The Virgin Strike Thread II
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not one that is recognised by the company as far as I am aware. Perhaps Balpa should have a siter company, good way to make revenue. Imagine one union representing the pilots and cabin crew, the force would be <americanism> awesome !!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
And if Branson didn't use dodgy accounting to hide profits then VS would be shown to be making a huge profit. I was told this by a union rep and believe what he said. Maybe thats why SQ want out of the deal?
If there was anything 'dodgy' about Virgin accounting, you can be sure the independent auditors that the company are obliged to engaged would have spotted it. Companies cannot hide cash away illegally - otherwise they end up like Enron. Can you imagine the publicity if Virgin was embroiled in anything even vaguely similar?
Don't spread dangerous rumours you have no evidence for.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah it's old school like the BA VS argument, however you must admit a private company can do a lot lot lot more clever accounting than a plc which is open to public scrutiny.
Morning vs-Lhr
Morning vs-Lhr
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would need to be recognised if it was to be able to represent and negotiate on behalf of the crew. Likewise IPA cover you guys in time of need but the majority choose Balpa and the company have recognised to negotiate on the pilot work forces behalf, no point joining a union that is not recognised by the company as being able to negotiate on your behalf ?
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
yeah it's old school like the BA VS argument, however you must admit a private company can do a lot lot lot more clever accounting than a plc which is open to public scrutiny.
Morning vs-Lhr
Morning vs-Lhr
Private companies may not have publish quite as much detail as a public company, but they are still obliged to report everything in their accounts; and those figures have to balance. You can't simply syphon off funds elsewhere - the tax man would have something to say about that, and a company the size and profile of Virgin would be foolish to say the least to even consider it.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: overseas
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've read this site for a long time and never felt the need to make a posting until now.
When I joined Vaa in 1994, like many others I thought it would be for a year or two of fun and then I would return to a "profession". I took the drop in salary etc. for the life style. Now as a part time single parent Fsm, flying is my profession. I manage to support my family with the help of Working family tax credit. The pay deals that were offered would have made no difference what so ever to my monthly income as the WFTC would have just been reduced. I am not alone in my situation.
Throughout the ballot process I voted no. The main thing I wanted to see was increments within my rank. I have no wish to go into the office and I stiil feel I have a lot to offer online. As a manager of upto seventeen crew with five years experience in rank I feel I'm not asking for too much.
When speaking to Vaa management I was informed the company offered increments to senior ranks and it was rejected. When talking to Amicus reps I was lead to believe it was the company who rejected increments.
Throughout the last year, due to the mishandling of the situation by both sides, I have just become more disillusioned with both Vaa and my union.
When I received the ballot paper for strike action the decision to reject a strike was not an easy one to make. I could not in good conscience vote for something that I felt would be to the detriment of all concerned.
For all of the postings of "what ifs" and "should haves" on this site and others lets not forget the most important thing. The small number of our friends and colleagues who are rostered trips on Wednesday and have to make the difficult decision on what their actions will be. I hope whatever they decide it is a personal informed choice, and not because of pressures brought by either side.
When I joined Vaa in 1994, like many others I thought it would be for a year or two of fun and then I would return to a "profession". I took the drop in salary etc. for the life style. Now as a part time single parent Fsm, flying is my profession. I manage to support my family with the help of Working family tax credit. The pay deals that were offered would have made no difference what so ever to my monthly income as the WFTC would have just been reduced. I am not alone in my situation.
Throughout the ballot process I voted no. The main thing I wanted to see was increments within my rank. I have no wish to go into the office and I stiil feel I have a lot to offer online. As a manager of upto seventeen crew with five years experience in rank I feel I'm not asking for too much.
When speaking to Vaa management I was informed the company offered increments to senior ranks and it was rejected. When talking to Amicus reps I was lead to believe it was the company who rejected increments.
Throughout the last year, due to the mishandling of the situation by both sides, I have just become more disillusioned with both Vaa and my union.
When I received the ballot paper for strike action the decision to reject a strike was not an easy one to make. I could not in good conscience vote for something that I felt would be to the detriment of all concerned.
For all of the postings of "what ifs" and "should haves" on this site and others lets not forget the most important thing. The small number of our friends and colleagues who are rostered trips on Wednesday and have to make the difficult decision on what their actions will be. I hope whatever they decide it is a personal informed choice, and not because of pressures brought by either side.
VS LHR. The Balpa presentation for pay talks a few years ago covered much of this mythical accounting. I believe the figure was something in the region of £800 million. It may well of been hogwash, but the flight deck did get a large payrise that year! 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: uk
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
further to sky1highs post, if you are still not sure what to do or even feel you have no choice if you are not a union member remember that you can still join the union online at any time http://www.amicustheunion.org/default.aspx?page=3136
If you do so it will cost you £10 and then you have an option and are protected by the same legal rights as other union members if you do decide to strike.
Having the option might make the decision easier rather than feeling there is no option.
If you do so it will cost you £10 and then you have an option and are protected by the same legal rights as other union members if you do decide to strike.
Having the option might make the decision easier rather than feeling there is no option.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: london
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
paul
On the topic of Paul...
What a top geeza. Had my best ever trip with him as FSM and i totally respect everything he has done as a representative for crew.
( Fancy some ***n cheese Paul... ?
)
What a top geeza. Had my best ever trip with him as FSM and i totally respect everything he has done as a representative for crew.
( Fancy some ***n cheese Paul... ?
)
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Somewhere high up
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
vs_lhr you said 'I doubt VS just writes a cheque when they acquire new aircraft, in fact, I think most are leased, aren't they? The money that pays for aircraft comes from the revenue that aircraft generates. If you have one less aircraft, that's less money coming in. None of our aircraft are spares, afterall.'
I know VS have leased a few aircraft in the past, definately the first two 747 classics were leased. They have also leased from martinair in later on. But they own aircraft now and have 'buying rights' on 787 so that must mean they will be buying them straight from Boeing albeit making use of amortization.
I stand to be corrected if this is incorrect.
Oh yes, Paul is definately a top FSM Whats it time for Paul? Hot, steaming coffee 
I know VS have leased a few aircraft in the past, definately the first two 747 classics were leased. They have also leased from martinair in later on. But they own aircraft now and have 'buying rights' on 787 so that must mean they will be buying them straight from Boeing albeit making use of amortization.
I stand to be corrected if this is incorrect.
Oh yes, Paul is definately a top FSM
Whats it time for Paul? Hot, steaming coffee
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
coolhandlu
The crew are not the only vital part of the organisation. There are a miriad of critical jobs done by dedicated people, many of whom earn less than crew, without which there wouldn't be an airline. Without Engineering there wouldn't be any planes for you to fly on. Without the Contact Center there wouldn't be sufficient passengers to fly on them. Without the IT systems we wouldn't be taking any bookings OR payment for bookings. The list goes on and on and on.
Tom Sawyer
And as an aside, if one of my "team" doesn't turn up for whatever reason, the rest of us do not get a compensation payment, but still have to cover that persons work and it is "front line" and so also could affect pax service and schedule.
I've been reading this thread as it goes along with "interest", and I have to say I'm becoming more and more disillushioned with some of the postings. I couldn't agree more with both Coolhandlu and Tom Sawyer. This mess won't just affect the crew - it will affect EVERYONE in Virgin. And at the end of it, everyone stands a chance of not getting any form of payrise this year and that includes the crew. There's continual reference to being crew down, crew down payments, differing allowances on different routes, payments for this payments for that and so it goes on. It seems that those hellbent on striking have the needle over the offer of money being paid to crew who will work when the strike is on, calling it a "bribe" - yet isn't that a similar kind of thing that you're asking for with trip pay on certain routes? Everyone has to work doing things they don't like, work short staffed, not get a regular break, go to places they don't like yet those on the ground don't stand there with their hands out asking for extra money. If the sickness rates are so high, then maybe those crew need to be asked if they have some form of medical or other problem, or do they just enjoy stiching fellow crew up/can't be bothered to come in to work.
There is no secret pot of money despite what you may think. You guys need to get back round the negotiating table and sort it out before things get even worse. Shoot me down in flames if you like for what I've said above, but that's my opinion.
The crew are not the only vital part of the organisation. There are a miriad of critical jobs done by dedicated people, many of whom earn less than crew, without which there wouldn't be an airline. Without Engineering there wouldn't be any planes for you to fly on. Without the Contact Center there wouldn't be sufficient passengers to fly on them. Without the IT systems we wouldn't be taking any bookings OR payment for bookings. The list goes on and on and on.
Tom Sawyer
And as an aside, if one of my "team" doesn't turn up for whatever reason, the rest of us do not get a compensation payment, but still have to cover that persons work and it is "front line" and so also could affect pax service and schedule.
I've been reading this thread as it goes along with "interest", and I have to say I'm becoming more and more disillushioned with some of the postings. I couldn't agree more with both Coolhandlu and Tom Sawyer. This mess won't just affect the crew - it will affect EVERYONE in Virgin. And at the end of it, everyone stands a chance of not getting any form of payrise this year and that includes the crew. There's continual reference to being crew down, crew down payments, differing allowances on different routes, payments for this payments for that and so it goes on. It seems that those hellbent on striking have the needle over the offer of money being paid to crew who will work when the strike is on, calling it a "bribe" - yet isn't that a similar kind of thing that you're asking for with trip pay on certain routes? Everyone has to work doing things they don't like, work short staffed, not get a regular break, go to places they don't like yet those on the ground don't stand there with their hands out asking for extra money. If the sickness rates are so high, then maybe those crew need to be asked if they have some form of medical or other problem, or do they just enjoy stiching fellow crew up/can't be bothered to come in to work.
There is no secret pot of money despite what you may think. You guys need to get back round the negotiating table and sort it out before things get even worse. Shoot me down in flames if you like for what I've said above, but that's my opinion.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know VS have leased a few aircraft in the past, definately the first two 747 classics were leased. They have also leased from martinair in later on. But they own aircraft now and have 'buying rights' on 787 so that must mean they will be buying them straight from Boeing albeit making use of amortization.
Whatever the deal is, the thought of cancelling an order for an aircraft makes that money available to fund pay rises is without substance since the money doesn't exist unless the aircraft is flying and generating the revenue.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: Somewhere high up
Posts: 83
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thats why I mentioned amortization vs_lhr. But still if the company aren't making profit from their existing aircraft (38) or as the case may be only a small profit then the best thing to do would be hold back on expension of fleet and/or routes and work towards resolving the situation, as I said before back to basics.
Once each aircraft is returning a better profit then look at expanding. No point in purchasing more aircraft if its not a good ROI.
And the money saved in loan payments could then go towards keeping the staff happy thus helping the company make more money.
RB once said 'Keep the staff happy, they will keep the customers happy and they will keep the business going'. If only he and the rest of the management worked on that philisophy we wouldn't be in the sh*t now.
Once each aircraft is returning a better profit then look at expanding. No point in purchasing more aircraft if its not a good ROI.
And the money saved in loan payments could then go towards keeping the staff happy thus helping the company make more money.
RB once said 'Keep the staff happy, they will keep the customers happy and they will keep the business going'. If only he and the rest of the management worked on that philisophy we wouldn't be in the sh*t now.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Virgin Atlantic is a business and not some big hoolie in the sky. Things weren't good before 9/11 and since then the belt has got even tighter. Everyone has to knuckle down and get on with the job I'm afraid. How do management keep the staff happy - by caving into every single demand? It's just not possible. Yes we'd all like more money, and putting aside those madhatter theories about dodgy accounting, if it ain't there we can't have it.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
the best thing to do would be hold back on expension of fleet and/or routes
Personally I still think Virgin is a small airline with much of the world left to exploit, and we lose business on certain routes where we don't offer enough flights to our competition who have more daily options.
However you may get your wish if the strike goes ahead and the company decides to downsize the operation to reduce costs. That, unfortunately, also means reduced headcount commensurate with that size business.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Crawley
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I know VS have leased a few aircraft in the past, definately the first two 747 classics were leased. They have also leased from martinair in later on. But they own aircraft now and have 'buying rights' on 787 so that must mean they will be buying them straight from Boeing albeit making use of amortization.
I stand to be corrected if this is incorrect
You need to be corrected then, a few of the A343s are owned by Virgin, however the majority are owned by a leasing company based in LA. If you don't believe me, go on board a 747 and look on the Flight Deck crew rest door, or on an Airbus, on the wall in the flightdeck.
What the 787 deal is I've no idea.
Its pretty pointless stating something that isn't correct and then asking to be corrected.
I stand to be corrected if this is incorrect
You need to be corrected then, a few of the A343s are owned by Virgin, however the majority are owned by a leasing company based in LA. If you don't believe me, go on board a 747 and look on the Flight Deck crew rest door, or on an Airbus, on the wall in the flightdeck.
What the 787 deal is I've no idea.
Its pretty pointless stating something that isn't correct and then asking to be corrected.
