BA City Express BHX & MAN - Latest "Rumour"

[mikegreatrex]

Firstly dont shoot the messanger, but the latest word at the coal face is that if the above businesses do not start to perform in a manner comensurate with the Managements expectations they will be closed from June 03!

Ok this is a rumour, but does any body have any facts on the comitment of Mr E and his band of merry men to these bases?

Regards

[Dai Rear]

June 2003? I'll be surprised if we last as long as that!
The business is running at a loss. The present mis-management can't manage and have lost the plot. BA only want a fast buck from us. We can't supply. BA will continue to asset strip us and close us down. If we had decent management, the one small ray of hope might have been a management buy-out. Would you buy a used car from this lot?

[Ringwayman]

Why would they start 3 services from MAN and double frequency on 3 others at the start of the summer timetable and announce another new service (to Stuttgart starting May 6th) if they are about to close the MAN base down?

[HZ123]

For the same reason that they spent £30 millions on Concorde and less than a year later withdraw it from service.

[682ft AMSL]

Presumably there's a parent / subsidiary relationship here which means that day to day management (e.g. route launches, axeing services etc) is delgated to BACX whilst strategic decisions (e.g is it in the long term interests of the shareholders to maintain a MAN operation) would be made by the parent.

Doesn't mean I know anything more about this particular rumour, just that its perfectly understandable why a subsidiary company might be merrily going along running its business whilst the parant has got very different ideas about its long term future. Happens all the time in all sorts of businesses.

In the context of BA & MAN, the route launches Ringwayman speaks of have all the signs of local BACX management trying to find something do with excess capacity in their Embraer fleet rather than being driven by any strategic influence from up on high.

682

[Lucky Angel]

Just to set things right here chaps.

The whole of the BACX operation is under review at the moment to find out how the costs could be brought down. The loss we made last year is not that much and if you look around us airlines have been losing astronomical amounts of money without going out of business.
If we look back a year ago, the airline was cancelling 30 sectors a day on average because of lack of cabin crew alone. When you add the costs of that and having to charter out a/c to do those flights, taxis of disrupted crews going around to work at other bases etc etc etc ....... the amount of money we lost i think is not bad at all.
This year even with a war and this new disease ,the loads have been good with the exception obviously of a couple of routes during certain times of the day.
Personally most of the flights i've done lately go around 80-90% full.
So i think these rumours are nothing but rumours and stand no ground.
Also i would challenge anyone out there working for any airline to come forward and say how safe he/she feels right now at these hard times for the industry.

[judge11]

682

A major problem to date has been the parent/subsid relationship namely an overbearing parent giving the subsid no room for 'self-expression'. BA has said 'jump' and we have jumped. This relationship should have been sorted out at the very early stages long before the take-over took place; it would seem that at long last this area of conflict has been seen as a debilitating factor in the business and is receiving some attention albeit 2 years too late.

You are probably right about the MAN routes; why Stuttgart for goodness sake! BACX has a lack lustre, completely unimaginative senior mangement nurtured in a mainline 'corporate' environment with no idea about regional airline operations.

[Tartan Giant]

Manchester to Stuttgart is odd enough, but what of the recent BA News article saying,
, “As for BA’s future at London City Airport, plans for developing more services and routes”. ?

Any ideas chaps ?

TG

[ecj]

Is there any news as to the future of the Glasgow base ?

[Landing_24R]

With regard to the rather vexing choice of Stuttgart, it was suggested in the local press that BACX were stepping in to fill the void left by LH who withdrew from the route recently ;) There may be a reason why LH withdrew of course... hope everything works out anyway.

[Amazon man]

For all you Ppruners interested in the facts, as we the employees of BACX know them so far.

New Measures To Boost Financial Performance

Key Points Phase 1

1. Deliver £20 million of savings, of which at least £7million must be achieved in this financial year.

2. Increase productivity by 5%

3. Remove unnecesssary duplicated activities and management layers.

4. Achieve an 8% operating margin-8p of profit for every £1 of revenue generated.

5. Reduce headcount by 120 manpower equivalent.

Phase 2

To complete a commercial review and a management & organisational review by June, together with a fleet & network review by mid May. The fleet and network review will focus on ensuring the optimum deployment of each type of aircraft on the most appropriate routes. It will also examine growth opportunities on the key markets which BA serves.

Basically BACX has got between 12 & 18 months to start making a positive addition to BAs profits or its sold or closed.

Now you know as much as us the employees know. To all my colleagues working for BACX please stop knocking the airline and its management lets all start pulling in the same direction if you have things to say to them then pick up the phone and tell them directly, in my experience they will listen.

This new airline BACX has a real opportunity to grow into an airline to be proud of, we will all have our part to play no matter how big or small but in can be achieved in the time frame given. As flight deck and cabin crew we have all seen where cost savings can be made but in future don't ignore them tell the management, report it and follow up all reports to make sure action is being taken.

I fully expect BA to come out of the present world wide airline crisis as one of the strongest and best placed in the near future lets make sure BACX is there alongside them, then maybe we can look forward to operating some shiny new Embraer 170/190s

[LAF]

y

No truth in Man and BHX closures at all mate.

The accountants say BACX runs at a loss.

1. To try and generate insecurity / fear (and rumours like this) to support their "you should think yourself lucky you have got a job approach".This is supposed to lay the foundations for steam rolling in the efficiency (read work harder for less) measures mentioned above.

2. They attach massive Waterside overheads to achieve this distortion (took lessons from Anderson Consulting).They used this to try and sell us the idea that the Man /Stn route (used to persuade Eastern to take the J41s) made a loss.The early and late STNs were typically 70% full (and not because tickets were cheap)...the answer was just to stop the middle rotation.

3. Because they have attached massive BAR losses to the ex BRAL / Brymon operations.Both the latter made a good profit.

4.Because they don't want expensive BA pilots taking commands on the RJs at Manchester (and if you look at the figures the 42 who initially bid are rapidly changing their minds).

Out of Manchester loads are the highest I have seen them (I have had to offload more people in the last month than I did throuhout 2002).Lots of club pax as well.

BA management might be stupid but even they are not that stupid

[SECs Machine]

3. Because they have attached massive BAR losses to the ex BRAL / Brymon operations.Both the latter made a good profit.

BAR was profitable when handed over to BACX and had been for some years. A profit plus a profit doesn't equal a loss by my maths. Perhaps this:

If we look back a year ago, the airline was cancelling 30 sectors a day on average because of lack of cabin crew alone. When you add the costs of that and having to charter out a/c to do those flights, taxis of disrupted crews going around to work at other bases etc etc etc

is a more realistic explanation for the poor financial results.

4.Because they don't want expensive BA pilots taking commands on the RJs at Manchester (and if you look at the figures the 42 who initially bid are rapidly changing their minds).

Really? I haven't heard of anyone changing their minds. Quite the opposite in fact, Besides, unless I'm much mistaken under the BA bidding rules once you've succesfululy bid for the position its yours whether you like it or not. Just changing your mind is not permitted.

[HZ123]

Very good to see one of us stating chapter and verse on the BACX 'key result' goals. BAR and CFE historically operated niche market and performed with financial control and consistent profits, providing good and sometimes better service than BA could muster.

Surely the problem for BACX / BA UK operations is the phenominal growth of the LC's, which have totally pulled the rug from under our feet. Both BACX / BA will have outstanding difficulties in achieving fiscal sucess and making swinging financial savings to maintain / sustain its UK operation.

So far in this thread no one has mentioned the Low Cost competition and this has impacted to such a level that BA management has showed very little iniatative / competance in responce.

In the last 20 years plus I have seen these situations a number of times and the outcome will always be biased towards ensuring survival of the LHR / LGW operation. Sadly all of the issues have been covered before with BCAL / DANAIR / CityFlyer express and I am sure if ex members of those companies read this they can confirm it as fact. Whatever ther a lot of BA staff at Waterside who rely on BACXs' sucess too.

[foundation digger]

I suppose most of you work for BACX.
I do not work for them but no may good people who do.
I fly for one of the operators who are expanding,

BA do not have a clue.
The trouble with this business is that decisions made by previous management have log term impact.
For example The A319 order and especially the short haul configuration have to be managed by individuals who did not make the original decision.
The curious decision by the pesent management to by themselves a problem like BRAL, is one that I will never understand, and demonstrates ineptitude.

Historically BA inherited potentialy the most profitable network in the world.

All they have done since then is tinker and chop bases and routes they have failed to manage properly.

The ultimate demonstration of this was when they stopped flying to BELFAST, I am sure they thought they had good reasons for this but it was an admision that they were incapable of managing the business.

RyanAir EasyJet and co are not that great either but they make the aircraft work and FLY from where People LIVE to where they want to GO.
Not VIA LONDON

They also use aircraft which satisfy the expectations of the traveling public.
They do also not use aircraft like the ATP and the ATR which as far as Joe Blogs (not pilots) is concerend are no better than the Viscount which had 72 seats and was more comfortable with big windows.

The majority of People in the UK do Not live arround London.

They dont have a Clue.

[Stu Bigzorst]

BACX crews should be a little less militant too...

The tools of our trade are the "forever on mobile" and our cars. The tools of your trade are the terms of your contracts.

We get on with it, you state you can't do it because your contract says "...

We have a laugh in the face of adversity, you moan and the pax notice.

We get paid less, but are thankful for a job, you get paid loads and complain at lack of security.

We have managers that look for low costs and efficiency, you have managers that have lots of meetings and come up with jargon riddled strategies.

We struggle with BACX staff, who have simply forgotten about the service they should be offering the pax, since they are so used to looking after themselves.

We have happy pax, we make a profit, do you?

Stu

PS - There are some BACX staff that are top lads/gals who are utterly sick of BACX and are a delight to have on board - experienced, keen and with a very positive attitude. They have spotted a winner and want to be part of it. But the key is "some".

Edited for tpyo

[HZ123]

I must agree with the contributor who stated that 'BA will come out of this a lot stronger'. However, logic must dictate that to do this it must come out a lot leaner.

Much of the higher than wanted costs for BACX is surely the ground service provided by BA mainline at MAN / GLA. One of the outcomes of the review must surely see ground services outsourced before routes / flights suffer.

I recall many months ago when the issue of BACX was stated with some force by an LGW F/O. When the RJs' moved to the BA terminal the handling charge changed from £400 to £1300 which reflected an immediate loss in their operations costs. Under the BA system at MAN / GLA turmaround costs are still too high.

[mikegreatrex]

Well STU you have certainly hit a raw nerve with your post.

On what basis / experience do you make your comments?

Many BA & BACX crew are known to me and "all" are more than happy to role their sleeves up and try their hardest to exceed the customers pre-conceived expectations of BA. All this in the face of considerable adversity, given the susceptibility to technical issues that continually impact on their ability to do the job. Lets face it the RJ100 with its overflowing toilets and other technical problems is not exactly condusive to the running of a tight schedule.

No I am convinced that those at the sharp end give their best, however most of their actions are reactive. What is needed is a more appreciative, proacative, "hands on" management that is able, with the tools at hand, to effectively plan for the survival of a good business.

NO MORE IVORY TOWERS PLEASE!!!

[CheekyVisual]

SECs is right. The main reason BACX can't make a profit is that the incidental costs have got totally out of control. The odd taxi and hotel here and there won't make much difference but we are not talking about the odd taxi and hotel ! We are talking about entire taxi companies being created and run solely for us ! and hotels full of displaced pilots and cabin crew.

The main problem was that although the FSAS changes may have been designed to cut costs in the short term they have created so much havoc that the short term costs of implementing them have driven us so far into the red you have to wonder whether it was worth it !

Manhatten Transfers have started up a BRS base purely to cater for us. At one point early this year they were running 10 to 15 round trips between BRS and CWL everyday ! Each with just one person in ! I have and I know others who have been displaced, who have been rostered away and then left in hotels, at goodness only knows how much a night, on STANDBY then to be brought home in a taxi having not operated a single sector ! I have friends working for TITAN who are laughing at us as they take ten thousand pounds a sector because we didn't have enough a/c and Cabin Crew - although all the a/c we "sent back" (to save a couple of quid) were standing idle usually at our own bases !

The whole scale changes brought about must have sent the training costs through the stratosphere and we have not even got to all the relocation !

The whole thing is a typical accountant's solution. Find a way to save £1 but forget that saving that £1 is going to cost you £10. You only need to look at almost every area of management in the UK, not just airlines, to see how useless accountants and management consultants are ! The people who know how to cut costs and where they can be cut effectively are the people who spend the money - The Pilots, Cabin Crew, The Ground Staff and the Engineers ! But no one asks us and despite what is said everytime I've suggested something the only reply you can get is that "You can't see the big picture". Well I can see the "Small Picture" and anyone who forgets the "look after the pennies....." quotation is obviously an accountant. Smart tricks on a balance sheet don't put bums on seats or save a few quid on fuel, catering and crewing. This is the fundamental thing that has been forgotten.

There was a need for change. The industry is changing beyond all recognition and no one in BA knows what to do about it because only good BA people get the important jobs and they know no other way. I personally don't blame any of the BACX line management they have been given an impossible task and the wrong equipment to do it with. i.e. The RJ, mike is right they are a tech nightmare and won't help us keep our pax's bums off FLY BEs, MYlites, BMi's, et als, seats ! But as a company, be it management or those of us at the sharp end, we are lumbered with them by people higher up BA who don't care if we succeed or fail and will keep their jobs and careers either way.

The point, after my long ramble, I am trying to make is that - Yes change is necessary BUT the company must think about the costs involved in making the changes BEFORE implementing them. That's where the FSAS reviews failed. They made logical, if not always nice, changes BUT carried them out with absolutley no co-ordination, planning or cost control. To quote Nike they just did it and the companies operation fell apart as a result and I'm worried it may now never recover.

For the company to survive the overheads have to be slashed you can not turn profit into loss by cutting more and more of an operation. That just leaves you with less earning potential to cover the same massive massive masssive overheads we have. This won't change as the turkeys will never vote for Christmas ! and most of the turkeys still think it's 1968 and this is how an airline must be run !

[Mr Angry]

STU

Don't intend to get into the debate, but feel obliged to correct you on one point. You say in your post:

"We get paid less, but are thankful for a job, you get paid loads and complain at lack of security."

£20,000 a year does not constitute loads in my book, indeed its less than the national average, and less than a bus driver gets in my home town!

Sorry, had to set the record straight.

Mr Angry

[Amazon man]

Stu,

Sir with all due respect whilst Iam quite happy to read all the rumours on these forums Iam not prepared to see someone like yourself talk about a subject of which you have absolutely no knowledge of that being BACX employees.


Those of us who were previously employed by BRAL and Brymon and now collectively employed under the BACX banner probably know more about customer service then you ever will, a large number of us have a long period of service to each airline and most of us have been giving a 100% for all of that time, thats why they were two very successful airlines BRAL in particular.

Both BA and BACX have big problems at the moment there is no disguising that but they are being tackled and I repeat what I said earlier that in my humble opinion BA will emerge from this current crisis a much stronger leaner and fitter airline well able to compete with the likes of Easy etc, and as flight deck and cabin crew we will have maintained our good terms and conditions and salaries, final salary pensions etc. With luck and a great effort both from ourselves and our management BACX will be there alongside mainline.

And to Stu in particular if it is Easy that you work for as I suspect then please do not try and fool us into thinking that everything at that airline is all rosy and that like the seven dwarfs you all go off whistling to work each day. Many of us have friends and colleagues that work for the airline and know full well that there are just as many moans and groans in you crew room as ours, it wasn't so long ago your management had there heads in the trough awarding themselves large bonuses for other peoples hard work.

Stick to talking about what you do know and when you have ten to twenty years experience in the airline business then I might be prepared to listen

[Lucky Angel]

It looks like you are happy in your company Stu so why dont you tell us which one it is?
I dont mind my salary Stu and in fact i am in one of the bases which are reasonably secure, but put your smelly feet in the shoes of those that have relocated about 3 times in the last 2 years and are facing relocation again.
Again if you are single its not bad but can you imagine if you are dragging a family with kids with you?
These people have every reason to complain and we in BACX are with them all the way.
Think before you generalise,look at the full picture and if you want to earn less than your local bus driver so your managers can get their big fat bonuses then stay with the company you're already with.

[bar none]

hz 123

Suggest you check some figures and costs before you blame BA Man and Gla mainline handling charges. Have a look at the new starter rates and then you will see why some recent BA recruits have resigned and returned to their previous employers, namely handling agents at Man.

[Hand Solo]

Just because they pay the staff peanuts doesn't mean they don't charge the customers a fortune.

[GWYN]

Cheeky Visual: excellent post

To add to it and with reference to the use of taxis: when one considers that there is a budget of £10 000 PER MONTH for ferrying around AOG spares via taxi, one can see why the company makes a loss! That, I believe, does not include the cost of positioning spares with light aircraft. It may only be a drop in the ocean in the 'big picture' but it all adds up.

[Hand Solo]

Add to that the £32000 recently paid to Titan in one week to operate just four sectors out of BHX and perhaps we're starting to see where the money is going.

[LAF]

Stu-you are either a wind up merchant or a simpleton.In the
latter case someone who makes wide sweeping statements, based on a minute population sample (whilst hiding behind a cloak anonymity) deserves no respect.I have wasted too much time on you already.

Secs machine-Please post your figures for the last year of stand alone BAR operations.I think you will find that BARs losses were immense.

[Hand Solo]

LAF - the last figures I remember for BAR (that'll be purely the Airbus, the 737s and the JFK 767 which is always full) showed that whilst MAN made a loss, BHX remained profitable and thanks to this the overall group made a profit of approximately £11 million. In fact, in the 12 months following September 11th 2001 BAR was the only fleet in British Airways that made any profit at all.

[White Knight]

mikegreatex - Why is the technical reliability so bad ?? When I flew those said RJ100's under the CFE banner I had only ONE technical delay in two years. And NO overflowing bogs ?? Is this down to BACX engineers not having enough manpower to cope ?
What a shame it's all gone tits up...

[Lucky Angel]

White Knight the reason the rj's are going tech all the time is because BA havent released the spares from Gatwick to BACX. Everytime something breaks down a taxi has to be sent for spares. I know it doesnt make sense but thats the way it is for now.

[Tandemrotor]

Hand Solo - Ah, someone who actually KNOWS what they are talking about!

LAF - Can you spot the difference?

[Youwererobbed]

Hand Solo is right. BAR were, at the end, one of the few profitable parts of BA, BHX in particular made quite large sums of money.

Slight thread creep here, but can anybody in BACX management actually read and write? Not one of the internal memo's or communications has been spelt correctly. Every single one has been grammatically incorrect. The idiots are in charge of the asylum and it's very depressing.

[Crash1]

secs machine

just to set the record straight many of those who opted for secondment (mainly ex gatwick rather than BAR) have been allowed to change their mind and take up other positions.

[Dai Rear]

Youwererobbed’s comments on 29th April were absolutely right. Not a hanging offence in itself perhaps, but an accurate indicator of the big picture.
To answer ECJs question dated 25th April, read my entry “Congrats To Bacx Elt Top Management” dated 30th April 2003, on the Rumours & News section of this web page.

[kuningan]

From today's Times...

May 02, 2003

CitiExpress faces more cost-cutting
By Russell Hotten



BRITISH Airways will today announce another round of cost-cutting at CitiExpress, its regional subsidiary, where pilots had threatened to strike.
CitiExpress, which has already gone through a restructuring, wants to save another £20 million, including £7 million this year.

David Evans, the managing director of CitiExpress, described the cost savings as critical to the airline’s future. In a statement to staff he said that “doing nothing is not an option”. He said: “The future of our regional operations is in our own hands, and we have to reduce our cost base immediately to avoid incurring losses.”

CitiExpress, formed from the merger of short-haul airlines, was restructured in an overhaul of BA’s operations after a big fall in business. BA has brought forward by six months a plan to save £450 million by next March.

About 21 routes have already been cut, along with bases at Cardiff and Leeds-Bradford airports. However, CitiExpress has begun services from London’s City Airport.


Grizly details to follow, no doubt...

[Charlie32]

I find it difficult to understand how the regional domestic services have turned in such losses.
I used to travel these routes very regularly from NCL, until they were almost all axed, and they were almost always 80-100% full.
I once sat down with a mate who was an ATR captain, and we worked out that at the then £280 flexible (egnt-egac) sector fare, four passengers would pay the fuel burn, landing/handling, flight crew, and apportionned lease charge for the aircraft.
Where does all the rest disappear? It costs 1p per transaction to BA to book on-line, and the £10 supplement more than covers the £4 cost of a telephone transaction. Could it be the excessive number of executives and accountants on their grossly inflated and undeserved salaries?

[kuningan]

Wonder where the Times got its gen from....sounded like a press release...but nowt on BA, BBC or Reuters....though BA share price did close up 8% today, well ahead of market...and on double normal volume and price picking up sharply after 2pm...now we all know how the market likes to reward 'restructuring' aka 'cuts' ...so wonder what they know we don't...of course it could be that as Reuters claimed...' dealers said the airline was helped by an upgrade from Smith Barney and gains by U.S. peers after Merrill Lynch (NYSE: MER - news) said carriers may be through their worst'....guess we'll just have to watch this space...