The BA Scope Clause.

[Nosferatu]

We have been hearing a lot about scope regarding the subsumption of the RJ Fleet into CitiExpress.
Courses have been cancelled, and from our perspective, we are waiting for the BACC and BA management to agree with our CC and what passes currently for our management when business in the regions can start to make a return on investment.

Frankly, most of us do not believe for a minute that BACC have any interests at heart except for their own pay packet and seniority list.:rolleyes:
We are trusting our CC to come up with a deal which will be fair to all, but it seems that evry time a deal is close, BACC move the goalposts.:mad:
I have the greatest sympathy with any BAR guy who doesn't want to go to LHR, and similarly with any CFE guy who doesn't want to move to the regions. However, on a similar thread about GB, a number of verbose and logically illiterate BA men suggest, at the end of the debate, that it is a case of 'Deal with it'.

This is going to result in a shafting of grand proportions to Brymon and Manx/BRAL, whose only 'crime' has been to be profitable enough to be snapped up by BA. (A bad day for all of us). Now, we are to apparently be grateful for what crumbs may be thrown to us by a BACC which is determined to keep us out of loss leading mainline routes, but the REAL issue is a couple of years ahead. BACC are looking at the next generation of regional aircraft, and are determined to ensure the same unprofitable structure has charge of those.

Well, we shall see. I'm not in management, but it is interesting to note the actions of The Bishop. The only thing keeping BACC afloat at the moment is the management's concern that BA pilots might actually strike. These are the same few rabble rousers who were in favour of the great successful Cathay action. Makes you think doesn't it.

Anyway, a small ballot, and, of course, invitations to comment:

Do you really believe that BACC has the best interests of CitiExpress Pilots at heart??:D

[Ten Knots Fast]

We didn't need a post to like this to make us think twice about the intentions of BA mainline - greedy ba###rds!!!!:mad: :mad:

[Baron Harkonnen]

A little strong in the expressive side of things, but the poll shows what we all know anyway!:(

[Flap33]

This is a very interesting poll. However, the fact of the matter is that I am an unhappy mainline pilot (ex-CFE) who is from now until an aggreement is reached going to be operating 5/6 day rotations thru BHX/MAN on the RJ100.

My own personal view is that the BACC have an agenda which is significantly removed from that of either the pilots or management. :confused:

It's about time BACC consulted the members, hardly any of my colleagues are interested in operating this work pattern - even if we take up their offer of secondment to BHX/MAN we cannot go until SCOPE is sorted, so we can't even relocate to appease our families/partners.

I cannot for one moment think why the BACC can demand that the employees of a non-BA company be offered BA plc contracts, surely this upto the individual airlines (GB, BMed, Maersk). And for that matter, the current state of BA isn't the most attractive of airlines to work for (well at Gatwick at least).

We can only hope for a quick and amicable solution so that lives are not disrupted any more than they have to be. Pilots in LGW want to stay in LGW, pilots from the regions probably want to stay in the regions - so BALPA try to make everyone move. MAGIC.

Enough said.

F33

[climbs like a dog]

A good follow up to the GB pilots topic. Although some of the mainline pilots were implying that any BACX input was irrelevant to that thread they were being disingenuous. The inclusion of GB pilots onto the MAINLINE seniority list has everything to do with our own position regarding scope which is becoming a bigger stitch up all the while.

It is a foregone conclusion that the BA CC is just after protecting it's pilots own position. I would also question what BALPA as an organisation are going to do. Our BACX CC is fighting our corner as hard as they can, but I don't see what BALPA as an organisation would do to help us should it come to pass that BACX pilots are significantly disadvantaged by the scope agreement. After all we are a much smaller body of pilots than BA BALPA, paid less, and therefore would represent less of a financial loss if we were to award ourselves a 1% payrise. It must be very frustrating for our CC.

The BAR pilots who will be coming on secondment will be laughing all the way to the bank. If the figure of £1000 per month is true then that represents 20% over and above a jet captain's salary in BACX. As an aside it would be interesting to see if the routes are initially profitable while being operated by the CFE / BAR pilots on the BACX costbase.

[The Little Prince]

Its very sad the way BACC are behaving. They are dividing their Company, causing huge antipathy to their Airline within BACE,(and 650 pilots is quite a lot!) and guaranteeing that as and when more routes and types inevitably come our way in BACE, there will be zero sympathy for their position, and certainly no assistance from us.

They see no-one's point of view, (IT, Engineering, Admin, Finance, Marketing, Commercial, HR, etc) but their own, and somehow think they can operate with impunity and do whatever, whenever to whoever they like.
A collection of Captain Canutes!
They should pay more attention to the likes of Flap33, and less trying to maintain/reinstate a world that has already moved on.

The only bright spot is that as far as even the neddies and nerds fro Waterside are concerned, CitiExpress IS the future of regional and probably eventually shorthaul within BA. :p

[Pickled]

Why not email people in the BACC and ask them what they are doing and why? A few facts may help clear the usual rumours / confusion.

This council seems to be a marked improvement on previous ones and much more representative of the whole pilot workforce.

Remember that BA mainline has changed enormously in recent times. Approx. one third of them are now on the post 96 'B' scale and earning a lot less than you might think.

Pickled

[Happy Boy]

I really find the attitude of you citiexpress pilots quite nauseous. You seem to almost revel in the fact that you are cheap. Surely you should be trying to increase your pay levels to the highest level you can?
The fact is that pilot pay has never been the deciding factor in whether a route or airline is profitable. Just look at what Easyjet and RyanAir are paying. Your costs pale into insignificance when you look at the leasing charges and nav/route charges not to mention fuel. So stop harping on about your cheap pay taking over the regions. You do all pilots a big disservice.
And yes I have got an axe to grind. Today I did my last 737 flight in the regions. I am being forced out because you are taking my job and the opportunities of many of my more junior colleagues. These are our routes our slots and we have worked damn hard to make them grow.
Yes scope is very important to us in BA because we do not want pilots like yourselves trying to steal more of our work by offering your services on the cheap. The only service you offer is a disservice to yourselves and you should be ashamed!!!
As for my BAR colleagues who have chosen to stay I wish them alot of luck if they are going to have to sit along guys like you with these sort of attitudes. Intersting CRM ahead!!!

NOT SO HAPPY BOY:(

[jumbodriver]

gentlemen and ladies,

you should consider SCOPE as as two way street-it will definately have advantages for those of you in BACE-you need to open your minds to the possibilities.It might help to think long term on this one.
Frankly,this thread ammounts to nothing more than scaremongering.
jumbo

[airrage]

Copied from my Post in another Thread;

Wow, I havent visited the RP thread for a while, mainly since the New In-house Forums provide a Platform free of wind-up merchants and managers attempting divide and rule tactics(no surely not). It is funny how this division has conveniently reared it's ugly head at a time when BALPA are getting increasingly militant and finally getting their act together with regard BA Pay Negotiations, coincedence ?

How pathetic to boast that you can do a job an get paid less for it, are you serious ? Hell I could work for free but I wouldn't want to and I certainly would hold it as an aspiration.

Scope is not about just protecting BA jobs. The future of every Pilot world-wide is under thraeat. A long-term solution stable solution is not ever going to be acheived if we start underbidding each other for jobs. There will always be someone junior/less experieneced willing to do it for less, including future autopilots. It doesn't mean it's safe however and Airline Management in their efforts to preserve their own expensive and non-productive jobs will push things down to the lowest common denominator. They would replace us all with monkeys if they thought they could get away with it.

For those who benefit this time, beware because if the line breaks down now, your turn will be next. They will either force you to take even less pay/work harder or they will find someone else in the world who will. Do not laugh at the struggles of BA Pilots just because they have been the first to feel these Global Tremours over the last decade and certainly don't wish that they fail at securing a Scope deal because that will leave you all WIDE OPEN in the future. BALPA are fighting the corner the best they can by focussing on the areas where they have the most resources to do so. If the center of the front falls what happens to the weaker flanks ???

BA's strife has had little to do with the current Pilot workforce(over 1/3rd of which on B-Scales, and the other 2/3rds earning the same in BA after decades of loyalty, as low-cost Pilot's after just a couple of years). The agressive response some here receive from implying otherwise is out of frustration that this Reality BA Pilots have had to endure being first in the firing line. Do not believe this is a BA Company Problem, all Airline's management will not stop their attack on Pilots T&C's at the collapse of BA pilots. Try to look from beyond your current uniform Colour and try to see that BA Pilots are the first to raise a stink not because we are all Inefficient Spoilt Crybabies but because we have been under threat from these issues for much longer, the very same issues that will soon work against all Pilots if we don't unite now.

We all have more in Common as Professional Flying Comrades than with any management structure no matter how caring or efficient they may be compared to BA's. BA Pilots are no less Professional or Inefficient than any other outfit's Pilots but are bearing the full force of taking off OVERWEIGHT down the back for years. Don't let them divide us Pilots. who really are the only ones who fully understand the job we do.

This is not a "BA ISOLATED PROBLEM" caused by "EXPENSIVE INEFFICIENT" Pilots(just ask any recent BA DEP's you might know personally if their Pre-conceived Pre-joining Nirvana-image about being an Overpaid Underworked BA Pilots match the Reality once in) but we are first to be attacked. Be careful what you wish for, you might get it sooner than you had wished and miss the days when BA Pilots were around to take all the FLAK !!!!!!

[The Little Prince]

Jumbodriver - clearly you are not in the loop with ref the scope clause as proposed by your own Company Council if you think even vaguely that it is a 'two way street'. If it were indeed that, I think we would be supporting you to the hilt. It is a rip off document, as usual, designed to ensure that BA mainline guys can come to us to work after they retire (thus pinching our junior guys career opportunities), it will not allow any but our 146 Guys into even a potential mainline job, but it enshrines the 'right' of BAR guys to come and sit next to us, but being paid a lot more.

Two way street - yeah, sure.

Happy boy - well, thats one BA pilot I won't need to get to know anyway! Bear in mind no-one is taking your job, it has just moved. Remember that famous BA guy turned politician "Get on your bike, and go to where the jobs are!" or something like that. If you want to come and work with us on the same terms, we'd be delighted to meet you. Otherwise, you can take your platinum rings, and spin on them!;)

[R308R]

Interesting to see what some of you think. I can only talk about BHX because I do not know enough about MAN

BAR BHX actually has made reasonable profits in the past and the current flight crew agreement has led to us probably being the most effecient and flexible pilots in BA. It is a real pitty that the success of the BHX operation has been blown apart for whatever reason you feel like beliving.

It is not a decision at pilot level that has effectively ended the current setup for us in the regions and we are all very very unhappy about it. I do not belive anyone from any company should hold a grudge for individuals, indeed fellow professionals, that have decided to stay. I would guess that most that have decided to stay will have accepted a reduction from the current "lifestyle" because they are motivated more about staying in the midlands for various, mainly family, reasons than chase the so called goodies that may be generated after a long commute down to London.

As for moaners and groaners. Someone will always have a better hand than you, but remember someone will always have less. Do we want to reduce everyone to the lowest level in order to "be fair" or should we try and improve our bit. In our instance I belive we should congratulate both management and Balpa for delivering a practical solution to the problem whist most other areas are still slogging it out.

As I have always maintained on these forums and in discussion, the overall mission from our individual BALPA representatives should be to move towards improving everyones pay, terms and conditions. If your companies reps haven't achieved what you feel is fair then its up to you to do something about it within the framework of your organisation, rather than look at others with green eyed envy.

[Sheepslagger]

Totally agree with all of that except for the:

'management and BALPA for delivering a practical solution' bit.

Even management have in fact tried to deal with a solution, but have been rebuffed time and again by Rob Hall and his cohorts.
A solution like this usually means BOHICA.

(BEND OVER, HERE IT COMES AGAIN! This is a tool (sic) well known by BACC!)

[Hand Solo]

Little Prince - a shame to see your back spouting your usual brand of uninformed rubbish. Please explain how a scope deal allows BA pilots to fly for you after retiring. At 55 our pilots are gone, out of BA, no more, contract ended, pension paid. They are no longer BA pilots, so they don't remain on the BA seniority list and they have no right of transfer to any flying job anywhere. If you're aggrieved about your company hiring BA retirees then take it up with your management, it's got nothing to do with BA pilots or BALPA.

As for the 'right'of BAR guys to come and sit next to you, well who gave you a 'right' to suddenly inherit 10 mainline RJs, or a variety of BAR routes? You don't have a 'right' to them, they've just been gifted to you by BA management. Thats right, by BA management, not your management. The condition of the deal is that people who want to stay in the regions can do so without losing income. If you don't like the deal that gives you RJs that you wouldn't otherwise have had then don't fly them. Not a tough choice, is it? Why should you begrudge our guys getting paid a reasonable wage, after all most BACE posters on this site seem to believe that they're are better because they're cheaper.

[Sheepslagger]

my my, you really should try reading your own literature. Either Rob and Kevin don't talk to you about anything, or you are nearly as good as them at posting misleading claptrap!!!

Don't make us laugh, you can see from the poll just how many people believe you!

:D :) :D :)

[Hand Solo]

I haven't bothered to view the poll results because their isn't an option to vote for:

Are BACE pilots only interested in lining their own pockets with RJ flying at the expense of the regional jobs of BA pilots.

I hope the poll reflects the opinion that the BACC are protecting the interests of the BA pilots, because thats why I voted for them. If they were looking after you at the expense of my position I'd vote them out.

[R308R]

Just want to clarify "Balpa and management achieving a practical solution."

I am refering to achieving an arrangement that allows some of us to stay at BHX or MAN.

I am not reffering to the decision to effectively close the base's. Considering that BAR pilots delivered a 10% overall improvement in effciency a few years ago on the basis that mainline flying in the regions would be secured it is a very very sore point whats happened; and a reminder to everyone in every company that nothing is safe.

"If you work and do your best you'll get stitched up like all the rest!!!!!"

So before having a bash at BA pilots staying in the regions just view the big picture and remember that there are a lot of very unhappy pilots leaving for LHR.

Airrage makes a very good point. For those that still do not understand just consider; If Beckham, owen etc had their pay cut to £10000 per week, and had to play 100 matches per year, how do you think things would change for those in the other divisions?????????????

[Humongous Henry]

Wow, the ability of BA pilots to shoot themselves in the feet should never be underestimated.
Let me get this right, now you are comparing yourselves to the most over-rated, over-paid, precious, petulant people in their particular 'industry'. People who, when it comes down to it, ultimately cannot deliver the goods for which they are paid, and who their manager himself admits are suffering from underperformance brought on by over-remuneration. This over -remuneration is also the prime cause of most of their industry heading for severe financial problems this very year, (although one must, again with an eerie clarity, admit this is down to a foolish management decision!).

I DO fancy your wife though, best legs in the business!

Seriously chaps, we shouldn't fall out. I sympathise most enormously with anyone who has to move because of yet another management 'bright idea'. But even here, we know what the removals package is with mainline. Our blokes in Abz, Bhs, Sou, Brs, Cdf etc are not getting anything like that from THEIR enforced moves, so you can understand why some of us don't actually feel the playing field is level. Coupled with that, we have one of your chaps from management by the initials TDLF who is trying to screw our Ts and Cs even further down, while telling us he is doing us a favour and IMPROVING things. Some of us have worked for the real giant bas###ds of the Industry, but we've never come across this sort of thing before. From our perspective then, we are being hammered both by BA management and BACC. Kind of makes a chap paranoid. And for the record, someone earlier referred to YOUR management, and OUR management. De facto as well as De Iure, your management (unfortunately) IS our management. It makes me sick to think management are better than pilots at anything, but at least they have a kind of loyalty to each other.

The way to avoid being stitched up is to try and act in concert. We KNOW this is not what BACC is trying to do, because they are telling our CC one thing, but discussing a quite different agenda with Mainline.:confused:

And for Mr Solo, I think my colleague was referring to the well known agenda to allow mainline retirees to join BACEX as Captains at age 55 should they wish to. So you see, we are getting it at both ends at once. Cadets in the bottom, and mainline skippers in the top. BACC have another agenda alright, and it is no-one's interest but their own.

[Quidnunc]

Can someone from one of the non-BA outfits explain why the *BRITISH AIRWAYS* Company Council should be fighting your corner? They fight for BA pilots - you've got you're own CCs to fight for you.
They're not the 'Anyone Who Flys in BA Colours' Company Council.

[Nosferatu]

Regrettably, almost true. They are in fact the:

"Screw anyone who isn't Mainline" Company Council.:(

I applaud their fighting for BA pilots, even if their actions are reminiscent of A. Scargill.
Where I fall out with them, and have serious reservations about the whole BALPA setup' is their capability, and indeed, announced intention, to ride roughshod over whoever it takes to get what they want. Bring their own Company down - fine, if that's what they want, but trying to disadvantage US - well let's just wait and see what happens next. :mad: :mad:

[HolyMoley]

I think you have said it all! This is exactly the impression we got from the GB thread! :p

[Quidnunc]

Girls,

Neither of you have answered my question. Why should the BACC fight your corner? You can boo-hoo all you want, but the BACC represents 3000+ pilots. (With the backing of those 3000+). Why should we defer to the needs of employees of a different company?

[Capt Pit Bull]

Make that with the backing of 2999+.

CPB

[Harry Wragg]

I think everyone should be forced to work for BA. I have too. Don't see why the Brymon and Bral guys and gals shouldn't get to suffer too! Don't believe the hype, its pants at BA!

Harry

[Deadleg]

As a displaced BACX pilot due to FSAS, if this RJ100 program falls through, our "managers" don't know what will happen to the 46 of us-reading between the lines that says to me you'll probably be made redundant despite seniority but I'm too scared to tell you at the moment!

What happens to the BA pilots?

[mrcabbage]

Excuse my interruption of this topic but having read through the various threads one thing which strikes me is that we are all in the same boat.I am an engineer based up north and following the closure and none sale of our hangar, 72 engineers found themselves at home on 'Gardening' leave i.e. paid to stay at home.We have been divided from our colleagues and treated despicably by the management teams to the point that many have given up trying to be re-instated and have gotten out of the airline buisness altogether or have jumped to other companies if they could.There are very few jobs at present, only contracting it appears.There are now around 30 'gardeners' left.THESE PEOPLE HAVE BEEN GIVEN WRITTEN NOTICE THEY WILL BE MADE REDUNDANT AT THE GOVERNMENT STATUTORY MINIMUM FROM THE 30TH SEPT UNLESS THEY ACCEPT MOVING FAMILY AND HOME TO LHR(UNREASONABLE) OR ACCEPT A VERY LOW VOLUNTARY SEVERANCE SETTLEMENT! I have read that there are around 900 cabin and flight crew on said 'gardening' leave down south.If the airline succeeds up here,YOU ARE NEXT!!!A ballot is currently in process for industrial action against this action.PLEASE SUPPORT US AS IT WILL AFFECT YOU SOON.........Thank you for your time......STATUTORY REDUNDANCIES AT MANCHESTER

[climbs like a dog]

I'd just like to remind some of the mainline pilots of a small fact that has been posted on the GB thread. The routes you claim as yours actually aren't owned by you, BA pilots esq, personally. They belong to the company and its shareholders. It is therefore down to the company and its shareholders to decide.

I agree with you that it is wrong for a BACX pilot to crow about being paid less than you. FACT - we are being paid less because (as has been stated before) most of us are where we want to be, GLA, EDI, IOM, INV, LBA, etc.

You carp on about scope and what's yours is yours, but should scope come down to seats on an aircraft we have 5 146's that we flew before, on BA franchise routes. Do you intend to displace these pilots? You also harp on about avaricious BACX pilots slavering to get on your RJ's, who incidentally were being flown previously by ex CFE pilots, ahem. I personally haven't bid to move to MAN or BHX to fly them, see the paragraph above.

I don't think that you have any intention of trying to raise our terms and conditions by your actions. Your actions prevent the movement of routes to BACX with its reduced costbase. With your job goes the dead-hand of waterside and its financial burden. Most of the BACX routes won't have such an overhead which will be a significant driver in making them profitable, possibly. So by restricting that move you'll be kicking your employer doubly.

Oh well. Nothing seems to change.

[Hand Solo]

But theres been no shortage of bidders for BHX/MAN, displacing those pilots who were willing to accept inferior pay and terms in order to continue working where they want to be.

Incidentally, as BACX is so low cost, can you tell me how much it costs to hire a 146 from Titan at short notice, because they seem to be underpinning quite a bit of your operation from BHX/MAN at the moment.

[LONDONBOY]

Little Prince you are 100% correct.

BA mainline has for far too long lost money on domestic and regional operations.

Loosing money is not an option in this world anymore, and it is the management of BA in Waterside who have made these moves inorder to try and stop relentless loss making operations.

I don't envy any of you guys flying for mainline, god bless all and I wish you the very best of success, but the fact is there are many routes on which you can not operate profitably, hence the role of BACE to still provide lucrative interline traffic yet take the burden of loss making services from you.

If you continue to lose money hand over fist you will all go out of business, USair has had the highest staff costs of any airline in the US and today has filed chapter 11.

BACE is the future of regional flying in the UK.:)

[snooky]

With illiterate losers on the loose, it will be the profession in general that loses.
:rolleyes:

[rhythm method]

snooky, I don't think this is supposed to be a spelling kompetishun.

Pilots aren't actually employed on their ability to spell!

To help the slightly less than perfect spellers..

LOOSE rhymes with MOOSE

LOSE rhymes with BOOZE (Quite apt really?)

Now back to the thread.

[Rider of the Purple Sage]

The argument is actually simple, BA as ever are trying to muddy the waters, and convince us they have our best interests at heart too....(pause for hysterical laughter) or, more honestly, asking us why the BACC should do anything at all for us. At least the latter approach is selfishly honest.

We would be expected to believe that the rate for all pilots should ideally be the same. Hmm, some logic, but no realism. Does one expect the Captain of a Fleetwood fishing smack to be paid the same as the man commanding QE2? I don't think I even need to answer that.

Change is inevitable. What s truly saddening is the inability of BA to actually UNDERSTAND why some people really don't want their system. We are not trying to change your own system, but we would quite like to keep our own, thank you. Scope has not benefited a single Regional Pilot in the USA, but it has certainly protected a lot of jobs on larger a/c - well, up to the current Chapter 11 new entrants anyway. But of course, it makes perfect sense in these dark days to insist on 737s and Airbuses flying around with pax numbers which would make a healthy profit on an Emb/146, but which are driving the operators out of business.

Butr anyway - a small wager. One year from now, there WILL be an RJ Fleet staffed by BACX pilots in a ration of around 2 - 1 to ex BA. In three years there WILL be BACX operated 737s and Airbuses in tandem with GB. In four years, all mainline recruitment will first pass through BACX, and in five years, we will all be part of mainline, on mainline Ts and Cs, and the Company will again be haemorraging money. At which point......they will probably buy Highland Airways, Loganair and Eastern, and away we all go again.

Kinda funny really, but I'm not laughing as BA take the first faltering steps to destroying my livelihood.:rolleyes:

[airrage]

You guys make me seriously consider looking for a new Profession.

BA have historically had the best working T&C's, Pensions and Pay in the UK for Pilots. Every 3-5years in BA, over the past 20years or so, those T&C's have been eroded step by step.

Also historically, Pilots often worked their way up through the smaller outfits gaining experience until they secured employment with one of the larger outfits(Virgin, BA, BM, etc) thereby enjoying the improved Pay, T&C's and Pensions. Now you are laughing because their T&C's are under threat ? Unless you are content to stay your entire career as a Regional Jet/prop and don't mind them halving your Pay in 5years after they have finished wiping out the top ranks of Pilots Pay then you shouldn't laugh.

BA have 46 unions to negotiate with and having been a Privatised company still bears a lot of the burden of being a Public company. A lot of the other unions apart from BALPA have been very successful in maintaining unbelievable working conditions which harm their profitability. BALPA being a more flexible and Reasonable Lot(in the past somewhat 'Cozy' with management) have compromised most of their inefficient working practices over the years and are now virtually the most efficient LH operators in the world(stats not BS). This has not stopped BA Pissing these saved efficiencies against the wall elsewhere(70 million on tailfins come to mind).

Realise that BA Pilots are no less hard-working than yourselves. Profitability in their company is no less in their control as you have in your outfits, the only difference to the way all Pilots work to the CAA maximums these days, is the colour of our uniforms that we wear to work. Any Pilot has more in common than the pseudo management types who are eager to replace us with technology asap, and listening to the garbage posted here I can understand their point.

Anywhere where Pilots T&C's are under threat is a concern for us ALL !!! If our Profession is allowed to become the equivalent of a bus-driver we will ALL suffer !! There isn't a Pilot anywhere these days that doesn't have a legitimate reason to be dissappointed or annoyed, because we are ALL under attack without exception.

You are all acting like a hungry pack of wolves over the last few crumbs whilst your owners let fresh bread go stale. Wake Up, we are in the same Profession here. Unless you have just a few months to go as a Pilot and are worried about losing your job then realise that if BA/Virgin or any Mainline Career Pilots lose the fight to save the job as a PROFESSION, you might as well go and get a job driving minicabs becasue the pay will come down to about the same.

Everyone is looking so narrow mindily at their own little poxy job that they can't see the forest for the trees. There is a steam Roller headed toward the Pilot Profession People and unless you always wanted to be just like a minicab driver(pay and status) then you better hope that BALPA succeeds in their efforts. It is not just for selfish reasons that they are using the weight of 3500 Pilots & subscriptions (rather than 40-50) to drive home their demands for consistent Pay & Conditions.

No offense intended toward minicab drivers who would understand the situation better than some here.

PS. Amasing how London underground workers are ready to close down ops in support of firefighters strike, yet Pilots can't even support each other.

PSS. Purple un-SAGE-like
You say "We would be expected to believe that the rate for all pilots should ideally be the same. Hmm, some logic, but no realism. Does one expect the Captain of a Fleetwood fishing smack to be paid the same as the man commanding QE2? "

No and BALPA are trying to prevent the Commander of the QE2 being paid the same as a Fleetwood fishing smack. Isn't it nice to think that a Fleetwood fishing smack Capt can aspire to be a QE2 CAPT ? Imagine if they manage to bring the QE2's CAPT's Pay down to that of the Fleetwood fishing smack, what kind of pay would that leave the fishing smack CAPT on(or should I say new minicab driver)

[snooky]

To get back to the thread:

Airrage, I was trying to say in one sentence what you have far more eloquently expressed in many.

Don't you guys devalue what should be a respected profession by trying to drag everyone down in pursuit of your own interests.

[Humongous Henry]

Come on Kevin!! :D

Everything you have written actually makes sense. The problem is that you have not answered the question about Scope, and how it is REALLY going to affect us here in BACX.

Sounds to me as though we at BACX are being sacrificed on the altar of your collective ambition.

I have an idea! Why don't BA end the leases on the RJs, and hand them back to BAe. The current BA pilots can all go and fly whatever and wherever they want - in mainline. Then BACX can lease the RJs at a much more competitive rate, and go where and when we want with them. Hey, I could develop this theme into 73s and all sorts of other aircraft, maybe I should suggest it to David Evans, Tim de la Fosse and Rob Hearn - trouble is, being BA themselves, they wouldn't understand the concept of operating profitable services.

Maybe, just maybe, (obviously following a successful interview and checkride) we'd allow mainline pilots to join our operation!:eek:

[airrage]

Scope is about security of employment first(and its immediate secondary effect is on securing reasonable Pay) not just outsourcing to the current cheapest option(not to be inferred at the BACX Pilots themselves).

If BA succeed in hiring the lowest cost operators at will for their operations, eventually their choice of operators will spill over to include other country Operators as well. So 10years down the road when Pay Negotiations are due, BA will say;
" sorry mate, we just had an offer from Ukraine-express(then part of EEC) who will do it for half that and put their Pilots up overnight in the UK at the bedsit they own, Yes I know a one-bdrm flat in the UK is 500,000 pounds so what, you should have agreed to SCOPE when you were at BACX !!!'

Without Scope we are wide open and any Pay Negotiations will not be worth the paper written on. Yes you can have a 20% Pay Rise but we will start outsourcing 80% of your jobs and your headcount will continue to fall off a cliff.

I think you get the picture.

Everyone is worried that Scope will cost them their job now, when in reality it will protect their jobs for years to come, despite unpleasantness now.

[Cornflake]

You mean it will protect YOUR jobs, not ours.
:mad:
I have heard that ex-CFE F.O.s are going to get commands ahead of our Captains, and that so-called BA seniority will be used to make sure that the most junior mainline person gets ahead of our most senior BACEx guy. I have heard that mainline is trying to pull a fast one on getting preferential treatment on roster bidding, on leave, days off - the whole nine yards.
:mad: :mad:

In the meantime, scope as expressed by a BAR guy I met here at Manchester yesterday will mean no progression onto the 146/RJ, (including even our own aircraft!!!!!:mad: ) for non type-rated BACX people until all of BA mainline have had a go on their superior Ts and Cs. On top of that, he said that CFE as was is rapidly promoting the Effoh contingent to maximise their chance at a command, because otherwise they too would be subject to the 'normal' BA progression if they left their current type and type freeze.:mad:

It is a complete stitchup, and I just hope our CC have seen it coming; heck, I'd even support our clueless management in their search for lower cost operations. Its all very well to talk about safeguarding future jobs, but call me shortsighted, the job, career and opportunity I'm most interested in protecting is the one which pays my mortgage!!!:mad:

As Einstein said, "The only things which are really infinite are the universe and human stupidity - and I'm not sure about the universe!":rolleyes:


By the way, who is "Kevin"?

[Nosferatu]

This thread is progressing quite nicely. It seems clear that the vast majority of readers believe BA pilots are (again) out for no-one but their greedy selves, and devil take the hindmost. They clearly don't care who they tread on in their quest for preserving and enhancing their pay package.
It's bad enough having to put up with management shouting BOHICA, and not even greasing the baseball bat, but when your own colleagues try to shaft you - well, it's just plain tragic! And then they have the gall to pretend to be surprised when we protest.
:(

I do like the Einstein quotation though. Maybe if he had known BACC and their selfish greed, he might have added platinum ringed cupidity to his little list!:rolleyes: :rolleyes:

[Dash Trash]

Personally, I might be prepared to accept a scope clause if the following conditions were met :-

1. Inclusion on mainline seniority list based on DOJ of original company (Brymon BRAL etc.).
2. Inclusion on mainline list open to all BACX pilots irrespective of aircraft type and rank. (i.e. not just jet/146 captains).
3. No interview or flight test to access suitability. If you're good enough to fly for BACX, you're good enough to fly for mainline.

If on the other hand, mainline CC want to impose a scope clause while at the same time selectively restricting access to their seniority list and ensuring that our most senior captain becomes junior to a direct entry cadet who joined yesterday, then they can stick their scope clause where the sun doesn't shine, which would at least have the beneficial effect of muffling those of our mainline colleagues who use this orifice to speak out of!


We are the BRAL collective ~ Resistance was futile, I have been assimilated!

[airrage]

You guys are forgetting one thing, YOU WERE TAKEN OVER. BA paid good money to your employers(£78m in fact, more than an 80% Premium to your share Price at the time of the announcement) not just for assets but accrued Goodwill - Economic FACT !!!

So Yes Dash Trash your most Senior CAPT now becomes Junior to the most Junior BA Pilot, just like as if he had joined from the RAF or Britannia. If you don't like it, go complain to your former owners who sold out ! Why should 3300 BA Pilots accept previous time in an other company for Seniority in BA - get Real ! If I joined BRAL(when it still existed) as a retired BA Pilot, would you have given me seniority based on 30years in BA......NO and rightly so.

As for your other points raised in order to accept a scope clause:

"1. Inclusion on mainline seniority list based on DOJ of original company (Brymon BRAL etc.). "
Covered Above. BRAL was TAKEN OVER/BOUGHT OUT, not merged as equals(or even David and Goliath style). It could be argued that BA Pilots wouldn't have even had to allowed you to maintain your Commands if we had wanted to be bullies, as everyone here seems to suggest we are. Imagine if we were as bad as suggested where you might be......unemployed with FSS ??? Have you ever considered that ?

"2. Inclusion on mainline list open to all BACX pilots irrespective of aircraft type and rank. (i.e. not just jet/146 captains). "
Then give up your retirement of 60/65 and sign a BA contract ? Why should other BA Pilots accept Pilots with different contracts/retirement ages on any BA aircraft when a lot of guys there presently are forced out against their will at 55, but BRAL guys can stay on ? Again if BA had been a bully they would have forced BRAL guys to sign new contracts and everyone over 55 dismissed. But BA Pilots are the bad guys here.

"3. No interview or flight test to access suitability. If you're good enough to fly for BACX, you're good enough to fly for mainline. "
Agreed, but I don't run the BA insurance dept where legalities may require it. BA Pilots aren't demanding this requirement.

There are two sides to ever coin guys, just ask the Senior BA CAPT's now being pushed out of the Regions to be replaced by your Junior CAPT's(junior in BA cause of takeover) how happy they are to have BRAL in BA. Then ask the 50-100 guys not getting their 757 Commands at LHR this year because of regional Capts junior to them are being directed onto the fleet how they feel about it. All this talk of BA Pilots looking after their jobs is far from reality, in fact the opposite is happening. You guys became part of BA(like it or not)when your owners sold BRAL to BA. No one can deny that there are probably more advantages to most ex-BRAL guys being in BA than being out, unless you thought maybe BRAL was going to buy over 250jets some of which are 747's and 777's and fly to most places in the world.

If we had been the spoilt Neadrathals in BA as intimated in some of your posts, we would have demanded;
- All BRAL Pilots sign BA Pilot contracts(mandatory age 55 retirement). Those over 55 become redundant immediately.
- that all FS&S job losses be from the bottom of the BA Seniority list(not having Senior 747 Classic Pilots without work for 1-2years on half pay, etc)
- all Regional jobs were filled in order of Seniority and bidding, instead of the present situation of BA Pilots losing their jobs to BRAL Pilots after haven taken reduced Pay for years to fund a New Aircraft that never came. Surplus BRAL Pilots(including CAPTs) are fed into the regular bidding Pool.(junior co-pilots)

So quite bleating about how unfair you are being treated, there are now 3500 people's opinions to consider and you guys are starting to make a lot of people feel sick with your unrealistic moaning. And before you start posting about how unreasonable I am being, remember the above is not what I said should have happened, but what might have happened "If we had been the spoilt Neadrathals in BA as intimated in some of your posts." Instead BRAL and ex-CFE Pilots concerns have often taken the forefront before "our Own existing Pilots" and I think have been dealt with a lot of consideration without a legal obligation to have done so.

So welcome to Big Airways !

PS. Any reason why you guys aren't posting these matters on the more Private Official BA-BALPA Forum, or perhaps after all this bleating about BALPA mistreating you guys, you aren't even members.

[Quidnunc]

"3. No interview or flight test to access suitability. If you're good enough to fly for BACX, you're good enough to fly for mainline. "

Couldn't agree more, but you forgot to mention the other side of that coin:

4. If you've ever been rejected from BA / failed the application procedure - then no job.

[Sledge]

BACE are a cheap option for BA, crew costs are probably half that of mainline BA, our aircraft are a lot more efficient on the routes allocated to us by BA. So all that together, equates to profit instead of loss on routes out of Manchester and Brum. I for one am not boasting about being cheap,I would like to enjoy an increase in pay and better conditions to go with the huge increase in workload I am now expected to put up with.But that isn`t going to happen,not as long as I stay with this company. The future that I thought I had planned out with this company has gone.It has been replaced by a vague non descript set of ideals handed out by a management team who operate behind the fastest set of smoking mirrors I have ever seen.No one will give a straight answer to a straight question,everything is subject to change.
As far as I can see only basic laws of economics will improve our lot (and I mean all of us within the BA group ),Supply and Demand. As soon as confidence grows within the airlines and recruitment starts in earnest,then will our lot get better.Until then lets all bend over and receive in the best tradition of exploitation.

[Hotel Mode]

Ref CFE effoh's getting commands on the RJ in BHX or MAN. I'm and RJ fo with hours for a command and there is no such plan. The only command promotions are on the ATR which is remaining a mainline type and is going to those who bid for it. CFE doesn't exist anymore and hasn't for over a year so how exactly you think it is promoting us is a bit beyond me. And to be honest so what if they were? They are our aircraft, if your 145's come to gatwick to replace the ATR i would imagine you would expect to crew them if you wanted???

One final suggestion, rather than listening to ill informed crew room rumours, why dont you wander accross the tarmac in MAN/BHX/AMS/FRA/EDI/ABZ etc and come and talk to us. We were in a similar position to BACE a couple of years ago, dont forget.

PS there was no testing for us to join BA, all franchises have been auditted for years. I guess the first sim check has some paperwork attached to it but no difference noted.

There will be winners and losers here, i very definately lost out on an RJ command for a good few years, but i can expect to be flying something big to somewhere sunny within a couple of years. Swings and roundabouts.

[airrage]

Hotel Mode,

Look forward to flying with you sometime in the future. Anyone in BA since the Dan-Air merger(even Cali days) has lost out somewhere given our recent upheavals, B-Scales, etc. I have been on the wrong side of a slope for near 8years because of joining 2weeks later than my mates. There are loads of CApt's below my Seniority and good luck to them. The poor buggars joining now are even going to lose their FS Pensions.

All we can do is try to minimise the damage in the future by learning from the past. In some situations, someone is bound to lose, be worse off, or not better off than others(probably my Seniority again, in the coming Pay Restructuring)but as long as every attempt is made to minimise damage, who can object. Only if the situation is ignored completely is their a problem.

All fleets(including franchises) are audited by the same Quality Control Team under John Mimpriss, I believe. The 747/777 fleet are currently in their audit period. It is to spot anomalies that might develop in Safety if fleets where to remain Independant for years. Why not learn from things that have been spotted on other fleets and vice versa. I imagine the franchises are even more closely monitored(rightly or wrongly)because they have been outside the main recruitment/training. BA knows that a photo in the paper showing a burnt tail fin remains, lying in a field in BA colours doesn't matter whether it's a franchise or not. They would be up for serious litigation however if they couldn't prove they had a serious input to check the Safety Level of Franchises in the event of a Incident.

I don't deny that in BA there are a lot of guys who selfishly look after themselves regardless of the effects on others, but they are in the minority in reality and the BALPA team just coming into power are much more spread out across all the ranks/outfits(ex-CFE, ex-RAF, etc) and aware of the shortfalls in the Past. Scope is not a BA-Pilot stealth Plan to takeover BACX jobs or anyone elses. As I said, there are more BA Pilots being displaced, (more than Seniority alone would dictate) as a result of recent takeovers than CFE, BRAL Pilots combined. A lot of BA SFO's are not getting their 737/757/767 Commands this year and probably the next, and some BA Pilots/CAPT's are being forced out of Manchester after decades of service there. So it is hard to argue that BA Pilots haven't been more than accomodating than the stance they could have take given their #'s and weight.

Scope is about protecting all our jobs in the future and without it we would have no leg to stand on come any future Negotiations. I am not a blind Pro-BALPA Pilot as most who have read some of my other posts Know. I read the fine print off agreements and then make up my own mind. But this time Scope is a must for all of us, including those outside the BA umbrella.

Try to take a balanced view to the wider implications that Scope means for All UK Pilots. If in doubt, ask guys like Hotel Mode who have only just come through the Welcome grinder.

[Milly Bar]

I'm getting very confused with all these acronyms in both this thread and the GB Pilots to join BA? (http://www.pprune.org/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64658) one.

Have I decoded the following correctly?

BACC (British Airways Company Council, BALPA)
CC (Company Council, BALPA)

BA Mainline (British Airways Plc Pilots)
BAR (British Airways Regional, subdivision of BA mainline, does this still exist?)
EOG (European Operation at Gatwick, subdivision of BA mainline, now renamed SHAG)
SHAG (ShortHaul Operations at Gatwick, subdivision of BA mainline)

CFE (City Flyer Express, now absorbed into BA Mainline)

Brymon (Brymon Airways, now amalgamated into British Airways CitiExpress)
Manx (Manx Airlines, now amalgamated into British Airways CitiExpress)
BRAL (British Regional Airlines, now amalgamated into British Airways CitiExpress)

BACE, BACX, BACXe. Are these all acronyms for "British Airways CitiExpress"?



Sledge talks of the "BA group" but this keeps changing so much, I keep losing track of who is in it these days. Is the following correct?


British Airways Plc (http://www.britishairways.com/travel/bafleet/public/en_gb) (Mainline Pilots) Operating to UK, Europe & World Wide (Concorde, Boeing 747-400, Boeing 777-200, Airbus A319, Airbus A320, Boeing 737-300, Boeing 737-400, Boeing 737-500, Boeing 757-200, Boeing 767-300).


BA CitiExpress (http://www.britishairways.com/travel/basubsid/public/en_gb) is a wholly owned subsidiary of British Airways which operates within the UK and Europe from a number of UK regional airports. Brymon Airways, British Regional Airlines and Manx Airlines have been combined to form BA CitiExpress. It is also the intention to integrate the sister subsidiary, British Airways Regional with BA CitiExpress later in the year. The combination of the four regional operations into one combined unit, operating as part of British Airways, will make it the largest regional airline in Europe with 79 aircraft serving 49 destinations. (BAe 146 RJ-100, ATP, DASH 8-300, Embraer 145, Jetstream 41).


Franchise Carriers (http://www.britishairways.com/travel/bafran/public/en_gb), Independent Airlines using the 'British Airways' name, livery and flight code, and inside the aircraft British Airways cabin interior and staff uniforms.

Within the UK

British Mediterranean Airways Ltd. (BMED) Based at London Heathrow Terminal 4, operating to 12 destinations in the Middle East, Africa and Central Asia. (Airbus A320, Airbus A321)

GB Airways Ltd. (GB) Based at London Gatwick operating flights to the southern Mediterranean, including France, Gibraltar, Portugal, Spain and Northern Africa. (Boeing 737-400, Boeing 737-300, Airbus A320-232, Airbus A321-231)

Loganair Ltd. Based in Glasgow operating an extensive internal Scottish network, as well as flights to Ireland. (Shorts 360, SAAB 340B, B-N Islander, DH 6 Twin Otter)

Maersk Air UK Ltd. Based at Birmingham International Airport operating services to Belfast International, Amsterdam, Berlin, Bordeaux, Copenhagen, Gothenburg, Lyon, Milan, Nice, Stockholm, Stuttgart, Toulouse and Vienna. (Boeing 737-500, Canadair R.Jet CRJ200/CRJ700)

Outside the UK

Sun-Air of Scandinavia A/S. Based in Billund, Denmark operating flights within Denmark as well as European routes to destinations including Stockholm, Gothenburg, Oslo, Stavanger, Berlin and Manchester. (Jetstream 31, Jetstream 41, BAE ATP)

Comair (South Africa) Ltd. Based in Johannesburg, operating to destinations in Southern Africa including Cape Town, Durban, Port Elizabeth, Harare, Lusaka, Victoria Falls and Windhoek. (Boeing 737-200, Boeing 727)

Regional Air (Kenya). Based in Nairobi operating services to Eritrea, Sudan, Zambia, Zimbabwe, Djibouti and Mombasa. (Boeing 737-200)

Zambian Air Services. Based in Lusaka operating routes to Johannesburg. (Operated in conjunction with Comair South Africa)


Oneworld Alliance Carriers (http://www.britishairways.com/travel/baalliance/public/en_gb), Independent Airlines code sharing with British Airways but maintaining a their own separate identities and brand.

Aer Lingus, American Airlines, Cathay Pacific, Finnair, Iberia, LanChile, Qantas.



Which airports are BA CitiExpress based at?

Where does "Atlas Air" fit into the above?

Mb

[Tinytim]

I honestly think that some of you BA boys are so inflated with your own self importance that you genuinely believe that if you repeat the self justifying drivel about the benefits of Scope to BACX etc often enough then we will believe it.

Lets be quite clear.

Scope is not about a two way process, it is about protecting one group of workers at the expense of another.

It is about greed.

It is about ensuring that a group who are inefficient and unprofitable sustain terms and conditions for themselves by attaching themselves as parasites to the backs of a lower cost subsidiary.

Scope is about the worst form of industrial protectionsim. History is riddled with examples of how workers in dying industries have tried to buck market forces and have ended up in the dust themselves.

Face it guys! you belong to a bygone era. The industry has moved on from where you would like it to be.
We live in a new world where the likes Of Mike O' Leary rule. None of us like that but look at the evidence (Ryanair and its shareholders are laughing all the way to the bank)

The conduct of BACC in holding BACX displaced pilots hostage to their broader industrial and political ambitions is in the process of backfiring.

I for one am very glad that at such an early stage of the negotiation process BACX pilots have been able to experience at first hand exactly how the advocates of Scope behave. As a result I am absolutely certain the the whole stupid exploitative and irrelevant idea will go absolutely no where.

[Quidnunc]

"...you BA boys are so inflated with your own self importance that you genuinely believe that if you repeat the self justifying drivel about the benefits of Scope to BACX etc often enough then we will believe it."

Not at all. I don't pretend that Scope is good for you guys in the slightest, but I'm not interested in your career. You have your CC to fight for you, and good luck. Our CC fights for US, OUR jobs and our T and Cs. Sorry to be harsh, but I'm not giving up benefits so Firemen, Burger flippers, Doctors or Solicitors can live a better life. Why should we give up benefits so you can have a better time? You're not BA. You may think you are 'cos you 'wear the clothes', but you're not. We don't give up things for Ryanair or EasyJet - so why you?

[Hotel Mode]

I cant believe this garbage from some of the BACE guys, i know for a fact its not the majority because i have spent several pleasant evenings down route with many of you. Many in CFE thought BA pilots were underworked and overpaid. Not a bit of it, we are substantially more efficient now than we were, get more days off sure, but i compared last august roster with this and i did 30% more flying, 20% more duty hours and 2 more days off. In fact i was very close to the monthly duty limit. My pay is 15% higher than last year, so pound per hour i'm cheaper now than i was a year ago. Thats efficient. I'm sick of people spouting off about things they know nothing about. Thats from BA as well as BACE.

The inefficient bit of BA is Management, Ground services and Cabin Services, if this brings the company down, BACE crews will have the same lack of jobs that BA crews will. Its your management too and we should at least pull in the same direction.

I thought the reasonable solution was that BA pilots have the right to fly the RJ's, and BACE pilots opting to go onto it join the BA seniority list and get T+C's on converting to a mainline type. Doesnt cost BA anything, those at BACE, and there will be plenty, who want to get into BA can join the RJ. Those that dont can carry on flying the Embraer etc for ever. I dont see any losers there. The franchise issue is a nightmare and i personally dont think i have any right to jump into a GB command etc.

And another thing...... Stop talking about pompous BA pilots, its not a disease, from what i've seen in the last 6 months the BA crowd are the same as the rest of us. Sure there are pompous a****, but they are in every company, and most of them post on here. But there is no more or less in BA than there was in CFE and no doubt BACE. Its just a big company so they make more noise. Just dont start me on pompous cabin crew.

[Tinytim]

If "your" precious RJs and "your" precious routes are so vital to you then why don't you just get on and fly them yourselves in BA Mainline...??

Oh I forgot......

You don't want to fly them because it is beneath your dignity to fly such an apology for a little aeroplane (heaven forbid a 145-you'd rather take a train) and, of course, you can't make any money flying around with thirty passengers in the back of an Airbus.

So you'll just spoil it for those of us who can anyway by an ill-conceived abomination called "Scope".....which ensures that you win all ways ....

The BA CC dog in a manger attitude is there for everyone to see.

Nice Guys....

[Hotel Mode]

For goodness sake tinytim get a grip on reality. Half the BA guys responding here actually do fly the RJ and we like it. They are not our routes they are BAR routes and they made sacrifices to keep them a few years back, all for nothing. Whatever way you play it you are gaining 12 airframes, BAR are losing 12. So more opportunities for BACE pilots. Dont know where you are based but try this one. In 2 years time BA buys Air Wales and its ATR's. They then decide that a mixed fleet in Aberdeen is a bad idea, and decide to standardise on the ATR to be flown by ex Air wales pilots on lower terms and conditions and all ABZ crews will be moved elsewhere. Would you not expect your CC to try and protect the jobs and T+C's at ABZ, in order to prevent the same thing happening at other larger bases, Manch etc. It is not unreasonable for the BACC to protect the work of BA pilots, thats what they are there for. I still dont understand what the problem is when you are gaining work.

[Hand Solo]

I think you'll find there are quite a lot of people who want to fly the RJ and are bidding for it, so you'd best wind your neck in because they'll be your Captain soon. Anyway, I'm going to heed the previous warning by one of your colleagues about the way you poison threads with your vapid drivel, so I'm going to ignore your posts and I suggest all other readers, regardless of employer, do exactly the same.

[Tinytim]

Hotel Mode...Ever heard of market forces??? You can't buck the market. However much you bury your head in a bucket, they won't go away.

If the free market says you are only worth two and sixpence an hour then there is no point in staring at a gold-framed mirror looking at the reflection of a pilot who thinks he's worth two and ten and hour. You, my friend, need to take the reality check.

H.S. I know that you can't resist a good wind up....However I gather only 14 of your guys bid for the RJ...So where does that leave your argument?

Oh of course..... you are not prepared to respond to my drivel. Perhaps one of your mates on the CC will.

[Hotel Mode]

Again congratulations on the duff gen Tinytim. 27 BAR pilots have bid for the RJ, and the bid for current RJ Gatwick pilots only closed on friday so how you know the result before BA is amazing. But i think you would be looking at at least another 20. Since noone else in BA has been given the chance to bid for it, not bad.

Market forces have nothing to do with it. Market forces would be if BA closed routes that easyjet flew. BA just want to wash their hands of everything outside fortress heathrow. They arent worried about how much they pay the pilots or they wouldn't have come up with the compensation for mainline pilots on the Rj. I think they are just chuffed to bits that your CC has failed to improve your T+C's on the RJ to a higher level. I cant believe you are proud of being the worst paid 110 seater pilots in Europe, that used to be us, its nothing to be proud of.

I feel sorry for the displaced in BACE, and believe me i'm not especially happy about the RJ being used as BALPA's hostage to scope, because believe it or not 6 days in a hotel at the NEC 3 times a month hadn't been in my plans for the next year

[Tinytim]

Thanks HM! the more you guys prickle at my provocative postings.... the more you give away just where you are really coming from!!

Your candid admission that our displaced guys are being held hostage by you lot is refreshingly honest and is exactly why we depricate so much this trotters-in-the-trough attitude of you and your colleagues and do not want any part of some fudged up arrangement to keep you in a postion which the market would otherwise deny you.

Scope is dead in the water and more of our lot are realising it daily largely thanks to the attitudes which are so excellently portrayed here by those who espouse and advocate it.

[77]

Have just read all these postings about scope and am thoroughly depressed by the attitudes expressed.
I flew in the regions for many years and enjoyed every minute of it but times change and I now fly out of LHR on longhaul.
The Balpa guys will do their best for all.
The longterm interests of all pilots within the BA group will be best served by unity not the devisive behaviour espoused here by pilots who are only interested in preserving their own little patch.
Over the years I have witnessed cosy little deals done in BHX, MAN, GLA etc to preserve the wishes of a few to live and work in those places. I don't believe that the longterm interests of pilots were always well served by these deals.
Times change, CityFlyer etc will disappear. You must move on and grow up. Don't attack BA mainline pilots on costs etc. I believe Balpa has proved tha BA has just about the cheapest and most efficient group of pilots in the world.
Quite frankly we need to improve conditions etc not fight amongst ourselves. If you don't want to be part of a unified pilot group in BA could you please leave and go somewhere else. We have enough problems with BA management we need your help to move forward.
Regards an ex regional pilot now longhaul

[B767300ER]

As they say here in the US:

"SCOPE is NOT a mouthwash!"

Management WANTS us to be divided on this issue; and, they want ALL short-haul, hub-and-spoke flying done by "Regional" airlines that code-share ith the mainline carrier that employ pilots at 40% of the wage scale of the mainline pilots.

Management is our enemy here, NOT each other.
https://image.jetnet.aa.com/imageserver45/aa/9_11_feature_ribbon.jpg

[Captain Correlli]

Let's agree a few basic points. Let's use some common sense.

1. Not all BA pilots are selfish tossers. Some, but not many.

2. Not all BACE pilots are selfish tossers. As above.

3. Change is inevitable.

4. BA management really is pants.

5. The most important pilot group to protect is US, the current BA Group pilot workforce, whether it be BA or BACE.

6. If we are divided, we are that much easier to shaft.

In conclusion, considering item 3) CHANGE, perhaps we should pay attention to item 5) OUR PRESENT & FUTURE.
In an ideal world, we should be able to guarantee our current jobs and pay structure for future generations. This world is far from ideal, so, let's ALL be a bit selfish/realistic. FSS has shafted a number of BA Regional guys, but also a number of BACE guys. I know the relocation package even offered by BACE is far better than the previous BRAL model, and I would guess that the mainline one is even better still, by several orders of magnitude.
My main point is that though NONE of these guys wanted to move, they still have a job. I would suggest that the gradual usage of BACE and smaller aeroplanes on supposedly marginal routes may cause a bit more dislocation, but not much because there isn't actually much left. Taken further then, assume BACE do achieve the RJ, and for exercise, more medium types, 737, Bus etc.
Being realistic:cool: as long as no existing pilot's Ts and Cs were diluted because of it, where is the problem really? As long as no-one loses either their jobs or their current contract, the only loser is any future joiner. If that group thinks the Company is poorly remunerated, then they won't join, so conditions etc will need to improve. We all know that eventually the lower paid group will negotiate their way up to the higher paid group - ok who could object to that (except the management), seniority is a problem, but numbers have to rule there (I had to swalow hard for that, but it is really an industry norm).
Difficult though I accept it is to believe, not all by far BACE even want to join mainline, and given age groups and demography, would prefer to stay on their weenyjets and out in the regions than move to a RHS on a widebodything again and start again. BA have acknowledged this with the type freeze conditions given to ecx CFE. Equally, our younger BACE people will quite rightly probably jump at the chance to go and fly a scroggs wonderjet.
Pensions - well, we all signed up to what we currently have. I suggest we should stick together protecting THAT at all costs, rather than argue over the rights of future employees.

I know, I know. People will say if you accept a cut for ANYONE, then another and another will follow until you are stuffed. But if you look at Cathay, they seem to be still attracting people with B scales, C scales and yet each existing scale (and more importantly, the people on it) has not been affected by the introduction of a lower one.

I can see this is a selfish view. I suggest it is not as selfish as some, because it actually disadvantages no-one except the potential new joins; and if that package goes down too far, recruitment will just cease. I would just like to hear any reasoned argument as to why it is better to deliberately try and adversely and hurtfully affect current members of the BA group to the benefit of people who have not yet even filled in an application form. I know the instant reply is that if we give the Company an inch, they will stuff it in a foot or so - but how much better and deeper would we be able to draw a line in the sand reference CURRENT and FUTURE Ts and Cs for EXISTING workforce if we are all acting together? One thing is for sure, as long as BA and BACE, and probably GB all think the other is out to get them, the management will always win. It would be folly for BACC to assume they can maintain the attitude displayed by some on here, and win just because they are the biggest component. That has not actually proved to have done you much good over the last ten years or so, now has it?
Similarly, while it is probably true to say that management is in fear of industrial action:

1. Who among us could really afford a strike, knowing in these times the Company could well go under, to the sound of Irish and Orange cheers.

2. If it REALLY came down to it, apart from number of pp24 long haul guys with their investment portfolios and crystallised pensions, who would actually do it anyway. We ain't turkeys, and Christmas is looming!

Meaning to have just turned this scope debate into a slightly more logical and inclusive, UNIFIED direction........;)

[Hand Solo]

Are you sure you're not management Corelli? Anybody who joined BA in the last 7 years has joined on relatively inferior pay. These people now make up almost half of all flight crew. Are we any closer to forcing pay up for everybody? Not really. Its all well and good saying 'I'm alright Jack, let the newbies suffer', but when they're in the majority you'll need their support when the company turns its greedy eye on you. If management have their way the next intake of BA pilots won't have a final salary pension scheme, nor I suspect will the nexy intake of BACE pilots. Do you think they'll support you when the company tries to end a pension scheme they don't even belong to, or will you reap what you sow? If you think theres a finite point where people will cease to fly because the pay is too poor then you've been in the industry too long. Cast a glance over some of the Wannabees sites sometimes and occasionally you'll find people willing to work for nothing. After all if they're prepared to go £50k in debt to get the licence what difference does another £15K make to support your first pay free year?

Your point is that BA pilots should not hurt current members of the BA group to protect people who haven't even joined. Well the current RJ deal already hurts members of the BA group, the BA pilots. Yes, they can move to LHR, but the job is about quality of life, not just money. By all means put the right size aircraft on the route, but the RJ is only 16 seats smaller than a 319 and putting cheaper pilots on it is not going to make the operation profitable any more than putting air taxi pilots on your ERJs. You assume the current deal is benefit neutral to BA pilots. I think your assumption is wrong and the deal is to the detriment of BA pilots on the whole. To use your argument, why should we as BA pilots sign a deal that doesn't benefit us in order to support a group of pilots who haven't joined BA but seem determined to undermine us?

As I understand your argument, you think BA, BACE, GB etc pilots should stand together against management, but also that BACE should take over the RJ fleet and then maybe eventually the whole of short haul too? Leaving BA mainline as a long haul only fleet perhaps? Well wheres the benefit in that for me? Experience has shown that you've more chance of getting blood out of a stone than negotiating B or C scale salaries up, so that leaves me on my B scale facing either a life in longhaul or a return to short haul on condition of accepting a C scale BACE salary, and thats not a road I wish to go down. Any encroachment by BACE into mainline work is a loss of opportunity for me, if not a loss of cash. If a line has to be drawn in the sand somewhere, then so long as we are represented by different BALPA CCs the only place we in BA can draw it is under our seniority list. If BACE want to join BA, as some may, then lets work on a system where they join our seniority list on mainline pay. In conjunction the BACE CC can work on improving pay within BACE. Transferring work from BA mainline T & Cs to BACE T & Cs is not a solution or an acceptable course of action to us. We are competing against a lot of other carriers, both high fares and low fares, but don't forget that Lufthansa, KLM, Air France, Easyjet and Go all pay their pilots more than the BA B-scale. Introducing a C scale into the equation is not going to make a jot of difference to our profitability.

[Cornflake]

:( Well Mr Solo, you certainly don't mess about, at least we know exactly where we stand in the view of BACC.
I notice you didn't address the point about strike action. I suppose we at BACX are in a win/win situation.

Option 1. Management work out a deal with you whereby we operate regional routes on RJs and then bigger aircraft, operating in some cases with mainline guys, and in some with just ourselves.

Option 2. BACC call a strike, and it isn't supported fully enough either for BALPA to agree it, or if they do, there are enough pilots who ignore it to make it just a farce. Management win, and red faced BACC have to eat some serious crow - also losing all BALPA credibility for the foreseeable future.

Option 3. BACC call a strike. It is supported, BA looks like folding, but Marshall/Eddington strike a deal with BACC. This deal canot possibly be as much as you appear to want, so everyone who has struck or not is actually left disadvantaged/unhappy/resentful - except for the BACX pilots, who now inherit more and more routes as the (new) management set up deals to ensure this cannot happen again.

My money is on some sort of option 2. I just don't think you are in the real world meboy.

[rhythm method]

Hand Solo

when CityFlyer were bought out by BA, your guys fought hard to ensure that the ex-CFE pilots had their terms and conditions IMPROVED to those at EOG. We don't see that happening this time, now do we?

Perhaps rather than using scope as a big stick to beat us not-so-worthy types into submission, why don't your company council fight to have our terms and conditions fully integrated. Thereby we can actually stand up to management on all issues together and speak with one voice as it were? This would knock on the head the argument that we are stealing your routes, aircraft and thus opportunities. Indeed the opposite would actually be true. Our younger guys who want to fly the scroggs wonderjet can go in that direction, your guys who want to stay in the regions will not have to have any sweetners added into their paypackets as there isn't any loss of income, and hopefully we'll see no more of "them and us" arguing.

Unfortunately, that will require BACC to stop some of their underhand 'negotiating' techniques when dealing with BACE CC. Up until now, they have been hiding facts or at times even being blatantly deceptive to the point of telling 'untruths'!

It seems to me that BACE can be considered part of BA when it suits (freeze on recruitment to help BA's budget, no profit share paid out even though nearly £10m profit achieved by us... this was actually swallowed up in BA losses) or we aren't BA when it comes to scope, etc. MAKE UP YOUR BL**DY MINDS!!!:mad:

As for the other posting regarding pensions, our new guys have already been denied access to our final salary scheme by our new BA management! Our existing scheme may itself be under threat! So it seems to me that a unified voice would be to the benefit of the WHOLE pilot workforce whether scum like us in BACE or gods from mainline.

Rant over!

[Hotel Mode]

I think they fought for us to be on equal T+C's because we were joining the mainline seniority list. I think we would all love for BACE pilots to join the seniority list and get BA terms and conditions because then we'll all be pulling the same way.... But BA arent that stupid.

[fiftyfour]

A few pages back, Airage, was considering the problems for BA should one of the f BA franchise aircraft end up with a serious incident and the negative impact of pictures of a BA coloured tail. There is another viewpoint.
People at GB are very concerned about such an incident. The chances of it happening with a BA mainline aircraft are approx 20+ times more than with a GB aircraft: (250 aircraft in BA, 11 aircraft in GB). The public watching tele won't appreciate the differences in the two separate companies. So, problems that eminate from BA mainline can affect GB in a very big way.
In a similar vein - once the public get wind of the fact that they can't guarantee particular flights because of impending militancy, bookings will plummet, just like they did a few years ago when BA cabin crew took strike action. This matters to the small airlines and their staff, because they know that it is the passengers that ultimately pay the wages and keep things going. I'm not convinced that the vocal element in BA flight crew have taken this obvious fact on board. The hostile element in BA, make many in GB very nervous about Scope. Why swap a regime of good Balpa versus Company industrial relations for a hot bed of problems which are unlikely to ever be resolved.?

[Maximuss]

Rhythm Method.

May I just say that you have made more sense than most, and I liked your post. I note that BACC members/supporters like airrage and Hand Solo have not replied to it.
It is a pity that BA are represented by such d1ckheads, because I refuse to believe that your average BA line guy is like that. The trouble is, from all I have heard, they ARE fairly representative of the BACC.
Oh well, it has been bad enough being fu#ked over by our management, it hurts a bit more being done by other pilots.

Now, about my RJ course..........

[James Thin]

Well said, well said. Don't expect a quick reply from dear old airrage anyway. Like many mainliners, he has so much time off he runs a Taxi Company in his spare time! If he succeeds in achieving the strike he encourages so much, then he'll be depending on the taxi a bit more than at present I think!:eek:

[Rider of the Purple Sage]

Recent trip over the water to the sim, courtesy of long haul, spoke with some other BA positioning crew. Longhaul view seems to be contrary to what has been posted here; they reckon a lot of their profitability is diverted to the feeder side of the business - that is, existing BA mainline shorthaul.
Guys wished us luck, and thought that the future of the entire Company probably lay in a reversion to the BOAC / BEA type of setup, and that obviously BEA never had been, and could not be as profitable as the old BOAC model. Hence, clearly, something in the cost structure had to be changed. Interestingly, as the conversation progressed, I found we agreed on most things, including the fact that the lower PILOT cost base of BACE really made little difference to the whole thing. However, what DID make a difference was the BACE Company setup. Our management may have difficulty working out whether to raise the toilet lid sometimes, but they are overall mega costless compared to BA. So, (he reckoned) the takeover of shorthaul would effectively cause a huge huge cull in Waterside, and basically eventual prosperity for all.
And all this from a BALPA member in BA as well!!:D

The only problem that I can see is I don't believe Waterside mangement would ever allow themselves to be made redundant - that has always been the problem. Oh well, nice to see some common sense and to meet some REAL BA people instead of the Mr Angries who seem to delight in winding everyone up for kicks.
Maybe I WILL bid for longhaul after all!;)

[maxy101]

Nice to see some sensible comments sometimes... Go for it, we're not all w****** in long haul. Just guys trying to earn a living.

[Oswaldo]

So the future may be bright without being ORANGE????:eek: :eek: :eek:

[airrage]

I think I have already my views clear here for those who have been willing to actually read the Posts, so no need to rehash it again and again to those who seem to want to maintain a Divisive atitude to BA Pilots. If you re-read my original Posts you will not find divisive, abusive or vulgar posts which has been the resultant response from some. In fact a quick read of the last few pages by anyone outside either company might startle some into hearing the arrognace and abuse being shown against the BA guys despite the actual content of the BA guys posts.

Of the many issues I raised;
- BA Pilots are actually losing their jobs in the Regions not stealing others.
- how if BA Pilots were all bullies then the ex-CFE/BRAL, etc guys wouldn't have had nearly as easy a ride of it to date, especially with regards FSS job losses, lose of jobs in the regions and Grandfather rights. Being a massive majority meant 0 wishes of the joining few could have been crushed by one ballet of 3300 BA Bully Pilots if we had indeed been as described here by some.
- Scope protecting all our jobs from future non-UK labour
- how being in a large company(3500 Pilots) means that it works for the majority of Pilots(whether you were taken on by BA directly or TAKEN over, junior or senior, LH or SH)but it doesn't work for all of the Pilots all of the time. I have been at the short-end of the stick 4times in 8years already. It's not a BA Pilot Vs non-BA Pilot thing, so try not to take it so personal.
- Why are you guys not discussing this in the privacy of the Official BALPA Forum instead of airing this on a Public Forum ? Are a lot of the guys complaining about BALPA here actually even Members at all, is that why you chose this Forum ?

TINYtims unconstructive response was
"I honestly think that some of you BA boys are so inflated with your own self importance that you genuinely believe that if you repeat the self justifying drivel about the benefits of Scope to BACX etc often enough then we will believe it. "

Can anyone verify whether tinytim is actually a Pilot in any of the Companies being discussed or is just enjoying the thrill of getting anyone to respond to his Posts(unfortuantely I have some doubts).

I don't see any point in continuing to participate in any debate with people(not all people here, apologies to those who do not fit this description here) who aren't willing to debate the points logically but just shout rhetoric or abuse. tinytim if you can explain logically how becoming part of BA, and subsequently the Scope agreement is detrimental to your longterm future as a Pilot then I will be glad to hear it. I haven't heard anything yet that would justify all the abuse flying BA Pilots way when a lot of consideration of the concerns of the Pilots coming onboard (from Firms that have been TAKEN OVER)have often been dealt with before those of Pilots already in BA(ie. job losses in the regions).

Perhaps you would prefer BALPA to sign a LHR-only Scope agreement and we could let you guys in the Regions fight your own battles with European market forces and BA outsourcing Pilots to the lowest bidders, then where would you stand ? But doing that would make BA Pilots the selfish idiots you accuse us of being.

[BluffOldSeaDog]

As the BACE Moderator I can confirm that TT is a member of my flock. Care to continue??

BOSD

[airrage]

YEs, do you have any comments on the points raised old wise shepard ?

[Tinytim]

Airrage, Bluffy (Our forum moderator) has confirmed who I am and, like it or not, I am as entitled to my opinions as you are to your own.
Abuse me if you will, but that makes your arguments no stronger.

Unfortunately for those of your view, my opinions, however unpalatable to you and some of your colleagues, are entirely representative of the way many - if not the majority - think in BACX. (You might be very surprised and not a little worried if you knew who I actualy was.) At the end of the day our people will have a vote on whether or not to sign a Scope agreement and they need wooing not shouting at.

Your CC has now upped the anti by rejecting a reasoned proposal to get our (otherwise redundant) guys flying the RJ on secondment to you and is saying "Unless by the end of November you make substantial progress to signing a Scope agreement by the end of the year then you can forget any CX pilot flying any RJ.ever"

Id say that attitude has now blown the chances of an accomodation on Scope out of the water. BACC are acting like total demagogs, calling the shots and telling us what and when we are to agree something that many are not particularly interested in anyway.

The attitudes I project are as a result of the provocation by yourself and others which is ensuring that we do not have a future together.

Further, Balpa stands to be massively damaged since, largely as a result of its manipulation by your colleagues, it is not seen as impartial by many of our members who will vote with their feet if it does not take control of the situation and stop your CCs bully-boy tactics dead.

[airrage]

TinyTim,


"Airrage, Bluffy (Our forum moderator) has confirmed who I am and, like it or not, I am as entitled to my opinions as you are to your own.
Abuse me if you will, but that makes your arguments no stronger. "

You missed the point TT, You are the only one shouting abuse and foul language on this Forum, I haven't, have a re-read over the past few days. Another complete avoidance of any relevant point whatsoever, do you see why people don't bother contributing to this thread or stop out of sheer desperation. Why not start a 'poor abused me' thread if all you want to do is moan and ask for sympathy, I thought you guys wanted to discuss the Issue at hand ?

As for walking out of BALPA, what % of you guys are presently BALPA members ? No-one seems to want to answer this question whilst they curse about BALPA not looking after them.

It is BALPA's job to represent the will of the majority of it's Pilots. Given that you are outnumbered by about 10-1, seems to me they are doing that !

[Tinytim]

Airrage thank you so much for your reply.

Every time you post like that you hand another nail to me to bang into the lid of the coffin of Scope.

Luv ya!

[airrage]

Still no answers to relevant questions TT ?

[Tinytim]

So Airrage, let me get this straight.....

YOU tell us what we can and cannot fly.

YOU tell us the terms on which we can and cannot fly them

Now YOU tell me what is and is not relevant!!

I am running out of space for the nails my friend!!

[airrage]

Tinytim the only coffin your building is your own I'm afraid if you cannot see how Scope will protect all of us, including you now and in the future. Without Scope, BALPA will be unable to have any power in ANY Negotiations of YOUR Pay/T&C's/job security because without Scope BALPA will be unable to prevent BA from going out and hiring "tiny-tito" from the Ukraine just because he will work for less than tinytim from the UK.

I do not want to fly "your aircraft" or "your routes"(which is a debatabe point in the first place) and neither do 99.9% of any other BA Pilot who have more than 2years in BA. Scope is attempting to keep scheduled BA services flown by BA Pilots(of which you are now apart of). To argue against this premise is a bit suicidal or misguided I think.

I am not trying to sell Scope to you like some used Car Salesman, I am trying to explain to you that if you intend to have any sort of successful career in BA(longer than 1-2years) and wish to arm BALPA with the TOOLs necessary to Protect your rights and Pay then Scope is without question. The arguement against Scope I'm afraid is very weak in this context and fortunately the majority of BA Pilots will realise this.

I have no wish to shoot petty comments back and forth. I am not telling you what you can/cannot fly or the terms to do so. I am telling you that if you want to be able to protect what you can/cannot fly, and the terms for the forseeable future, then you will support Scope. You are right about something, a simple vote will decide this matter and I have no doubt which way that vote will go, so your dramatic coffin will not be needed and will not be seen as a credible threat by any of the other more than 3200 BA Pilots.

The sooner you accept that you are now part of BA so anything that is good for BA Pilots is now good for you as well the better. Change your name to Bigtim from Big Airways and broaden your viewpoint to include the whole BA Pilot workforce and the whole of your BA career.

[faq]

Not off the thread/topic I promise;

I've been in BALPA most of my (aviation career) working life and I used to work for Dan Air.

Like most Dan Pilots, we paid our subs and were happy with the protection & representation BALPA gave us. Then in 1992 BA bought Dan Air from David James (for a fiver?). Most of us were down the road, some (737-300/400 pilots) kept jobs but on reduced, compared to Dan Air, terms and conditions in EOG/EGO.

I've experienced first hand how BA CC deals with and regards non BA mainline BALPA members and to suggest that BA CC are looking after BACX BALPA members interests in my experience is not true.

The whole Dan/BA episode led to the formation of the IPA when some of the previously staunch BALPA members realised who's interests BALPA were really looking after and I some years later compensation was paid to redundant ex Dan Air pilots after litigation, but I can't remember from who.

[Hulkomaniac]

Kevin, (aka airrage) a lot of us know exactly who you are, and more importantly which questions you are not answering.

1. I note no reply to the entirely reasonable and logical argument put forward by Rhythm Method.

2. You don't actually comment on the points put forward by Tinytim, all you do is tell him how wrong he is.

3. You KNOW what he says about scope is correct, accurate and current, but you are too arrogant (or maybe honest) to even deny it. You just continue to bluster.

Finally, do you really believe that BA pilots in general will try industrial action over scope. (I laughed so hard I nearly wet myself!) Come on, BALPA aren't even sure they can get you all out over salaries!!!!!! You know, and we know, that if you don't at least throw us a few scraps (by your standards), then management will just call your bluff - like they did last time. I have to say, astonishingly, I find myself almost in sympathy with BA management; it must be a grim business negotiating with blockheads like you and Han Solo. As to OUR BALPA membership, I believe the figure to be currently around 75%, though it could be higher. Most of us don't post on either our Company forum, or the BALPA one, because we quite like the concept of anonymity - not like you eh, KJ ??
As TT also said, unfortunately for you, most of us here in BACEX feel the same way, and your puerile rambling utterings do nothing but antagonise more of us daily.
Personally, (fortunately) I've never had the bad luck to meet a BA pilot with your outlook, whereas I know most of our blokes DO think like me, TT, and the other BACEX guys who have posted on here. If in any doubt - just check the straw poll at the top of this thread!

Finally, DO try and follow some sort of grammatical logic.
I am perfectly prepared to accept that what is good for BA pilots is good for me - but ONLY if I am to be offered the same Ts and Cs. Oddly, you have not addressed this point at all, though it has featured several times. You or Solo mentioned the amount of BA guys who want to come and fly our RJs - now you say this is only 0.1%, which by my maths correlates to 3.2, or possibly 3.3 pilots in total. This will equate to roughly one quarter of an aircraft crewing roster (given 5 crews per aircraft), so I suppose you can fly one of our RJs on Wednesday morning. You and I both know that there are around fifty BAR guys alone, not to mention the ex- CFE blokes.

You are obviously some kind of BACC hothead Mr J, but we have all listened to posturing from management in general, and BA in particular so we are well able to detect the rich odour of bull**** !!!:D

And hear hear for faq. Yes, memories are long, (not that they need to be) and we have a number of ex-Dan guys with us (and bloody good they are too!). You in BACC have a form sheet as long as my elbow - sorry, we flatly do NOT believe you have ANY, never mind our best interests at heart. In fact, heaven help me, for my current medium to long term future, I definitely prefer BA management. At least they need me to fly their aeroplanes, ALL their (regional) aeroplanes - whereas your intention is obvious !:mad:

[Fox One]

:) :) :)
And you haven't mentioned the CitiExpress Gatwick base yet.

I'd check your six o clock if I were you -

'the Times they are a Changin'..........'

;) :D :)

[Hand Solo]

Maximuss - sorry to disappoint but the reason I haven't replied to rhythm methods post is that I have actually been working. Yes I know you think nobody in BA works, but you're wrong.

Rhythm method - when CFE joined BA they did just that. They joined the BA seniority list, bringing with them aircraft and routes. BA BALPA worked hard to ensure that they were brought in on the same T & Cs as other EOG pilots, with the exception of the ATR which is a unique case and has pay rates similar to the former BA turboprop routes. BACE on the other hand, are not joining BA. They are bringing nothing to this particular party. They are removing 16 RJs from the mainline fleet, removing 16 RJs worth of pilot positions from mainline and displacing almost all the pilots at BHX, MAN and the LGW RJ fleet. That is a very different situation from the CFE integration.

As the Rider of the Purple Sage mentions in a subsequent post, PILOT costs are not a key factor in profitability but the lack of overheads is. Fine (though I caution against listening to anyone whos been on long haul for too long, they get some very strange ideas). Ideal solution is to keep the RJs as mainline aircraft crewed where possible by mainline pilots, but all seconded to BACE. It has a precedent as all BAR pilots are actually mainline but seconded to BAR. BA certainly wouldn't be able to fully crew these aircraft with the incumbent pilots, so go to BACE, who then provide the remainder of the crew (and, probably, the majority) and they fly on BAR T & Cs. So whats wrong with this? It's a bit like the current deal, the aircraft stay in mainline, BACE crews on the RJ get a pay hike, stable rosters, more time off. So why can't this happen? Its because certain elements from BACE (on this forum at least) just can't wait to get their hands on the RJs and they'll fly them for peanuts, no matter who it screws in the long run.

Rider of the Purple Sage - yes I'm sure lots of long haulers do believe money is diverted to subsidise the flat-earthers in short haul. Im sure they think we should be out of short haul all together, despite the fact that Rod says it would ruin the company and deprive long haul of customers. Little snippet of info on how BA attributes revenue - all connecting flights are allocated ticket revenue on the basis of the proportion of total miles flown. Hence you fly EDI - LHR -JFK, going rate (APEX) for EDI LHR is £69, going rate (APEX) JFK - LHR is about £180. BUT, mileage wise, EDI - LHR is 300 miles, LHR JFK is 3000 miles, so of £249 revenue, long haul get £226.36, short haul get just £22.63! So who's subsidising who? And why was EOG paying Concordes fuel bill for so long (Concorde being classed as a short haul aircraft within BA of course).

To answer some of Tinytims points - Firstly, there has never been any secret in the fact (at least not from our side) that the BAR/BACE scope issue is not a stand alone issue. It has always been subject to larger, all encompassing scope agreement, but that element was completed early due to the imminent closure of the regional bases. There is no question of any CE guys flying the Rj on 'secondment' to BA as effectively they would be on a mainline aircraft on inferior terms, which is exactly what we fought to avoid with CFE. Could you also explain why your chaps will otherwise be redundant, and why your management have sought to secure peoples jobs on the basis of an unsigned, unagreed deal which might or might not have been constructed? As to the 'accomodation' on scope, you are rather overstating your hand here. Posession is nine tenths of the law and right now we posess the aircraft. There's not really an accomodation to be reached as such with BACE, its to be reached between BA and BA BALPA. If and when its decided to let the aircraft go then what you do with it is up to you subject to the terms of the scope deal between us and BA. I dont think BALPA will be massively damaged by this, BACE are large but not a huge element of BALPA and I suspect the financial contribution of the BACE community is at least one if not two orders of magnitude less than BAs. You don't need me to tell you that money talks. Finally to address your questions to airrage, I don't care what you fly below 100 seats, but if BA want you to fly anything bigger than that (and right now you don't apart from your five 146s) it should be as part of the BA seniority list on the superior BA T & Cs. The pilots for these aircraft have to come from somewhere, why not from BACE with a big pay rise?

Hulkomaniac - thanks for your contribution, I admire your ability to structure an argument without resorting to personal abuse. Firstly do not draw comparisons to the last strike situation which was sold out by Chris Darke (whatever happened to him?). I think the overwhelming victory by JF illustrated the increased mood of militancy amongst BA pilots. Lets face it, if the companys going to go bust it won't be because of us, so we might as well take what we can now before they give it to the CSDs. Secondly, I agree entirely with your comment that:

I am perfectly prepared to accept that what is good for BA pilots is good for me - but ONLY if I am to be offered the same Ts and Cs.

As the RJs switch to the regions many pilots will take advantage of being 'unfrozen' on type to go long haul or move to LHR. 50 or so BAR guys are staying plus some ex-CFE, but as you state, thats not enough to crew the operation and we still have a recruitment ban in place. So, why aren't your company council pushing for you to fly the RJ on our terms? There's never been a better time.

[Harry Wragg]

I would have thought the simplest thing to do would be to have every employee under the BA "umbrella" on the same contract. By that I mean any company which is wholly owned by BA. Obviously GB, Bmed, and Maersk do not apply as they are entirely separate.

One of the reasons that BA has so many problems is that it has too many people on different T's and C's, thereby leading to division and "scope clauses".

The basic premise is sound enough as it should prevent "contracting in" cheap labour, as per the merchant marine. However, within the same company it does start to become ludicrous.

If you are employed by BA then you should be on the master seniority list and paid the going rate. I suspect that it just won't happen as too many people have their own agenda, especially those within the BACC.

Remember, anything outside LHR does not exist as far the BACC is concerned, and that means everyone at LGW and BAR.

To those at BACX, welcome to BA, how do you like it so far?

Harry, citizen of the Republic, second class.

[airrage]

Maniac,

"Kevin, (aka airrage) a lot of us know exactly who you are, and more importantly which questions you are not answering."
- Everyone knows who I am because I knowingly posted my name, company and fleet on another thread when accused on being a BALPA Rep(which is strange because most of my Posts are definately not Pro-BALPA - ask Chris Darke/Merv Gren. or the BACC Pay Team). I have no need or desire like some here to hide my Views behind Anonymity and as such prefer to post openly on the BALPA Forum where I also annotate my name with airrage to show my Pprune identity. So you can quit trying to act like you're some brilliant detective, I personally chose not to coward behind a false name. " SFO Kevin Judkins - not BACC check yourself !!!!

Note that I am not demanding Maniac to reveal his Identity. One, because I couldn't care less and two, because I respect his wish for Anonymity, despite him not affording me the same respect on this thread. He should have left it up to myself to post my name on this thread despite me having done so elsewhere. However, I have no reason not to stand by my convictions with my name attached. Perhaps Maniac will do the honorable thing and tell us who he is Now, at least the choice has been left for him to decide.

As for your questions Maniac;

"1. I note no reply to the entirely reasonable and logical argument put forward by Rhythm Method. "

-Rhythm Method is alone here I agree in Posting coherent arguements amongst the other anti-BA crowd and I apologise for focusing on the majority of nonsensical posts rather than talk to the only level headed man in the crowd. The problem with separate T&C's across BA Fleets is unfortunately not a new Problem in BA(Dan, EOG, BAR, etc). As I identify who I am, anyone in BA can confirm that I have ALWAYS voiced oppositon to any outstations on separate T&C's having suffered it at EOG myself for 5years. I have also backed up my Views through action by NEVER bidding into the LHS of any outstations because of this and even remained as an FO for an extra 2.5years at EOG when such a Command was available, so I have put my money where my mouth is. I often take abuse from people who have bid into such Commands for this outed View. The only problem with demanding BA Pay Full T&C's is that they would argue that it was the different T&C's which were the reasons BA were attracted to buy BRAL/CFE in the first place. Would you be happy to accept full BA T&C's and contracts(retirement age 55?), but then take up a Position in BA commensurate with your New Seniority since being TAKEN over ? Like as a SH FO ? FO's might, but I suppose most Capt's would prefer to retain their Commands on type even if it means you don't get full access to all BA aircraft in doing so. I would love to have everyone under one contract and Positions Commensurate with one Seniority List, thats all I have been after for 8years, afterall it is only the non-mainline Capt's who actually are benefitting from any lower-rate Pay because they now have a Command they wouldn't normally have gotten under one PAY/Seniority until Years Later(some would have possibly retired as co-pilots). The problem is most guys chose one issue(like being a CAPT on less than mainline rates) but gloss over the fact that they only have their Commands in the first place because of those lower rates. Despite their best efforts you can't separate the two Issues Easily unless you also allow a complete Re-Bid for Positions."

As for.........
" 2. You don't actually comment on the points put forward by Tinytim, all you do is tell him how wrong he is.

and

3. You KNOW what he says about scope is correct, accurate and current, but you are too arrogant (or maybe honest) to even deny it. You just continue to bluster."

......I find it hard to decifer any real Points raised by TT in amongst the agressive anti-BA posturing. I would be happy to give my opinion on legitimate Points raised by anyone. HS has answered most other questions I think more than fully.

[Baron Harkonnen]

Thanks for being so honest airrage and Hand Solo.

You tip your hand (pun unintended) every time you post. BRAL's post was bang on the money; the problem really is that what you want and what we want are really not different sides of the same coin, they are different coins, and hence there is no compromise possible on here. What is really needed is a meeting (s) between our BALPA, your BACC, and the two sets of managements.
I live in hope.

Having said all that, I was talking to our Chief Pilot Fleets the other day, and he mentioned that mainline were now noticing that the load factors on the old RJ routes now operated by 737s are well down (relatively) and that the routes were not really viable on these aircraft types. The plan, apparently, is to replace them with Embraers in the short/medium term. This is the future for the BACEX base at Gatwick, expect an announcement soon. Having said all that, coud it be that this was a long range plan after all, and aimed at sorting out the short haul problems?

Finally, because it irks me a bit. Some BA guys keep going on about how BACE are 'proud to work for peanuts' or something like that.
We're not. We think we need to be paid more, and we shall be working towards that goal.
What we were proud of was our ability to get the job done, to achieve the flying roster, to provide a good service to the peeps who eventually pay our wages - the customer, and, (old fashioned concept though it is), be part of a successful Company. Ever since we started mixing with BA, we have amazed by the totally self oriented attitudes, the scrabbling for small print and the rule book to avoid carrying out the job, the ridiculous and constant detail changes to everything, the refusal to compromise at all with management over anything, and most of all the polarisation which exists between all levels of BA staffing.
It makes us sick to be part of it. Its NOT an individual thing (I even have friends who work for BA) itis a collective Company and Corporate malaise.

Harry, we don't like it at all - remember the only reason that BA's offer to buy us was accepted was because BA made it very clear that the franchise was not up for renewal. Despite 9/11, the market shrinkage, BA management , BA management implants to us, BA doctrines on how to do everything, despite having to accept BAR costs and overheads, WE ARE STILL MAKING A PROFIT! I leave it to your imagination how much bigger that would be if we had not had to become part of BA.

Well, no good wingeing, we're here now. But do accept that it will take a while before we fully acclimatise to the ME ME ME doctrine of the BA workforce ethic, which seems to me to run from the hangar cat up to Colin Marshall. And also, do not expect to have your own way with us over scope. I know you have tried to split our 146 guys away by bribing them with mainline Ts and Cs, because there's a horrid anomaly for you there which immediately breaches your scope plan ! In the final analysis, my colleague above has it right, you won't strike over this for the same reason you have actually raised the issue in the first place your own self interest.

Harry, love to buy you a beer sometime - how have YOU found BA?:rolleyes:

[Fourpuffs]

In spite of being the most obvious contradiction to the Scope clause, we feel a bit isolated up here. An LGW base would be classic BA, just like ABZ. Close the base down, then nightstop two complete crews EVERY night of the year.
BA terms and conditions would not actually make any of better off if we had to move to Gatwick - in fact, I don't think they'd benefit us anyway.:(

[airrage]

Finally some reasonably toned debate:

bral

"What is so special about 100 seats? "
Arbitrary # based on the maximum aircraft size BA Pilots would agree to concede. It goes back to what I said earlier. If BA want ex-BRAL to fly 747's then we want it to be on T&C's prevailing in BA for that fleet-size. And BA Pilots don't mind conceding grandfather rights(Capt's stay as Capt's)but as long as they stay on similar sized jets. Lets face it, this isn't an unreasonable BA Pilot request.

We could have said, no they are now bottom of the Seniority, we want all Pilot positions filled by bidding which would cost BA and put all ex-CFE/BRAL guys at the bottom of SH RHS. It is a COMPROMISE. Do you really think BA Pilots should agree for guys to stay as CAPT's and then after 6months allow them to say fly any type/size of aircraft ? In extremes this could mean guys become a 747 CAPT's in BA after being in months after some guys have waited 20 YEARS !!!!!!!!!!! Would BRAL Pilots not have demanded some sort of restrictions if put in a similar position ?

Scope is not about keeping ex-BRAL/CFE guys out of large BA aircraft but keeping BA from outsourcing all our jobs from outside BA. The aircraft size is the compromise of allowing people to be no worse off than when they where taken over by BA. Without Scope BALPA would be unable to Negotiate from strength in future for anything !! Because BA would just threaten to find a cheaper Option.

BARON

"Ever since we started mixing with BA, we have amazed by the totally self oriented attitudes, the scrabbling for small print and the rule book to avoid carrying out the job, the ridiculous and constant detail changes to everything, the refusal to compromise at all with management over anything, and most of all the polarisation which exists between all levels of BA staffing. "

Please try to believe that this has been brought about through decades of experience with working in BA and under their management. Things in smaller firms or family firms are based on give and take. Large UK PLc is about MANAGEMENT taking as much as possible from employees and giving it to shareholders, getting management share options and then changing firms with a successful CV. They do not even attempt to build a profitable firm believe it or not. They are concerned with BRAND management Only. Large firms means POLITICS, it is ineviatble when working with say 46unions in BA, all with different rights.

The only thing BA Pilots have to defend themselves is our Agreements, which BA ignore when possible. Being a stickler for Rule books is not because BA Pilots are different than other Pilots, it is because we have found what works and what doesn't over decades of experience. There is a lot history in every little Rule no matter how stupid it seems, unfortunately the historic reasons for those Rules often gets lost with the Pilots retiring but you can bet it is because they conceded something in the past in exchange for it.

Example 1
- LH flight crew have a different bus than CC on arrival back into LHR (2buses meet aircraft). BA CC get paid for 45minutes after arrival, Pilots 30minutes. BA won't concede an extra 15minutes Pay and because buses continually showed up late for crew. To improve bus punctaulity, after years of Pilot complaints, BA only acheived it when a financial penalty for being more than 35 minutes late was acheived. Pilots recently conceded the extra bus to fund Flight engineers early dismissal due FSS. The bus union have subsequently blocked such action. you get the idea.

Example 2
Why BA Pilots get paid a lunch allowance even though they don't leave the plane and they get a meal onboard. SH Pilots used to get to go for lunch(yes its true)between sectors at a fancy full service waited Mess. Pilots agreed to take lunch onboard but BA then stopped their alowance. A comproise resulted, so BA improved efficiency 200% and closed the expensive Mess and Pilots kept the lunch allowance.

A retiring BA CAPT once told me that there is even a reason why we have a PEN in our hotel rooms and not a PENCIL.

Although frustrating and often personally disadvantaging, the Rules are there and need to be protected in a company as large as BA. The only raise BA Pilots have acheived in decades is from trading off these inefficiencies otherwise our wages would have been stagnant. It is important not to concede these things for free because BALPA use them as bargaining tools.

Baron
"Harry, we don't like it at all - remember the only reason that BA's offer to buy us was accepted was because BA made it very clear that the franchise was not up for renewal."

BRAL/CFE, etc for was bought out/Taken Over by BA, the reason the takeover was successful(BA not extending franchise as Baron mentioned)is largely irrelevant. An 80% Premium to the current share price existing at that time had something to do with them agreeing I think.

Everyone, including BA Pilots need to come to terms with that we are working for a large PLC. It is not our job nor our within our ability, despite this sounding harsh, to make BA profitable. We are one cog in a machine of 1000's worldwide. Even our Pay is largely an irrelevance to BA making a profit. They can lose more money on not hedging fuel prices right overnight than they pay us in a month. This is just one example of 1000's to show that we have a much more irrelevant contribution to BA in terms of profitability than we like to think. We cannot continue to think of BA as our little company and if we work a little harder we can turn things around. It is exponentially beyond the realms of our control, all we can do is do our job to the best of our ability and hope the guy in the officie pushes the fuel buy order at the right time, etc, etc.

[Cu]

Why not:

Put all BACE and BA pilots on one seniority list, with Grandfather rights for BACE Captains on current type, and have everyone on the same pay scale.

Effectively make the BA seniority list responsible for flying all the a/c regardless of which company operates them. If BA management want to outsource flying to subsidiaries/franchises then fine, they just have to use BA crews and pay them accordingly to fly the aircraft. That way the only thing you lose is the input and cost of BA overheads and management as flying gets out-sourced.

Pilot's pay, conditions, and prospects are preserved. Whether BA proper, or the franchise pays the crews doesn't matter - as long as the franchise contract makes it clear what the crewing cost will be and that it must be met at that level. If a franchise didn't want to take the contract under those conditions, it doesn't have to (though I imagine it would make little difference to the economics) - mainline would just have to operate the service itself. T's & C's for the whole flight crew workforce could then be negotiated en masse with BA Group management.

I'd be interested to know why anyone from whichever comapny would not benefit from this... but if I've suggested something stupid, my apologies! (I'll delete the post if I get too insulted) :)

[Jet II]

airrage


there is even a reason why we have a PEN in our hotel rooms and not a PENCIL

OK, I give up - what is the reason?

:confused:

[Mike Mercury]

airrage. I think I can see where you are coming from, I wonder if you can say he same for us?
One minute we are a successful Regional Airline, making record profits year on year, and broadly speaking, as satisfied as pilots ever get to be. Then BA come and buy us. (I really wouldn't talk too much about share price if I were you!).
Worst of all, they then deluge us with appointments, mangers and BA personnel. They also merge us with another successful wholly owned subsidiary, already going through the BAisation routine. Our colleagues in Brymon tell us what BA management is like - but most of us smile and think they exaggerate.
Then we look at the Big Cheeses coming our way, (not to mention the little one, lol).

We get managers with no experience of managing, certianly not of managing regional airlines anyway. We get Fleet Manager appointments with no experience of manageing, or even of being an aircraft Captain, we get training captains likewise. We see appointments made blatantly to relatives of senior staff, and then they say everything must change. No specifics as to why we must change, just that we must.
We change SOPs, manuals, procedures, management structures, training structures, training procedures, passenger checkin methods, aircraft handling methods, pax and crew catering, uniforms, recruitment - EVERYTHING.

What happens next? Hmmmm, we start cancelling flights due to lack of crew, we have plummeting morale, we have dirty unkempt aircraft, total lack of timekeeping - its an effing disaster - but hey what do we know? Noone apologises, noone is fired, and the same management that achieved this masterpiece carry on with their buddy buddy tactics, changing things that worked for things that don't. I would be the first to stand in line and congratulate success, but this is bizarre. I don't know how, but somehow apparently we are still in the black, but it can't b by much.

This airrage, is why we don't trust or believe anything to do with BA. I can actually see what you mean with your last post, but I can tell you, this type of system may be ok for a large outfit like Marconi, oops, I mean BA (you see, methodology DOES matter) but it does not work in the smaller, tighter Regional setup.

I suppose I would be happy to accept BA Ts and Cs, but I'm not sure I would actually be better off. I certainly can't afford to retire at 55. I certainly don't want to become a tiny cog in the machine; I quite like being able to actively contribute, and see the difference my efforts make. It does seem however that this aproach is impossible within BA. I don't know who I feel sorriest for, you lot for having your system, or us lot for having to join your system.:rolleyes:
Maybe there isn't an answer, but your attitude certainly doesn't help.

[maxy101]

M.M Why are you seemingly blaming airrage, when it seems you have a common enemy? I also work for BA mainline on L/H now, ex cadet, and I'm also disheartened like you both. I've been regionalised, franchised and generally shafted. Now that you're in BA you'll experience the same, but pls don't blame the likes of airrage and myself for wanting to stop the rot and protect our jobs.

[airrage]

Cu
Perfect solution, and I have said the same thing many times myself. But do you think the huge ranks of BA managers are going to implement something that downsizes their own importance or numbers, look at the arrogance of even building an office like Waterside on acres of prime land near LHR. This is what I mean about working for a huge outfit rather than a profitable small or family outfit. At EOG we were paid 30% less than the Pilots BA paid GO Pilots(their low-cost outfit). I would have been happy to have been seconded to GO and get a 30% pay rise. It didn't happen...........BRAND Management. We are told we don't have the big Picture, know the intricasies of cross-accountancy, etc.

Jet2
Sorry can't remember but it amused me all the same to think even to this detail our lives have been Negotiated.

MM
The 80% share price premium to which I referred was not BA's share price, but BRAL's when BA bought them, they paid 80% more than the price the BRAL shares were frozen at(so BA paid 180P for every 100P worth of shares). It is unfortunate for you that your owners sold out, and no-one is denying you were a great profitable firm before.....but sold out they did, so this past is largely irrelevant from here on in. All the rest of the frustrations you mention are the very things BA Pilots have been complaining about for the past 20years or so. We didn't create it or ask for it, and it certainly doesn't help that every other Pilot in the UK accuses BA Pilots for BA's problems. Whilst we work just as hard, have doubled productivity every 4years for decades, and we watch the low-cost Pilots getting paid in 1-2years what we get after building seniority of 12years+ in BA. With your short time in the company you can probably start to see it's not our fault, just as much as it's not yours. It's not my attitude, I am just a cog like it or not, it's beyond my control. BALPA's militancy protects us little cogs from how management would really like to treat us..........Yes much worse and probably for no improvement in profitability but maybe a Waterside in New York, or a different tailfin design, etc, etc.

The only chance we stand as tiny cogs in the huge BA meatgrinder is by giving BALPA as much fire-power as possible. You have to stop thinking small scale firm of flexing and bending over, and a bit of give and take, because BA relentlessly come back for more only to **** it out elsewhere. BALPA and BA Pilots are not the enemy, we just KNOW from DECADES of experience the BA Ops against Pilots, and are constantly trying to plug chinks in the BA Pilot Career armour. If you don't believe me now, you will in a few years down the road. Better to get that healthy glow of cynicsm now, it will save you years of frustration.

[Mike Mercury]

I'm not blaming airage. I'm pointing out he can hardly expect anyone to be disadvantaged the way BACC are trying to do to us with scope and not complain. The more so when you see what BA has done to our Company.

airage should put himself in our shoes, and then just maybe he'll realise that his CC have scored once with DanAir a few years back. The world knows what they are like, their record speaks for itself even if it weren't vocalised by the likes of Kevin Judkins and Han Solo. No, we will not lie down and be walked all over.

Cu has a very good suggestion, but it will never happen, beacuase there would be a BA mainline outcry.
Remeber what Kevin said

"We could have said, no they are now bottom of the Seniority, we want all Pilot positions filled by bidding which would cost BA and put all ex-CFE/BRAL guys at the bottom of SH RHS..."

or
"There is no question of any CE guys flying the Rj on 'secondment' to BA as effectively they would be on a mainline aircraft on inferior terms..."

or
"I am telling you that if you want to be able to protect what you can/cannot fly, and the terms for the forseeable future, then you will support Scope...."

and
"The sooner you accept that you are now part of BA so anything that is good for BA Pilots is now good for you as well the better.."

In other words he is dictating his issue terms, and not even attempting to see the other side......oh, I really can't be bothered with this any more. Time will tell soon enough.

[airrage]

MM

"airage should put himself in our shoes, and then just maybe he'll realise that his CC have scored once with DanAir a few years back. The world knows what they are like, their record speaks for itself even if it weren't vocalised by the likes of Kevin Judkins and Han Solo."
I WAS STUCK AT EOG(just after DAN takeover) FOR 5YEARS, I KNOW FIRST HAND WHAT IT WAS LIKE !

"Cu has a very good suggestion, but it will never happen, beacuase there would be a BA mainline outcry. "
Not a BA mainline outcry a BA management outcry, see my answer to CU above for more.


Remeber what Kevin said

"We could have said, no they are now bottom of the Seniority, we want all Pilot positions filled by bidding which would cost BA and put all ex-CFE/BRAL guys at the bottom of SH RHS..."
Yes, you can't expect to retain your Commands and fly JUMBO's the next week can you ? You were TAKEN OVER !!! The compromise of keeping Commands is aircraft restriction, do you think this is unreasonable, or you think you should get a JUMBO Command because you did 4-5years in BRAL ??

or
"There is no question of any CE guys flying the Rj on 'secondment' to BA as effectively they would be on a mainline aircraft on inferior terms..."
DO you really want to allow BA to fly BA aircraft on inferior terms. No, I would rather keep the terms and have you improve your life when you come across. Or would you prefer we all go to the lowest common denominator rather than secure the highest for us ALL.

or
"I am telling you that if you want to be able to protect what you can/cannot fly, and the terms for the forseeable future, then you will support Scope...."
Otherwise Ukraine Air will be doing it for US !!!

and
"The sooner you accept that you are now part of BA so anything that is good for BA Pilots is now good for you as well the better.."
You are part of BA now, don't you want the best terms and conditions possible ??


PS Baron Harkonnen....Finnish ?

[Charizard]

To Mr Airrage.

Yes I would like the highest possible common denominator for all. The trouble is that I don't believe that is what you have in mind.

Look at the contributors to this forum and their arguments - you and Hand Solo are are virtually 2, maybe 3 against a dozen or so united against you. Look at the odds in the poll at the start of this thread - gives you some idea of the thrust of most people's opinions don't you think?

Some of your stuff sounds quite a good idea, and quite innocuous - again, trouble is that is not the way it sounds by the time it has gone through the BACC filtering process.

So sorry, you are the weakest link - goodbye!;)

[airrage]

Charizard
"Yes I would like the highest possible common denominator for all. The trouble is that I don't believe that is what you have in mind."
As a LH Pilot with 8years worth of Seniority in BA, what do you think I possibly have to gain by Scope from You ?? An RJ Command when I could have taken a 737 Command 5years ago ?

"Look at the contributors to this forum and their arguments - you and Hand Solo are are virtually 2, maybe 3 against a dozen or so united against you. Look at the odds in the poll at the start of this thread - gives you some idea of the thrust of most people's opinions don't you think? "
No doubt this is the view held by the BRAL Pilots, but what kind of Results do you think a Poll of 3200 BA Pilots would produce ? you siad it yourself, there are only 2-3 BA Pilots on this thread at all. There are not a lot of guys that visit the site here now our Official Forum is so active and the only reason I did was because someone posted a link from the Official BALPA Forum and couldn't believe some of what I was reading. I blame BALPA or your own CC for not informing/communicating(PR) to you guys better about what Scope wants to accomplish.

There is no conspiracy folks, if there is I wish someone would explain how any BA Pilots are benefitting. If you can't see Scope is about protecting the longterm future of BA Pilots(which includes you)from outsourcing BA sched flights and thus retaining bargaining Power by BALPA then please elaborate !!!!!!

[airrage]

bral,

BALPA are trying to form a deal so that no-one is worse OFF(a compromise)given the recent takeovers and ALSO secure the future of all of Us from Outsourcing to cheap labour(Eastern Europe is one example)

So How can this be done:

If you were a BRAL CAPT before,
- you will still be (as long as you stay on similar sized aircraft so that BA Pilots aren't disadvantaged, like introducing a 747, etc)

If you were a BA CAPT at that Base and it is now run by BACE;
- you can be seconded to BACE and aren't forced to move home, wife, kids.

FUTURE;
BA cannot operate with outside Pilots on BA aircraft or Routes. This means BALPA have Power come Negotiations, future Pay Deals, working agreements, etc. Without Scope BA just hire or create an E.European group that pays peanuts and tells us to take the same Pay or they will eventually outsource 100% of our jobs to this cheaper Option. They will continue to find cheaper options(3rd world) until the world is all as wealthy as the West and Pays are equal across the world.

Where is the conspiracy and why would anyone not want the FUTURE security it offers ?????

[exeng]

Look at the contributors to this forum and their arguments - you and Hand Solo are are virtually 2, maybe 3 against a dozen or so united against you.

What a weird argument! I hadn't participated because my colleagues 'Hand' and 'Airrage' were doing such a wonderful job on their own.

Just like to point out that we have elected the BACC to look after BA pilots. Presumably you have elected your CC to look after your good selves. I don't expect that many of our reps would be elected if part of their manifesto read that they had no interest in making sure that BA flying was carried out by BA pilots.

I genuinely do wish all of you the very best, and I sincerely hope that some time soon you will find yourselves on mainline T & C's. (Thats if there is any sort of BA mainline left after 'Dubya' has let off a few firecrackers.)


Regards
Exeng

[Hand Solo]

bral - Firstly some simple maths pertaining to your post:-

quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They are removing 16 RJs from the mainline fleet, removing 16 RJs worth of pilot positions from mainline and displacing almost all the pilots at BHX, MAN and the LGW RJ fleet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------


And what will replace the RJs? The 737/Airbus a/c from the regions. You ex CFE are BA pilots - you can fly them, or do they have too many seats?

By my reckoning BA currently have

x Concorde, 777 ,767, 757, 747, 737, A320, A319, ATRs in London
8 A319s at BHX
16 RJs at LGW

which is x+24 aircraft

After this proposal we would have:

x Concorde, 777 ,767, 757, 747, 737, A320, A319, ATRs in London
8 A319s extra at LHR
0 RJs at LGW

which is x+8 aircraft, or 16 RJs worth of pilot positions removed from BA.

As for this :-

The BACC want scope to protect their members from the possibility that BACX could increase the size of aircraft in the future? But you (BACX) say BACC, can operate the a/c provided your pilots are on BA T&C's. OK say the BACX managers - we agree to that. Ah, but won't BACC then say, "Only after our Mainline guys who used to work for BAR are allowed to operate them." Then there are the ex CFE pilots, after all they are too junior to others who have bid for the Airbus/737 - what happens to them? After all they ARE BA pilots and they will not be able to stay on a similar sized jet (grandfather right as you called them). Sorry airage, BACC wants it all ways, BALPA are NOT looking after the interest of its BACX members.

Well see my sums above. If BACX managers agreed to let you fly the RJ on the same T & Cs as BA (which they haven't) its still has the potential to take 16 RJs worth of jobs out of BA. BA management want to offload the RJs to suit their own needs so I would damn well expect that anyone in BAR who wants to stay in the regions or anyone in CFE who wants to protect their grandfather rights on the aircraft gets first choice on it. BACC quite rightly demand the best deal for BA pilots. By all means protest to your own CC, but that doesn't change the fact that the British Airways RJs are an issue to be resolved between BA management and the BACC. If or when a deal is struck between the two partys then you can do what you like with them, but until then they stay as BA aircraft . If you want to buy a whole fleet of 99 seat RJs then go ahead, but the wholesale transfer of BA owned/leased aircraft to a subsidiary or an independent company is a different issue entirely.

[Charizard]

ermmmm,

16 x RJ jobs out of BA? What about:

1. The current BA pilots taking BACE jobs with us?

2. The recruiting going on this year for BA?

Someone mentioned earlier you were trying to negotiate now for all FUTURE pilots, not just current ones. Seems he was right, because no net jobs are currently being removed from BA mainline, they are just being transferred to a different type or base, and those who don't want to move base don't have to, and don't effectively take any remuneration cut.
Hence, there ARE no BA jobs actually going. If there were, I could sympathise, and you would be within your rights to object to what would be effectively constructive dismissal.
You are also being disingenuous - at least BACE are only talking about its current, PART MAINLINE workforce, whereas you have apparently set yourselves up as representing the future of all BA flightdeck crew for ever. I wonder how many of you would sacrifice anything for an as yet unemployed cadet?
It seems OK to you to have some of your mainline people seconded to us, but RETAINING their mainline seniority and privileges, to be sucked back when you feel like it. Perhaps our BALPA should refuse to sanction helping mainline pilots out any more? Would the current BA guys with BACE prefer to hang on to their BA seniority with us, or lose it because BACC insist on having it all their way, thus provoking BACE CC to retakiate in kind? Perhaps our CC should refuse to countenance providing paid flying employment for BA mainline pilots who would otherwise be on the dole, or maybe cabin crew?

Exeng - I take your point. Strange though, that all these people couldn't be bothered to cast a straw vote.

[Baron Harkonnen]

Finnish??

Never tried one, but in my experience, Danes and Swedes are both good.:D

[Harry Wragg]

Did someone mention drinks, great, mines a lager please!

Being a bit of a hybrid, BA, then CFE, then BA, I suppose I have had the advantage/disadvantage of seeing both sides of the argument. A lot of what is being said makes a lot of sense.

I know where AIRRAGE and Co are coming from because they have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, hence they have views that may not seem palatable. Unfortunately understanding WHY BA is the basket case it is does not necessarily make the situation better.

The inaction of all the minor "cogs" plus the low quality of employee at BA means only one thing, financial ruin. In defence of BA pilots they at least partially understand the situation they are in.

Everyone else thinks they are in the civil service and that BA will somehow last forever. It won't! Remeber peple are recruited by BA because they "fit in", not because thet will do a good job. If our managers were genuine entrepreneurs then they would be running there own companies. They live in the comfort zone.

Unfortunately in a misguided attempt to protect what little is left mainline pilots are manipulating the situation to their own advantage, despite what they may say. The argument is that "you should know your place" because if you don't protect "my job" then "you" will have nothing to aspire to.

My own T's and C's have NOT improved as a result of being at BA. This is not unusual. Of my immediate circle of friends, the 3 cabin crew members are worse off, BUT the office dwelling type has enjoyed a substantial rise!

What I do find worrying is that on talking to recruitment people from other companies the message seems to be that, and I paraphrase, "we don't generally employee ex-BA because they cannot do the job". By that they mean that we as BA employees are seen as inflexible, regimented, and sticklers for rules and procedures. This is obviously at odds with what is a dynamic and fluid aviation market.

The company is in decline, whether or not it is terminal depends on the employees as well and the managers.

This argument should NOT be happening in a healthy company. If the BACC was serious then it would ensure that ALL BA employees were under the same T's & C's. Unfortunately the BACC represents many members, many of whom would not support such a motion.

Junior doctors have such a tough time because senior doctors had a similar tough time when they were junior. The same ethos applies in BA.

Solution : Answers on a postcard please.....

Harry

p.s. Each day at BA is more amusing/bemusing than the last, can we still get an allowance for not having a hotel room with a bath?

[Nosferatu]

Wow, this is the most interesting thread I have ever started.
Lots of impassioned and logical debate, and a lot of very relevant and accurate points from all sides.

Personally,;) I entirely empathise with the BA point of view, and, I must say, I totally agree with the BACEX point of view, (I am one after all). Iam disappointed there is an inability for both sides to meet in the middle.

However, if I accept that airrage and his chums REALLY do have our best interests at heart, and REALLY do know best about everything, given their great experience with BA management, may I ask the following question:

When BA did exactly the same thing with CFE, ie taking over a profitable regional, there was the same debate between BA and CFE pilots. Not all CFE guys by far wanted anything to do with BA, but like us, eventually had no choice. There was a difference though. BACC didn't bleat about scope; they insisted CFE guys went straight onto BA Ts and Cs. They won their case. Whilst all CFE guys were not enamoured of their new employer, at least everyone was brought into the fold.

Can someone then explain to me why BACC are not trying to get the same for us? After all, there is no difference that I can see? Why are they openly trying to shut us OUT of the mainline empire, rather than bring us on board.

Honest answers on a postcard to BACEX Manchester please?

[airrage]

"However, if I accept that airrage and his chums REALLY do have our best interests at heart,"
I think the situation is just a compromise between groups of people, not trying to have anyone's own interest at heart.

"Can someone then explain to me why BACC are not trying to get the same for us? After all, there is no difference that I can see? Why are they openly trying to shut us OUT of the mainline empire, rather than bring us on board. "
I believe they are not trying to shut you out of mainline, but they are trying to shut out anyone operating BA aircraft on inferior T&C's. So when you do operate a BA aircraft it is on Present T&C's. Besides I doubt you really want to operate BA aircraft for less pay than what they offer now ?

I don't know the inricasies of the differences between CFE and Now. Probably a combination of the following; Size of intake, timing of PAY/PENSION/SCOPE negotiations, CFE didn't involve the replacement of BA jobs as in the Regions - it just brought in New Pilots on their own Planes to fly bigger aircraft required them bidding across under BA contract !!

[Nosferatu]

Well there's a first!;)
airrage says :
'I don't know the intricasies of the differences between CFE and Now.'

That must be the first time airrage has EVER been known not to know the answer to something!:(

and : 'I believe they are not trying to shut you out of mainline, but they are trying to shut out anyone operating BA aircraft on inferior T&C's.'

So, by definition, since we are on inferior Ts and Cs, you are trying to shut us out. Sorry airrage, that is disingenuous and worse, duplicitous. Your evasive answer is an answer in itself.
:(

[airrage]

Nosf,

Think you missed out the rest of my quote. I am not on this board to try and sell you SCOPE and am unable to describe the contract in specific details(like yourself) just to provide another prospective and to tell you SCOPE is not designed as an RJ Policy(the world, BA and SCOPE is much bigger than the tiny world you are determined to remain, in despite my efforts to try and get you to look outside the box). At the end of the day the BACC will decide this Issue and whether you believe it or not, it will have the sole purpose of benefiting and protecting ALL BA Pilots(ex-BRAL/CFE inclu.)

I gain nothing from whatever side your opinion eventually falls on. Unfortunately, there are far too many people here willing to criticise posters and far too few able to contribute positively to the debate. Thank-you to those of you who have managed to discuss this sensitive Issue sensibly.

To conclude, SCOPE is about;

1. COMPROMISING to acheive a FAIR Integration of Pilots given recent TAKEOVER's;
- BRAL/CFE CAPT's retain seats(with stipulation BA don't try to then introduce a larger aircraft - 757,747, etc which would disadvantage those BA Pilots with decades Seniority awaiting Commands)
- BA CAPT's/Pilots through secondment don't have to uproot families from the Regions having worked for years subsidizing BA to fund these bases future.
- 100 seat AC size limit to prevent BA trying to reduce PAY/T&C's from that which exists as present for those aircraft types in BA or expand low-paid outstations to 100% of ALL BA ops.

2. Future Negotiations
Without SCOPE BALPA will be unable to Negotiate from strength if BA can just turn around and OUTSOURCE(not just to BRAL, but the rest of the BIG WORLD !!!!!). Without the power of BALPA Negotiations BA will walk all over ALL of US. Even with your little experience in BA surely you can agree on this !

Continue to believe that this is a BA Pilot Plot to rob you of your precious little RJ if you want, the truth is staring you ALL in the face that the Issue is much bigger than that and could AFFECT all our careers in BA and subsequently the UK. If you don't think BALPA are trying to protect us ALL from the Nasty BA manager's ask your own Reps.

Anyway, nice to see a couple of Pilots with B@ll@cks actually starting to discuss SCOPE on the BALPA Forum.

[Hand Solo]

Well I'll have a go at explaining it. When BA wanted to merge CFE, CFE brought a fleet of aircraft of comparable size to many of BAs (737-500 springs to mind), plus some ATRs. That means CFE would be flying aircraft which were roughly equivalent and interchangeable, and BA management wanted to fly them interchangeably on BA routes ex-LGW. Thats is why the BACC insisted that CFE people were brought onto our seniority list, and with that comes the BA T & Cs.

The BACE deal is entirely different. The BACE deal does not bring a fleet of comparable aircraft to fly interchangeably with ours. The BACE deal sought firstly to boot all BA pilots out of the regions, then to transfer an entire fleet of aircraft out of BA to be flown exclusively by pilots of a subsidiary and hand over all the routes to that subsidiary. In short, the intention of the deal was to enure there was no further BA presence in the regions. In this instance the BACCs first priority must be to look after the interests of the BAR pilots who wish to stay in the regions and the ex-CFE who wish to stay on the type. They have gone some way to acheiving this (despite howls of protests from BACE on this thread).

On the subject of merging or somehow incorporating BACE on the BA T&C, then I suspect this could only be done for those who fly the RJ as (ATR excepted) BACE don't fly any type which is of similar size to, our interchangeable with, any BA type. Furthermore, universal incorporation into the BA seniority list (which would be at the bottom) would undoubtedly lead, after an initial protected period, to quite a few mainline BA crew bidding onto regional bases at the expense of your people who would be junior. I suspect this would not go down well at BACE where most FOs would see regional command prospects disappear for some time. So, as far as I see, the only place where we could reasonably merge seniority/ T & Cs is on the RJ, which is effectively an entirely new fleet. This then brings into question the BACE contracts, as if you fly an RJ on BA T&Cs you'd probably have to go onto a BA contract, which again means going to the bottom of the seniority list and retiring at 55. Also, if for any reason the RJ left the regions to be replaced by a yet smaller aircraft, which was below whatever level of seats scope decides on, then you could look forward to be directed down to London as a junior FO.

In my opinion a way for this situation to have been handled better would be for the RJs to swap to the regions on BAR T&Cs, those who wanted to fly them can stay and those who don't (which is many) leave, leaving the regions short of crews. The gap is then filled by internal recruitment from subsidiarys of those who wish to work on BA T&Cs but on the BA seniority list with the associated down sides. Unfortunately it is not possible to press for BA T & Cs whilst there is no intention to merge with the BA seniority list, and from the opinons expressed on this forum it seems that there is little interest in doing that from most BACE pilots.

[Cornflake]

Not a bad effort at explaining things overall. You will understand, though, that as we ALREADY operate aircraft with in excess of 100 seats, the logic (other than that of the power of the majority vote) is a little strained.
Having experienced your BA management now for a year or so, I completely understand where you are coming from, and I completely support your aspirations to resist any degradation to mainline Ts and Cs. It is a well known and indisputable point that BA have slipped a long way from the top of the remuneration ladder. It has also become clear to us that your management are not to be trusted in any area at all, and frequently change their minds having already agreed things. Thus, no argument again.

Where does that leave us? Hopefully just mopping up the detail. So much of what you say makes absolute sense. But if you want to be both fair, and expect to work harmoniously with us, then you have to accept that our development into more and more of the thinner routes -
(how thin is profitable is a beancounter thing, the numbers change on a daily and person to person basis)
- is probably not going to change. What happens when the RJ/146 are retired, and a replacement is sought? On my understanding, if it has more seats than an RJ, then its BA, if less, then BACX. Problem is, of course, that by then there will not be many regional BA pilots left, and for sure the Company is not going to want to pay the hotac bills.

This has got to be resolvable, all it really takes is BACC and BACX CC agreeing, and BEING straight with each other. It doesn't help when we find that BACC are up to BA management tricks, and not telling us all the details. Yes yes, I know, whose interests are you acting in primarily blah blah blah. However, remember we are now chained together with BA financial shackles. If one of us stumbles, he will bring the other to his knees.............
If one of us is deliberately tripped up - well you don't have to be a rocket scientist do you?

I suggest a Scope limit of 120 seats, which should keep us all happy. I also suggest BA mainline recruitment out of BACX, not as a right, but as a primary interview pool for those who want it, with standard interview terms applying. I also suggest a way into BACX at age 55, for those from mainline who want it, clearly as DE Captains, again subject to interview. This should allow career aspirations or not to be fully explored without any writing of blank cheques - but don't forget we're already saving BA line guys from the dole queue flying with us right now! I suggest joint pressure on our Pension future, or we will be picked off at leisure.
I suggest, in fact, that the synergies of the two pilot groups are HUGE - we help no-one but the BA management dorks by all this squabbling.
:confused:

[airrage]

Conrnflake.......not so corny or Flakey;

"Not a bad effort at explaining things overall. You will understand, though, that as we ALREADY operate aircraft with in excess of 100 seats."
How many, I honestly don't know ?

"I also suggest BA mainline recruitment out of BACX, not as a right, but as a primary interview pool for those who want it, with standard interview terms applying."
AGREED. In fact I think we should be all on the same Seniority List, swapping in and out Purely on bidding(No need for a recruitment division, one less Office). Obviously GF rights for CAPTs would be lost if someone wanted to go fly aircraft in excess of Seats of #seats agreed. Over-55 would be a nice option for some, although in a few years it will be mandatory in BA as well.

"we help no-one but the BA management dorks by all this squabbling. "
AGREED. Finally someone who realises the enemy is not the BACC but the BA mgmt.

[oscarh]

Whilst you are all squabbling about the management of the airline by the employer, the share price has gone as low as 89.5 pence today.
It´s really time to belt up and get on with it chaps or there´s gonna be b@gger all to get on with.
I address this particularly to the Important Ones at Waterworld. Sell the bloodey offices, they are nothing but a shameful illustration of what´s wrong.
For Cripe´s sake take a leaf out of the fat Greek´s world and buy a few prefabricated buildings. Close whole departments, permanantly. Outsource. Learn fast or it´s all too late and then we will all be sorry.
As for some of the pilots on this thread, you amaze me and probably many others as well with your pointless bickering. Airrage in particular. you would have looked good in a toga, playing a violin.
Whatever the current rate is for any particular job, live with it because it´s far better than the dole. If you can cram a few MORE seats into an aircraft and sell them, do it and don´t give a b@gger for any ridiculous SCOPE arrangement. That way is surely Luddism and we do not have the luxury of even contemplating such archaic practices.
Wake up chaps, it´s already after 11pm.

[Tinytim]

Nice one OscarH.

Two things are certain

We aint seen nothing yet on BA share prices

One or two smiles will be wiped off one or two faces this time next week

Airrage I salute you....Go make your horse the emperor of all you survey..........You've done a grand job.

[JW411]

oscarh:

You have just posted about the most sensible reply that I have read in years on PPrune. Everywhere you look on the forums at the moment it is doom and gloom for the future of BA and yet the good old faithfuls are still banging on about who should be allowed to fly what and to where and for whom and with how many seats.

It must be a great relief to them know that whilst they are arguing about SCOPE, the pension fund is in great shape, the BA share price is doing incredibly well, the Company is making huge profits and that dear old Tony has promised that, whatever happens, he will make sure that BA survives.

Sadly, under EU trade legislation he simply does not have the power to ensure that BA will survive in the shape and size that the party faithfull might think. The Belgian government made the same sweet noises to SABENA.

Wake up chaps before it is too late.

You guys are in a survival situation and you had better realise it fast!

[Hand Solo]

Aaah, good to see JW411 pop up again with his usual bitter anti-BA tirades! Still flying Go/Ryanair on your domestic positioning sectors (instead of the fictitious BA 'business' class)? Any bad experiences to report? Does anybody else remember the quote from phoney Tony that he wouldn't let BA go under, because I consider myself a bit of a newshound and I certainly don't remember Tony saying that either directly or implicitly.

Oscarh - this will amaze you but nobody is more acutely aware of just how much c*** BA is in than its pilots who frequent this forum (who are mostly shareholders as well). Thing is, sticking a few more seats on the aircraft (which will probably remain empty) won't save us. Downsizing to RJs on inferior terms won't save us. Only MASSIVE manpower and cost reductions from the companys bloated, inefficient, militant departments, followed by aggressive advertising and sales campaigns and a commitment to improve customer service levels would set us in the right direction. I console myself with the entirely rational thought that if we're going to sink under the weight of our £5 billion debt then theres nothing I, or the whole Flight Ops dept collectively, can do thats going to make one iota of difference. This thing is much bigger than all of us put together, and a whole careers worth of dedication from me won't make as much difference as one day of clear thinking, realism and determination from the board. If the companys demise is inevitable then I'm minded to take what I can now before theres nothing left.

[JW411]

Hand Solo:

Indeed I am alive and kicking. Since my last reply I have made three more journeys on Ryanair. Two were on time and the third was 40 minutes late which is still better than my last experience with your lot.

I resent the "fictitious business class" jibe. It said business class on my ticket and I was seated in Row 6 (as best as I can recall). The only thing that was "fictitious" about BA1438 was the quality of the service that I was given.

[Hand Solo]

Doesn't alter the fact that there is no business class on UK domestic sectors and as a man so concerned about saving his employer money perhaps you should have questioned why they were burning money paying 'business class' fares for a non-existent product? Still, glad to see you are enjoying Ryanair and they too, are sometimes late.

[oscarh]

Hand Solo,
You have to go a bit further before you can amaze me chum.

[Sheepslagger]

So why are BACC pushing for 70 or 100 seats to be the limit when we already fly 110? If we had, say 120 as someone else said, at least then we would have career progression without challenging BA mainline too obviously?:confused: :confused:

[airrage]

I have asked before but how many 110-seaters do you fly, and how many sub-100 ? I am not being sarcastic, I just want to know so I can get an idea of the importance of the point you raise.

[Fourpuffs]

We have four with 100 seat plus capacity, though only one actually has over 100 seats currently fitted.

(The managements last great idea was to increase yield by taking seats OUT, and inputting bigger ones. Yield and load factor and bums on seats all fell!)

We have one which has a sub-100 seat capacity, and is configured(obviously) as such.

Hope this helps; but we would like to see the RJ Fleet as the pinnacle of BACX aspiration, if it cuts at 100 seats, then since we already have some 100+ it will inevitable be seen as being done down! On the other hand, can't really see why 120 as such would hurt mainline. There's a serious CRM issue as well, crewing up with such hugely disparate salries is one thing, crewing up with bad feeling over scope mixed into the flight deck is something else!

As well as that, from what I read about LGW and LHR, if BACC 'protect all jet jobs here, then the question becomes a bit irrellevant. And I must say I agree with you, LGW and LHR must be kept for mainline, otherwise that really would let in the outsourcing and scale B crap to all our detriment.

Any further thoughts?

[airrage]

Fourpuffs

Thanks for the response. I imagine the LOADS will eventually determine the aircraft size despite BALPA's best efforts. You have to admit it's stretching it a bit to argue that the BACC are trying to downsize your aircraft size if you only have 1 presently with over 100 seats compared to the total number of aircraft you fly.

Anyway, hope they resolve the SCOPE, Pension and Pay Issue soon so we can get back to being Pilots talking about flying and good places to go downroute.

[Nigel Nearly]

I hope so too. Speaking personally, it's a function of the PERCEPTION that BACC are going to stop us flying any more 146/RJ types. I know it wouldn't actually stop us flying our existing 5 hulls, but it would be seen as a very good move to at least agree that this particular size of a/c could be used by our guys. I concede your points about Gatwick and Heathrow - but surely compromise is the answer. Conceding 120 rather than 100 seats isn't going to affect the next generation of regional jets anyway, as we had always been told they would be 70 to 100 seats at the biggest. In the meantime, whilst we (honestly) sympathise and understand about the forced moves (we've got some too!!) we can't see how letting BACE have access to the RJs is REALLY going to affect anyone's mainline career significantly, now or in the future.

I'm glad some of the heat has come out of this debate, and lets hope all the BALPA reps can sort it out soon!:)

[Hand Solo]

As a pure point of information, allowing franchises/subsidiarys to fly 120 seat aircraft may cause problems because the A319 only seats 126 and the 733 seats roughly the same. We also have a few A318s on order (that we don't seem to be able to get out of) which have less than 120 seats.

[Nigel Nearly]

I take the point, so why not 111 seats, or a figure which allows the BACX pilots the feeling they have actually achieved SOMETHING by being part of BA,
(ie an increased size of 146/RJ Fleet until the intro of the Emb 170)
without hazarding any mainline jobs. Whilst completely understanding and agreeing your bottom line over mainline Ts and Cs, I can't quite see that the whole future of mainline pilots depends on keeping BACX pilots off any current or future BA aoc aircraft types. I mean, practically, though BACC could easily enforce the various histrionic threats made on here about any CURRENT mainline aoc types, just suppose that BA ended the RJ leases, and moved the BA pilots appropriately to other bases, whilst at the same time, BACX entered into new, probably cheaper leases on similar aircraft? This would be outwith any BALPA action, provided the pilot moves were structured cleverly enough not to be deemed constructive dismissal. It may be a little farfetched too; however, consider the Emb 170 and its competitors. 70 to 120 seats, BRAL and Brymon were always going to be getting a lot of these, and after the current market turns, you can depend on it happening. What do you suggest then? Change your scope clause? Suggest none but mainline pilots can fly a jet anywhere there are mainline pilots. I don't think so.

Again, compromise is surely the thing rather than wanting everything one's own way? If all parties feel they have gained most of what they want, then it is a good agreement. If some parties feel it is not a negotiation, but rather just a completely negative and dictatorial order or command, then there will be no harmony - which is to none of our advantages.

Ball bouncing into your court sir!

[airrage]

Nigel,

A professional Mediator told me that a successful Compromise is acheived only when both parties leave the table Dissatisfied. Judging from this thread I think we are just about there with the current SCope Clause.

We have to remember that SCope also deals with Franchising, Subsidiaries, Freighters, Alliances, Codeshares and mergers. If the aircraft size is such that BA have a huge flexibility in various aircraft-types available then you can sure as heck bet they will use all the tricks in the book to avoid using a BA Pilot on BA T&C's to fly as many BA routes as possible with outsourced Pilots(not necessarily ex-BRAL always).

If Scope however is agreed and BA do require more or larger aircraft, then they will also need a greater # of Pilots which would have to be employed on BA T&C's....these Pilots I would like to see come directly from your crews and I'm sure that is the intention anyway. Perhaps that is what BALPA should also be trying to secure with SCope, a 1st refusal for any new employment in BA. That way you guys can all be 100% sure that it is YOUR future you are securing with the Scope deal. Why not give your CC Reps a call to push home this point.

[TennesseeSquire]

"Enough is enough" - to quote BACE newsletter. Scope is dead and buried.

[Tinytim]

And a good riddance to bad rubbish.

Can we please now get on with our lives.... either on the same terms or apart........ but not on the basis of some ridiculous agreement which has CX strung along with inferior conditions like a compliant poodle waiting for its owner to slip it a few biscuits if it "behaves" itself.

[oscarh]

Thank the Lord for that.
Now let´s get back to WORK.
Operate on schedule, give our passengers the best flights we possibly can. Appreciate that they have a choice and interact accordingly.
Now we have despatched the antideluvian idea of SCOPE, is it too much to hope that our company will strip off the dead layers of Water World et al?
As we seem to be unanimous on this one, could we not bring some of our collective influence to bear?
It´s our future, remember.

[Cold Soak]

Don't put the Plane before the tug guys. I agree Scope (well Scope as far as CitiExpress is concerned) is in its death throes maybe but the ball is in BACC's & BA Management's court now. We're still waiting to hear arn't we? Unless we get what we're asking for: Common Terms and Conditions for all and a joint master seniority list then scope will still be around albeit in some form of compromise.

I don't know about you but whilst i celebrate and applaud the stance taken by of our BACX CC and remain optomistic, I will wait with baited breath as to the response that must surely be in the post. :cool:

[Beerbelly]

:( I hate to spoil the party, but I believe that a gentleman from BA, who is the LGLC Chairperson, and also the Scope Team Rep, has gone on the record contradicting the BACX newsletter, and then denying the agreement over the redirection of the 50 displaced guys. He has then apparently gone on to say, most interestingly, that seemingly the BACX CC CANNOT reject Scope, since it is not our agreement, but rather one being agreed between BA and BACC!!!

Water gets even muddier now. :rolleyes:

[Tinytim]

Dunno who the man you quote is but.....

An agreement requires the consent of all parties to it otherwise it ain't "an agreement".Scope was about a consensus between all parties to it.

If Johnny important thinks that all he has to do is satisfy the BACC and carry on expecting BACX to be compliant then....boy I suspect he's in for a shock.

One thing all this has done is to unite and mobilise Cx pilots (as well as others ) against BA treating categoriers of its pilots as second class.

The result would be a balot for Industrial action by any CX pilot expected to work with one on better terms. Can't see any mainline pilot crossing a picket line in those circumstances....

[Hand Solo]

Well against my better judgement I'll respond to Tinytim. Scope is a deal between the BACC and BA, relating to the deployment of our aircraft and the use of the BA brand on aircraft of a certain size. The RJ deal is a very, very small part of Scope. An agreement does require the consent of all parties to it, but BACX is not one of those parties. BACX have no more means to veto an internal BA agreement than they have to veto pay agreements between BA and the BACC. If agreement is not reached then the RJs remain in BA, they won't be transferred to BACX and any further debate on the subject is irrelevant.

If agreement is reached between BACC and BA, then the way is open for BA to transfer those aircraft to BACX, and how they crew them is between BA (subject to the terms agreed in Scope) and BACX. If you choose not to play ball with BA at that stage, then more power to you. BA must find a way to crew them to make the transfer work and they'll probably have to do it on your terms, whatever they may be, but at that stage the negotiations will be entirely between BACX and BA.

The key point of this is that these negotiations are not tri-partisan at any stage. Its all very well stamping your feet on this forum about how you will derail the whole process, but it blindly ignores the fact that currently you are not actually in the process. It may be an unpleasant truth, but it is the truth nonetheless. When the BA/ BACC part of the negotiation is concluded, then you get to negotitate the best deal for yourselves.

I have noted your comments about BA treating certain categories of its pilots as second class. For the record, in 'another place' there is unanimous support for the principle that all BACX pilots should be treated equally, regardless of current aircraft type. Furthermore there is an absolute refutal by a member of our negotiating team of the claim that the BACC have stipulated that CX prop pilots must be handled differently from jet pilots. It is stated that the BACCs position is, and always has been, that all CX pilots must be treated equally in any merger/transfer situation. It is BA management alone who are setting the terms for any transfer into mainline.

[Tinytim]

HS ...nothing within that with which one can really disagree.

Excuse me for reminding (if memories are a bit short) but it was your CC who said "sign up or else". Nothing very tripartisan about that.

You can agree what you like with BA, but if it involves our pilots
being forced to work alongside guys and girls on better Ts and Cs that is where any agreement you reach will fall over. That is the nub of the issue. It is not about wanting your RJs (which most of us are not bothered about anyway).

This now brings into focus your cadets and your BAR cabin crew with whom we are expected to work. Like it or not we are already involved.

[JW411]

Hand Solo:

I apologise for taking so long to respond to your last reply but I have been away for a week.

GSS: You and I are in total agreement on this subject. There is no doubt in my mind that BA freight should be moved by BA crews in BA aircraft. I absolutely abhor the practice of flagging-out.

Sadly, now that the GSS aircraft are G-registered and operating on a UK AOC, I feel that you have as much chance of changing the situation as you would have in trying to push butter up a badger's a**sehole with a red hot needle.

I simply cannot understand why the combined might of the BACC and BALPA were incapable of stopping this unfortunate situation when the thing was still N-registered.

It must also be quite galling to you to see your ex-BA mates bury their ideals (if they ever had any) and go to work for such an organisation.

At least the rest of us out here can rest assured that your own high morals would never allow YOU to work for the likes of GSS and that we can be confident in the thought that you will retire from BA at the age of 55 and live happily on your pension in the countryside.

Ryanair: I realise that this subject is off-topic but you did ask me how I was getting on. Since last we spoke, I have had one Ryanair experience and it was not a particularly happy one. The flight left 90 minutes late due "late inbound which previously was delayed by fog in Germany". No doubt Ryanair's propensity to operate from non-CatII/III airfields had something to do with it. Fortunately, the delay didn't matter to me.

When the flight did happen it was good. The aircraft was a 738 and it was around 2/3rds full, clean and quite comfortable. On arrival, the baggage appeared promptly.

I counted 14 "suits" (potential business class punters) on the flight.

GO: Once again, I have since had one GO experience. The flight was full and pushed back on schedule. Sadly this promising start was not to last.

Within minutes of PRGU the two comedians in the front had changed the climate pertaining in the cabin from comfortable to that of Bahrain in the summer. It really was bad.

Layers of clothing were being shed all round, overhead punkah louvres were being opened to no effect and the ladies were frantically fanning themselves with safety cards.

I saw the senior girl make two calls to the flightdeck and finally she strode into the flightdeck to have a confrontation.

I could not help thinking that the Junior F/O's (for as such was he described by his boss on the PA) experience of climatic matters probably consisted of studying diagrams of air-conditioning packs and temperature controls in ground school.

If the young man in question was actually flying the aeroplane at the time and the guy in the left seat was responsible, then I apologise profusely. In which case, the man in the left seat has not had his hands on the controls on the other side of the cockpit for a very long time.

It could not have been a runaway pack for there was no evidence of the dreaded gray smoke.

On the credit side, I was totally mesmerised by the lovely young creature on the other side of the aisle. I have never witnessed so many layers of clothing being shed. Sadly, she stopped before it got really interesting or indecent.

Normality was restored after 20 minutes. The flight arrived on time and baggage delivery was prompt.

I was unable to count the "suits" for everyone was in a state of undress but I guess that they were between 15 and 20 (which you may well get back after this experience)!

Business Class: I have a slight feeling that you regard me as someone who seldom travels in business class. This is not so.

For example; I have travelled business class (return) across the pond 5 times in the last 2 years. One of those journeys was made on BA (744 westbound and 777 eastbound - I found the 744 sector more comfortable). The other 4 journeys were made on European carriers.

The service on all flights was pretty good and there was very little to choose between them. If pressed, I would have to say that the best experience I had was with the late-lamented Such A Bloody Experience Never Again - the service was excellent.

If I have to travel a long way I shall continue to insist upon business class but, despite the last two experiences with Ryan and GO, I relly don't think I would have done any better with the likes of BA in business class for relatively short flights.

This is the market that you have to try to recapture or get out of completely.

[thedude]

It's all very pathetic really! Can I blame BACC for trying to shaft BACX employees in order to protect themselves? no not really, but please spare us the lengthy attempts at justification! All it does is antagonise further.

Now, the way I see it, BACXCC look after our interests at BACX, so;
Tell BA we want nothing to do with the RJ's they have on offer.
Had their offer of them not come along, we would still, sooner or later, have acquired bigger aircraft.
Why do we really want aircraft with all these strings attached? Go get some from the open market, in that way BACC can go and get st####d.
I stongly suspect, that left to the market forces, we would see a few available RJ's before long anyway!

As for possible scope! You can't really argue with that logic, surely not! It appears to me, a realistic expectation, that BA pilots be prevented from flying smaller aircraft in the region's. And the idea that they should be allowed access to the turboprop fleet without starting at the bottom of the seniority list, well, that's just ludicrous!!

:cool: