View Full Version : CitiExpress Base at Gatwick

Taxi Dancer
20th Sep 2002, 11:16
I have been reading a bit about this apparently happening soon. It may well affect me - has anyone else any news, views or comment?:confused:

20th Sep 2002, 11:44
could affect alot of us .... where have you been reading this ?

In trim
20th Sep 2002, 12:09
Let me see.....BA had a wholly owned, low-cost subsidiary at Gatwick (CityFLYER Express) which they "integrated" into EOG (hence becoming high cost and inefficient), and start phasing out the CFE aircraft to the regions, and no doubt get rid of the last ATR's once the leases are up.

They take another wholly owned 'low cost' subsidiary (BA CitiExpress), which has bases in the regions but not at LGW, and start moving CitiExpress into LGW, including a crew base?

Nothing against CitiExpress at all.....with CFE now gone I believe CitiExpress are key to the future of BA short-haul at LGW......but BA management at Waterside must surely see the funny side!!??

Would anyone from BA care to comment? Was integration of the 'low cost' CityFlyer such a good idea after all?

In trim.

Jet II
20th Sep 2002, 14:59
I have heard this rumour too - apparently from what I have heard, is that BA are looking at transferring the whole of the shorthaul operation at LGW to CitiExpress. The only fly in the oitment, as far as management is concrened, is the ongoing row over scope. Apparently the CitiExpress management don't think that they can operate profitably if they have to take on flightcrew at Mainline BA T&C's

In trim

Whilst you (and the rest of the world) may think it to have been stupid move to integrate CityFlyer into BA mainline, you have to realise that the managers in Waterworld are operating on a dim distant planet far away from the rest of us - so please make allowances.


In trim
20th Sep 2002, 15:10
Jet II....thanks for the support. I still think that was the most stupid move BA made at LGW and they did it rather than stand up to the unions. To then give up loads of slots post Sept 11th, for the likes of easyJet to move in.....commercial suicide.

It's obvious they now need a lower cost base at Gatwick. If BA CitiExpress need offices at LGW the CityFlyer ones are still up for rent....gotta be cheaper than BA's !!

20th Sep 2002, 15:41
And there are still those that wonder why the BA share price is at the dizzy heights of £1.10p (as of today)

Being ex CFE i'm speachless:mad:

Mike Mercury
20th Sep 2002, 15:50
:rolleyes: I just cannot believe this is happening. I admit this is all around the crewroom at the moment, and having asked the Base Captain, I was told "off the record" that an announcement is expected soon - whenever that is.
However, whilst I can dimly see the economic argument in all this, I wonder who on earth they think is going to move down to LGW to operate these aircraft? Most of us are in the Regions because we want to be here. We specifically do NOT want to be anywhere near LHR or LGW (can't afford the house prices anyway, lol:p ) and we really don't want to move our families either. Heavens, I sound like a BAR pilot now.
So just out of interest, are there any CitiExpress pilots out there who WOULD move South?
Come on, lets hear from you, remember it will probably lead to bigger aircraft in the medium term, and hence a better package.:D

20th Sep 2002, 18:47

Count me in for that, I'd move just for the whisperjet, never mind the chance of the 737. I reckon house prices down there will be back in the negative equity thing by the time it gets sorted out anyway. Scope has yet to be finalised, and they won't be doing LGW until they have that done.:p

21st Sep 2002, 09:38
As you say Mike"most of us are in the regions because we want to be there"having recognised there is a good lifestyle to be had outside the south east.Even if I was taken on at mainline rates my disposable income would be massively reduced (if I were to buy an equivalent five bedroom house)They may get some single/ambitious f/os but you can count the experienced skippers who would move from BACE Manch (by far the largest CE base)on one hand.

21st Sep 2002, 12:22
Move to Gatwick? yup i would go tomorrow. I would love to have a base near to home on the south coast, with southampton a no, no, now, it would be the only chance of living in that part of the country with this company. Even if i had to fly T.props, would go to straight away...... please!!!!

21st Sep 2002, 12:54
Just positioned back from the States on a BA flight.

Chatted to flight deck after landing, and they reckoned the same, (which was the first I'd heard of it) over next two years they said that BA shorthaul out of LGW is going to be shutting up shop.
They seemed to reckon most of losses come from shorthaul anyway, and some more major fleet/base changes were in hand.

I see that the LGW Base is now the formal subject of a notice on the CitiExpress Company Management 'Intercom' site. :cool: :cool:

Uncle Silas
21st Sep 2002, 15:18
I should have thought we 'displaced pilots' would have had first option on any vacancies going at any new base, though I wouldn't be surprised to find that somehow it doesn't work out like that.:( :( :(

21st Sep 2002, 15:30
I for one would move to Gatwick in an instant. What airframe? I don't really mind.
I think you will find that there are a lot more of us who would move down south than you think.

21st Sep 2002, 21:48
I wonder if this has a connection with a rumour at STN of Barbara setting up another low cost operation somewhere and another rumour coming out of BA concerning an announcement next week also referring to a BA low cost operation involving a certain Barbara C.

22nd Sep 2002, 06:42
Getting somebody like Citiexpress in Gatwick and BC in to clean up the mess could be good for BA but I feel like a turkey in November.

The way BA is operating out of LGW at the moment they appear to me to be in their management way making LGW look as bad as possible so that they can turn round and force a lot of this stuff on it. A blind man could see the writing on the wall. I just wish BA would get on with it and not 'poison the well' by treating pax and staff like s@@@.

Jet II
22nd Sep 2002, 07:57
Well said mainfrog - it does seem that BA mismanagement is deliberately trying to screw up LGW so they can implement something big.


Amazon man
22nd Sep 2002, 08:57
Is there anybody in the present BA management that know what they are doing, the longer this sorry little mess goes on the more I think that this is all some big joke and any moment Noel Edmonds is going to appear with a Gotcha Oscar.

Somebody please up there in Waterworld start earning your money and get this airline back on its feet with a clear focus about where it is going.

As for the possibility of another low cost attempt well this would just be beyond a joke having sold GO. I think there would be serious signs of mutiny in the front ranks if management were seen to be trying to go over old ground again and serious cause for the resignation of the present management.

One word to the GB staff, your airline is the only shining light in this great big jumble of BA mailine , franchise, wholly owned subsiduary etc etc etc, dont let yourselves be swallowed up and ruined. Iam sure GB is more than capable of standing alone again as GB Airways in its own right.

Ben Evans
22nd Sep 2002, 09:23
Heavens, just read the Sunday Times article on the state of BA:

Share price now lower at 113p than when the company was floated in '87.

Out of the FTSE.

Total value put at £1.2Billion which is what branson got as valuation for Virgin three years ago when he sold half to Singapore.

BA company bonds trading at 76% of face value.

Standard & Poor rate BA as BBB- which is one level above 'junk' status apparently.

I hear that the company is sitting on a pile of cash and liquifiable assets. However, is it now a distinct possibility that BA will fail?

Obviously one hopes not.


22nd Sep 2002, 12:36
I doubt it could fail outright,

...but a takeover?? Its raw assets , (slots, property etc) must be worth close to or more than its stock market valuation. It could even become victim of an asset stripping exercise.The pension could be very vunerable in these circumstances.

22nd Sep 2002, 14:03
Lets not forget the 6 Billion of debt they have.

22nd Sep 2002, 19:02
I get the impression that BA have given up at LGW, they are alienating passengers, and can't see the damage it is doing to what used to be a first class operation (streets ahead of handling at LHR). The whole thing has been a shambles for 3 months now. It is virtually impossible to get a turnround anywhere near to schedule because there is always some link in the chain missing. London Victoria Terminal was closed in a hurry, and it wasn't realised that North Terminal would have to handle all the passengers previously checking in downtown!

23rd Sep 2002, 11:47
Interesting times. I have no idea what will happen but rumour control would suggest that once SCOPE has been thrashed out the future could be a re-invention of EOG and CFE operating out of LGW using the 737's and Airbus as the european fleet and the Avro/Dash 8's feeding into it. The rumoured takeover of GB (GB's owners met Uncle Rod last week I have heard) could pave the way for a GB/BA Cityexpress combine within BA (ie a company within a company) running the Gatwick show leaving mainline with the longhaul routes operating out of LHR. I don't think that BA has ever made money on shorthaul and this could be a wise step (from their perspective) by taking profitable franchises and creating a profitable shorthaul BA. Who knows? The only facts are that there are lots of rumours!! We shall see.........

:) :D :)

Didn't this sort of arrangement exist before it became BA ie BOAC etc?

The comments on other threads which have degenerated into a bit of a slanging match between pilots of the franchises and BA are not the issues that "the management" will worry about. I am sure that articulate suits could present a convincing business case for the GB/BACX British Airways Gatwick setup and more importantly perhaps assuage the city that it will compete effectively with the easyjet/ryanair competition. Oops have almost convinced myself - better go and see my doctor!

King Kee
23rd Sep 2002, 17:37
MaxAOB...good post. And probably just what BA are thinking. However, if it's not managed properly then all that will happen is that GB Airways will get sucked down the same plughole as CFE, Brymon, etc.

The management of shorthaul at LGW has GOT to be taken away from BA. They simply do not know how to do it. CFE Management could have done it and made a profit. GB Management can do it and make a profit. BUT ONLY IF ALLOWED TO MANAGE WITHOUT EXCESSIVE INTERFERENCE.

If such a move is MIS-managed by BA (how dare I suggest such a thing?) then GB will simply end up saddled with the costs, overheads, history, and cock-ups of the past and are doomed to fail. Just look at the handling costs in the North Terminal, before you even start on the management issues.

If, as you suggest, they are to present a serious threat to the ryanair/easyjet competition then they've got to start from scratch....not try and mould what they've already got.

23rd Sep 2002, 19:59

Really KK - i read with interest.......

"CFE Management could have done it and made a profit"

where did the chief pilot at LGW originate from???? granted CM may not be able to do all he wants too do and may have his hands tied by the chaps from down the road - but surely LGW management has a little to say about the operation which their running............

For example surely there are better ways of improving morale than rostering pilots to 4 sector days with 40min turnarounds, finishing the day with 15 minutes to spare before going into discretion? with certain departments expecting you to extend FDP on day 5 of early`s, when its hard enough to remember which spot you parked your car in............and dont tell me those on the 4th floor have no influence on the `renegade scheduling dept`

This is but a tiny example of how morale has got to be improved, if the pax see a smily face with every body enjoying there job:rolleyes: people tend to be happier and things pull together a lot more! look at whats happened to eng/drivers/cc - if the employees were treated better the operation would run a lot better and some of the `missing links` in the chain ( which we see daily and which causes most of the disruptions) would in my opinion, not occur.

King Kee
24th Sep 2002, 08:07
Valid comments.....but how many CFE management are left. The person you refer to is almost a lone voice within a huge organisation with all the ´baggage´that goes with it. I doubt he on his own stands a hope in hell of turning this supertanker around!!

24th Sep 2002, 09:38
I heard this rumour about 3 weeks ago now and didn't even consider putting it on here as I thought the chances of it being true are very slim and the last thing we need at SH LGW is more whispers about being made a low cost op or being closed down all together.

But it would seem that it would be more likely to be true than before as I am hearing it more and more day to day now at work form people who alledgedly "know people".

All I can say is I can understand that BA are trying desperately to turn a profit at LGW and everyone at LGW is doing their best to make it a profitable operation. But the company do seem to have lost interest in it in relation to improving it by keeping staff levels realistic in the terminal and upgrading longhaul aircraft.

Unfortunately it's the age old plan of action to impress the city and perhaps try to keep us in the FTSE 100 - go in cut staff and costs and make the balance sheet imeadiatly look better. Unfortunately the remainder of the operation are left to carry on and as has happened at LGW; the ship has been sinking over the summer and PAX jumping off onto another ship not letting in water and so the balance sheet in the long term will be worse.

I'm not sure how merging GB/BACEwith SH LGW will make things better, I'm no expert. But if merging more opperations into SH LGW will make it a profitable concern then isn't that is what BA has to and will do? After all BA is in the business to "make" money alledgedly. We've certainly got lots of space at JB house to be able to handle a much larger opperation. I know it may not be everyones ideal solution but it may help the company get back into profit, what is the alternative? I have no wish to see the company go down the tubes and my job - career aspirations -and pension with it, and I'm sure no one else does too!!

24th Sep 2002, 11:09
Looking at the way the Share price is going (as I type this it's 95p) I think this may all be academic before too long as I can see the Shareholders leading a revolt particularly as BA can now be classed a a "Penny Share" Market cap is also looking like it will go below £1Billion. Mismanagement must now be on borrowed time.

Re the comments on GB and ex CFE Management I seem to recall that during discussions with CFE after the take over such was the concern of some of the CFE chaps they met Uncle Rod and it became clear that the EOG Management had been in there before them and stiched them up (JB was thrown out of one meeting for telling Rod what he thought) Re CM, personally I think he's a great guy, however, he was a late addition to the team replacing DMcQ and, to the best of my knowledge, held no shares in CFE, it is likely he needs the job as much as the rest of us.

Re GB, I haven't heard that re-integration rumour before, however, how many of you know that BA once had a large slice of GB and agreed to an earn out with them some time ago? Looks like another 180 in progress??

Highly likely that the LGW saga will rate as one of the biggest Airline F++kup's of all time.

edited for typo's

24th Sep 2002, 12:29

Comments regarding CM were not meant too be personal - I understand the difficulties he`s facing cant be an easy job! however some of the decisions that have been made seem more to be reactive than proactive - surely with the experience of some of the management at LGW these problems could have been forseen and avoided; I understand that there probably trying to enforce policies that have been pressed on them by those in waterside, however there does seem to have been some almighty screw ups!

Its extremely frustrating when you can see how these problems are going to arise, from working on the front line day to day - you then express your concerns to those in the decision making process and yet nother seems to be done - result months down the line said problem arises and a half baked and shortsighted attempt to solve them is implemented.

I understand that this is mainly due to the management structure of BA - however when your doing your best to make sure that your flights get away on time, you tend too come up against a brick wall when trying to resolve certain problems!

e.g - flight delayed by approx 4 hours due slot ( bad wx at dest) after 2 hours decide to bus pax back to terminal ( as no air con, toilet facilities e.t.c) get told by certain groups that this cannot be authorised as meetings at LHR are trying too decide what is best! when the acft commander on the ground fully appreciated the situation and came up with a soloution! Pax transport requested and was told that it would arrive asap - 50 mins later after a host of delaying tactics transport arrives and crew are told its not worth taking pax off!

How on earth can we provide a service that is deemed acceptable by the pax when those in the company are preventing you from doing your job and making the decisions which we should be entrusted with! Majority of crews have years of experience and have seen the situation before so surely we are the best too make an immediate, educated decision on how to rectify the prob!

This is one of the reasons why morale is so low!

I know BA pilots get a lot of stick from certain groups using this forum, I think this is totally unjustified - we all do the same jobs and encounter the same problems each day!!!! people say that mainline crews are overpaid and inefficient, this is just not the case - the crews are very efficient, it is just the resources and restrictions placed on us by up high that makes the public and those outside the airline percieve us to be so!

I agree with you swede - if the share price drops any lower maybe we will get what we desperately need - a complete clearout of the current management! perhaps then we can get on with the task in hand, be it mainline/ex cfe/brymon, and fly pax from A to B with a standard of punctuality and service that will make them want to fly with us again!

surely that can only be in the best interests of everyone!

24th Sep 2002, 18:01
In my whole existance I have never wanted to see a 'revolting' shareholder more than I do now.

The whole setup needs a good kick up the @rse.

The lower levels need to be given more control over day to day decisions. There's no point in having flt deck, cabin crew and ground staff with years of experience( a lot of them have vast experience ) in the daily running of the job and then shackling them with 'barking management' who can't make the quick decisions that are sometimes required.

Maybe it's time for BA to go.

There is talk of BT being better broken into it's component parts. Maybe BA should go the same way and return to the old companies it was with longhaul and shorthaul as separate companies.

24th Sep 2002, 18:29
This will probably inflame matters further still on the subject of BA management but has anyone seen the application in today's CAA Official Record http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/213/1559.pdf by BA to lease in two SN Brussels Airlines Avro RJs for the winter season - to "provide extra capacity"? Does anyone know why these aircraft are needed and where they will be based?

24th Sep 2002, 19:59
Sorry everyone. I started this rumour. I had no idea it would get so out of hand.

King Kee
24th Sep 2002, 20:38

Agree with your post entirely.....and trying to work out who you are!

Ben Evans
24th Sep 2002, 23:22
Didn't BA have a successful, profitable, strongly branded low cost arm called Go-Fly?

If they had not sold it then today it would be worth something like a third of a Billion (thats what Stelios paid). Or roughly a third of the market cap of all of BA.

Would it not be the ideal vehicle to re-launch Gatwick with? Would it not be the ideal thing with which to persuade the city with? Would it not be the ideal long term strategy for BA - short haul Europe mostly Go; Medium and Long Haul mostly BA mainline; domestic network mainly specialised smaller franchises.

Or is that too obvious?

Gatwick is a fantastic airport. It not only captures a big chunk on London but sits right at the centre of the wealthiest region in Europe. It, in itself, is an efficient airport in terms of runway and ground utilisation. It has excellent transport links and is well known and used by a LOT of passengers.

That BA are apparently apathetic about its future is worrying indeed. If Gatwick falls then how much longer will Fortress Heathrow remain free from the Orange tails?

Interesting Times.


Amazon man
25th Sep 2002, 08:49
Ben Evans,

I think you have hit the nail on the head it was simply just too obvious and a lot of these so called managers seem to lack what used to be called common sense.

25th Sep 2002, 08:57
Flight Rider, perhaps they are for additional back up given BA have trashed the ones they inherited from CFE??

Did I just see "common sense" and "BA Management" used in the same line? Not a hope, Mismanagement couldn't organise a watch roster for a one man submarine.

King Kee, keep guessing, though I may have the T Shirt and the Video.

Wet Power
25th Sep 2002, 09:09
BA shares closed at round about the 96 pence mark last night.

Partly a fear of Gulf War Mk 2 but still not good - going to have to be very careful.

25th Sep 2002, 09:51
Beerbelly- I shouldn't listen to any longhaul crews talking about the future of LGW. They have as much of an idea of what is going on there as Nero had on fire prevention. They only realised that the RJ crews had negotiated Grandfather rights months after it happened, they are only really interested in 'golden runways' and will talk down anything else just to make themselves feel better.

Sick- Who in their right minds would take on BA with its debt and its 47 unions. At the moment BA is an airline run for and by Cabin Crew the management is scared s***less of them and so continues to pour money down their throats.

King Kee-CM managed like Genghis Khan at CFE with the lovely BB backing him up.Grantd he can make 1+1=2 but he couldn't lead a bunch of kids to a birthday party let alone BA's LGW operation. CFE was a small airline run out of portacabins next to a sewage farm with some of the worst paid crews in Europe, if thats what you are looking for I'm sure BB has started a new operation hasn't he? Talk about rose tinted spectacles!!

Ben Evans- BA views LGW as LHR's third runway. LHR probably won't get a third runway so BA are staying at LGW (Rod E last week) word on the street is that Z car park will eventually become a bit longer and thinner with white stripes at each end!

There are some great rumours on this thread. The whole of the industry is in deep ****, no airline is afe at the moment, particularly with the yanks queing up to go into the rediculous Chapter 11 arrangements that will enable them to avoid the market forces that they hypocritically howl on about whenevr anyone threatens their dominance of the market. All the bickering on this and other threads is missing the point. All our jobs are under threat.

Big Dog's
25th Sep 2002, 09:58
Worry not folks-help is at hand. When GB Airways take over the running of short haul at LGW you can all work for an efficient and friendly company with a great future!

OK so may be that's a bit strong but those of you in the know will realise that this is what might happen! With the backing of the Bland Group GB could easily be in a position to take over the North Terminal (it's been proposed before)

25th Sep 2002, 14:26
Is it just me, or am I missing something in all this.
The BA managers aren't as stupid as everyone is painting them.

If you all put yourself in their shoes for a moment.

On one hand (Mainline BA) you have a high cost company that is costing an arm and a leg to run, allowances, salary, pensions, transport [from crewroom/aircraft] etc.etc.etc.

On the other hand you have a compnay that cost a fraction to run compaired to mainline. Top salary for a Citiexpress turbo pilot, and I reiterate TOP, £46,667. Night allowance £21 (I know you don't believe it, but check with any of them) How many BA F/Os are on more than that.

So if you were management which company would you promote.
Mainline are and have been on easy street for so long everyone thinks it's normal, it ain't, and it won't stay like this for ever.

25th Sep 2002, 17:37
R Don, you obviously havn't a clue how much BA crews are paid in shorthaul. There are NO repeat NO FO's at LGW that are on anything like 46 grand. All this banging on about how inefficient mainline crews are at BA just shows how little you know about how hard we are working at LGW as well. This self righteous uninformed b******* that everybody seems to be trying to hit the mainline crews with is , to say the least, counterproductive. Are you really as short sighted and misinformed as it seems you all are or do you just like the self righteous glow you all seem to be basking in at the moment?

If BALPA gets its way and puts all BACE, GB and other franchise crews on the BA seniority list you will all be better off. Not only will you be able to stay in your jobs with no loss of terms and conditions, in fact they could improve, you will also, in the long term, have access to a greater variety of flying than you ever would get at BACE. If you don't want that variety, never mind you don't have to change what your doing, if you do great!

Maybe I'm misunderstanding you but to call us liars at BA is way wide of the mark and incredibly insulting. We need to drag this debate out of the nursery and into reality before another thread becomes devisive and insulting.

You all seem to be willing the downward movement of terms and conditions just to spite another group of pilots and feel better about not being paid as much as they are. We all want as secure a future as possible at BA and I'm sure that most of us wish that everyone was on the best T's and C's possible, not necessarily ours by the way! Lets hope it all comes off and we see the lot of all UK pilots improve as a result.

Grease Weasel
25th Sep 2002, 22:16
So what's the latest with those CityFlyer RJ's? Where are they going and more importantly when? I heard that they were going to Manchester and Birmingham in August and September - but it doesn't seem to have happened... Is it BALPA's dealings that are standing in the way and if so are they close to completion? Are all of the 73's initially at Manchester going South?

Harry Wragg
25th Sep 2002, 23:22
CFE, a small airline run out of portacabins which managed to make more of a profit than the whole of BA. Unfortunately we have to work with these idiots at LGW. The ones from LHR are even bigger idiots. The ones from Waterside make village idiots seem positively intellectual.

So, in conclusion, don't let anyone from BA near your company, especially management types. Hopefully, LGW will be able to break free of BA at some point, I don't mind under which banner as long as it's not BA led.

GB is a well run profitable company with the right attitude. Don't let BA make a mess of this too.

Harry :D

p.s. Once BA mismanage SH to a standstill they can then concentrate on making LH unprofitable too. Not sure if ANY BA routes are currently profitable. The wheel does OK.

fatboy slim
26th Sep 2002, 07:52
Grease Weasel - 2 RJs Flying in MAN now, 1st RJ arrives in BHX on the 1st OCT, when its all complete no more 73s in MAN or 319s at BHX. Delay - Engineering causing a problem at the moment as the BHX based 319 engineers (quite rightly) dont want to be moved to London but the company is refusing to re train them on the RJ. Seems a common management misconception to me - people will just 'up sticks' and move at the drop of a hat.

Second point - SCOPE will preclude the BACX base at LGW as it will not allow any Jet flying from London Airports by folk not on the BA seniority list.

In trim
26th Sep 2002, 08:58
Atropos and others,

Don't keep coming back to aircrew and their salaries as the issue......we all know that the 'mismanagement' is not particularly one of Flight Ops.

Just look at the handling costs and inefficiencies in the North Terminal......you are paying 3x what you could get with a dedicated handling team in the South Terminal, but is the handling in the north any better....no way!!

BA have pulled out much of the longhaul, but not really stripped away the same proportion of Club Lounges or office space....so short-haul is now presumably saddled with an even higher proportion of these costs than it was in the past.

No-one is saying CFE was perfect, and I have no doubt salaries would have risen as aircraft size increased.....just remember it started with small turboprops which do not have the same earning power as a 737, but still need two drivers at the pointy end. However, the turboprop fleet was reducing, the RJ fleet was increasing, so inevitably salaries would have risen with market forces.

It may have been run "out of portacabins" but it was the people who made it successful......a management team who were focussed and knew the LGW short-haul market. Not many of those in BA.

Ask the ex-CFE employees where they would rather be right now in these uncertain times and I bet the majority would like to turn the clock back.

It's too late for that now, but for god's sake don't let BA drag down any other good companies such as GB. (Incidentally, another successful company which like CFE was managed from knackered old offices next to a sewage farm.....it must be something in the air?!)

26th Sep 2002, 11:41
I know what the ex-CFE people would like 'cos I'm married to one of 'em! That's given the game away!

The real problem at BA as several correspondents have quite rightly pointed out is that the company management structure is shot. The ideal scenario is to end up with BA pay and flat efficient management like CFE, however with a large helping of understanding thrown in. As I understand it RE has publicly stated that he wants to move faster to this goal but the company's inertia is preventing him. Now what that means is open to interpretation. I think it means that the management team and the board are preventing him because they are scared of the power groups in the airline, i.e. the cabin crew and customer services under Mike Street. The sooner all the old guard of BA's days are turfed out the better.

How you take on the CC unions and get rid of the demarkation on the ground is also open to discussion but BA are paying for their intransigence in the good times when all this should have been done. The ostriches just seem to be pushing their heads further into the ground rather than taking stock and acting. Re says he has contingencies in place that will allow us to survive any new Gulf War. I would argue that is the least of our worries. This company needs to be sorted out now, RE is a centralist who wants everything under his control, that is the only thing that gives me hope for the future. We need to get away from the empire building, the political in fighting and start with one goal which we can achieve-survival!

Hand Solo
26th Sep 2002, 17:21
R. Don

On one hand (Mainline BA) you have a high cost company that is costing an arm and a leg to run, allowances, salary, pensions, transport [from crewroom/aircraft] etc.etc.etc.

Allowances/salary - much the same thing. How many FOs at Go/Easy are on £19K? None, Id guess. Factor in allowances and then a BA FO is starting to make comparable cash.

Pensions - Pensionable pay of £19K? That'll really break the bank compared to DC contributions on a £30K+ salary.

Transport - obviously never flown out of LHR. What do you expect us to do, cycle around the airport? Its not our fault the bus drivers won't carry pax in both directions or allow us to use the same transport as cabin crew.

Anyway, lets not forget that last year the highest earning BACE jet pilot made around £70K, with jet FOs earning considerably more than £21K. Not that great a difference in many respects, particularly given the difference in aircraft size. You may think BACE could take over shorthaul, but where are you going to find 737 drivers on the open market willing to work for £21K and £21 per night when they're away 12 nights each month?

Grease Weasel
27th Sep 2002, 16:33
Thanks Fatboy!
So how many RJ's are there all together? Are they just going to Manch and Brum or also elsewhere? Are there (737) engineering conversion issues also at Manchester or is that just a Birmingham issue...? Seems like a hell of a lot of messing around with not a big end result.........
No doubt the people who have to move aren't paid for their trouble......................?

27th Sep 2002, 17:18

There are 16 RJ100s, all will have gone to BHX and MAN only by next spring, at the rate of two per month. First 2 or 3 already gone to MAN.

27th Sep 2002, 19:13
From BA Aviation Section website www.avnclub.demon.co.uk

BAe RJ100

G-BZAY, final BA @ LGW service was BA2839/31Aug
CDG-LGW. Ferried LGW-MAN as BA9272P/01Sep.
In service with BACX as BA1654/02Sep MAN-FCO.

G-CFAA. final BA @ LGW service was BA8186/11Aug
BRU-LGW. Ferried to MAN same day as BA9271P.
In service with BACX as BA1604/12Aug MAN-CDG.

Further confirmed transfer dates:
G-CFAB - 16-Sep-02 - BASE MAN
Remaining planned dates are (but not confirmed):
G-BZAU - 01-Oct-02 - BASE BHX
G-BZAV - 14-Oct-02 - BASE BHX
G-CFAE - 01-Nov-02 - BASE BHX
G-BXAS - 01-Nov-02 - BASE BHX
G-CFAF - 01-Dec-02 - BASE BHX
G-CFAH - 01-Dec-02 - BASE BHX
G-BZAW - 01-Jan-03 - BASE BHX
G-BZAT - 01-Jan-03 - BASE BHX
G-BXAR - 01-Apr-03 - BASE MAN
G-CFAC - 01-Apr-03 - BASE MAN
G-CFAD - 01-Apr-03 - BASE MAN
G-BZAX - 01-Apr-03 - BASE MAN

27th Sep 2002, 21:14
Hand Solo on LHR:

Its not our fault the bus drivers won't carry pax in both directions

Are you talking about inter-terminal pax transport or remote stand to terminal?

I can't understand how I can get an airside bus from T4 to T1 but not T1 to T4.

Sorry to divert off topic but that really bugs me :( :confused:

Grease Weasel
27th Sep 2002, 23:46

Wow! Thank you very much - what efficiency!:cool:

Hand Solo
28th Sep 2002, 01:38
MarkD - Sorry I'm talking about crew transport. Bus drivers will carry crew from the crew report centre (Compass Centre (CCO)) to central area, but then won't carry crew from central area back to CCO. They insist they return from central area to CCO then be tasked to return to central area to pick up an inbound crew and return them to CCO. Similarly, they vetoed the plan to reduce crew transport from two busses to one because it would reduce the requirement for bus drivers ?! Tail wagging the dog again!

Nigel Nearly
28th Sep 2002, 11:33
That totally beggars belief!!!!!:mad:
How can these so called effing managers POSSIBLY accept that sort of behaviour and conduct!!!?:mad:
Who is the so-called manager in charge of this load of b0ll0x, I shall write to him personally!!!!:mad:
This is a great example of EXACTLY why BA is such an eff1ng mess, I can hardly believe it!!!:mad:

Please HS, if you have a name, lets have it, and I'll start educating people in BACX what mainline is REALLY like!!!!:mad:

Nope, I STILL can't effing believe it, it's not the tail wagging the dog, it's the terd left by the dog causing the dog to change course!!!:mad: :mad:

Hotel Mode
29th Sep 2002, 09:21
No its worse than that! There was going to be no reduction in buses in service as, half were to be left on crew buses to improve reliability and the other half were going to pax buses again to improve reliability. But MT prefer doing crew bussing so they said no. And some of them get paid more than me!

Miss Inform
29th Sep 2002, 16:23
Looks like the drivers have cottoned on to SCOPE!

30th Sep 2002, 11:06


2nd Oct 2002, 14:14
I understand that it is the franchise issue that is holding up scope negotiations at the moment. If this one isn't settled there could be all sorts of cages being rattled at LGW, MAN and BHX.