chances of me getting on any public transport, esecially an airliner, at the moment is ZERO.

Just my point of view looking at the data I have available to me.

P.S. Yes, I am one of the very lucky ones who can work from home.

777JRM

1st Sep 2020, 15:38

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune.org-vbulletin/1852x813/e1bb6ddc_2297_4082_8596_89ac12dc7dfc_b9dbc35ce375ae7d972d200 9d342964649328df3.jpeg
From england.nhs.uk, Tab3 deaths by condition, screenshot.
Also, look at the ages that are most affected.
Apparently, obesity is a significant factor too, but the media avoided that for a while.

FlipFlapFlop

1st Sep 2020, 17:03

OpenCirrus619

6.1m cases in US and your conclusion is daft and inaccurate. If one of them has a pre existing condition then maybe but if they have they are not exactly going out of their way to protect themselves are they.

And if you won’t go on a plane and you are lucky enough to work from home (we cannot) why are you here ?

The Blu Riband

1st Sep 2020, 17:45

The chances of me getting on any public transport, esecially an airliner, at the moment is ZERO.

I understand your fear, and why you're paranoid.

I've operated 16 flts, and pax'ed on 28 since the 1st april. I've had 6 Covid tests, and 2 antibody tests (all negative).
Still here!

The death rate is now statistically insignificant.
Many of the early Covid deaths were incorrectly reported, improperly treated, and mostly to people with pre-existing conditions.

FlipFlapFlop

1st Sep 2020, 19:21

In the UK last three days.
Covid deaths 6
Road deaths 15
Cancer deaths 1350

OpenCirrus619

2nd Sep 2020, 08:51

777JRM Thanks - I was looking at gov.uk.
I hadn't found those stats before - once I've waded through them I'll certainly be better informed

FlipFlapFlop Not ridiculous at all - simply using the numbers provided.
My figure of 5% mortality certainly sits in the middle of those produced by JHU https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
I willingly concede the point that the death rate from Covid is now well below some other causes - but, personally, I do my best, where possible, to avoid risk. The number of deaths, in the past few days, from lightning strikes is 0 - but I'm still not going to stand under a lone tree, in the middle of a large field, during a thunder storm.

The Blu Riband I agree with your statement about death rates. Unfortunately I am more worried, these days, about long term mordibity (as opposed to mortality).
This program raises some worrying questions: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/m000ljnb/surviving-the-virus-my-brother-me