BA and Project Columbus
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 553
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No, I can sympathise with that.
I'm actually a fully-qualified Astronaut, but I don't like the International Orange-coloured pressure suits they make you wear on shuttle missions these days.
Which is why I work in Ground Ops.
I'm actually a fully-qualified Astronaut, but I don't like the International Orange-coloured pressure suits they make you wear on shuttle missions these days.
Which is why I work in Ground Ops.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Uk
Posts: 109
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Its hard to see how argueing about what others earn helps the issue of
"columbus", even more so when the individual quotes that they are a quailified pilot but chooses to be cabin crew instead, the surely one also chooses the pay that comes with that and not that of a pilot ??
.
On the point of "draft" payments ,which for pilots in BA is overtime, I think this compares, on uk average to other uk airlines day off payments. It also compares to the overtime hourly rate that WW LHR crew get on every daily duty over 12.5 hours( if my friend in CC who i meet in SEP recently is correct!!).
A stronger counter-arguement to pilots get paid X amount so should we, will be needed by CC and the unions to defend this proposal. I hope this is being carefully thought out by all involved..
Nobody wants to see any groups underpaid for the job they do, and in the main, from my experience we all support each other thats how we stay strong, even when we are being attacked from above !!!!!
"columbus", even more so when the individual quotes that they are a quailified pilot but chooses to be cabin crew instead, the surely one also chooses the pay that comes with that and not that of a pilot ??
.On the point of "draft" payments ,which for pilots in BA is overtime, I think this compares, on uk average to other uk airlines day off payments. It also compares to the overtime hourly rate that WW LHR crew get on every daily duty over 12.5 hours( if my friend in CC who i meet in SEP recently is correct!!).
A stronger counter-arguement to pilots get paid X amount so should we, will be needed by CC and the unions to defend this proposal. I hope this is being carefully thought out by all involved..
Nobody wants to see any groups underpaid for the job they do, and in the main, from my experience we all support each other thats how we stay strong, even when we are being attacked from above !!!!!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Wherever Carmen says...
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by VS-LHRCSA
As for operating minimum crew on the 737, ok fair point, you've proved that you can do it. Does this mean that the 777 will now go out with 8 crew, keeping in line with Thomas Cook and Thomson? No, of course not, and why not?
TCX may go minimum even on long haul as planned , but Thomson do not- not even on the 737, unlike your goodselves.
Stick to the facts you know...
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: YPPH
Posts: 501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I was actually going by my personal experience when I flew for one of the First Choice incarnations when we would often have 8 crew for Y327. I was just refering to what it is known now - not everyone here would remember Leisure International or Air2000. I do not profess to know what the-airline-that-was-once-known-as-'Britannia' crew compliments are or were. Sorry if I gave you that impression.
As for telling me to 'stick to the facts I know', fair point. I am always happy to be corrected but there are probably better, more diplomatic ways you could have done that. I am not the enemy here.
As for telling me to 'stick to the facts I know', fair point. I am always happy to be corrected but there are probably better, more diplomatic ways you could have done that. I am not the enemy here.
Last edited by VS-LHRCSA; 27th Jan 2009 at 10:52.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 100
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fight the Good fight.
Keep the faith folks, stay together, and if you need a reminder about how BA treats loyalty, check out the youtube clip in the GLA crewbase thread in this section. Believe me, years of service count for nothing, just ask anyone who was based in the regions what BA really wants. Basically Willie will only be happy when all the experienced crew are gone and he can recruit cheap labour to fill the places. 
Safe Flying All!
Safe Flying All!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: London
Posts: 383
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the possible 150m losses announced yesterday, a situation which is not sustainable, I don't think there will be anyone, whether that be Crew, Pilots, ground staff or office based staff, that will be immune from cost redcutions and improvements in productivity.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
747,
It doesn't matter who you work for if pilots and cabin crew are working to the regulatory hours limit. You can't be any more "productive" than the regulations permit.
What you can do is cut waste and lower the non revenue generating staff; have ground staff trained in multiple tasks and examine where small savings can be made, which multiplied out, create large savings.
For example, is it not cheaper to have all the aircraft come back to base each night rather than nightstop the crews? Reduce the ground turn round times to improve utilisation etc.
It doesn't matter who you work for if pilots and cabin crew are working to the regulatory hours limit. You can't be any more "productive" than the regulations permit.
What you can do is cut waste and lower the non revenue generating staff; have ground staff trained in multiple tasks and examine where small savings can be made, which multiplied out, create large savings.
For example, is it not cheaper to have all the aircraft come back to base each night rather than nightstop the crews? Reduce the ground turn round times to improve utilisation etc.
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: YPPH
Posts: 501
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The reason why nightstops are generated by the short haul roster is that aircraft themselves are nightstopped so that an early morning flight can be offered from an outstation. It's not a case of giving crew nightstops just for the sake of it.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: London
Age: 66
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There would be very few pax on the aircraft if they all returned to LHR late at night. That would also leave the competition to pick up the revenue from early morning departures from outstations+ profits.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: London
Age: 66
Posts: 58
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA are not currently making profits but if they returned all a/c to the LHR base each night their losses would be greater than they are now for the reasons I gave. Few pax on late departures from out stations resulting in further losses + leaving revenue pax to other airlines to make their (not BA's) profit from. Additionally a lot of pax would be lost who connect to long haul services with BA. It does not cost that much more to keep an a/c on the ground overnight abroad than it does to park it at LHR even if there was enough room which there is not. Then what would they do with all the aircraft in the mornings even if they have the slots available, duplicate services and make more losses? What you suggest does not make commercial sense and would make the losses far greater.
When I was on short haul aircraft a lot of pax on early flights were connecting to BA's long haul services, a fair amount in premium cabins-that business would be lost to competitors again adding to further losses currently.
Why do you think foreign airlines night stop at LHR to operate early morning services from Heathrow, to make a loss just tp give their crew a night in London? No to get a share of the available business and profit from doing so. When BA is profitable that is precisely what they do from foreign departure points.
If times were different and BA was currently profitable a tremendous amount of profit is earned through night stopping aircraft and crew abroad, there is a lot of business early in the morning from almost anywhere, loosing that revenue now would make the losses worse.
Sorry to disagree with you on this occasion but these are facts.
When I was on short haul aircraft a lot of pax on early flights were connecting to BA's long haul services, a fair amount in premium cabins-that business would be lost to competitors again adding to further losses currently.
Why do you think foreign airlines night stop at LHR to operate early morning services from Heathrow, to make a loss just tp give their crew a night in London? No to get a share of the available business and profit from doing so. When BA is profitable that is precisely what they do from foreign departure points.
If times were different and BA was currently profitable a tremendous amount of profit is earned through night stopping aircraft and crew abroad, there is a lot of business early in the morning from almost anywhere, loosing that revenue now would make the losses worse.
Sorry to disagree with you on this occasion but these are facts.
because the new boss of IFS is ignoring them, oh and he forgot to thank the mighty BASSA for dinnerJoin Date: Jan 2009
Location: london
Posts: 13
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have read most of this thread and it still amazes me how cc feel they have to deflect the columbus argument into one about how much pilots get paid.
Most cc i work with are brilliant and respect the fc profession, i find it strange that some are so resentful of our t&cs. why? i know we both wear nice uniforms and work on a shiny jet but that is where the similarity ends.
The fact is that i'm very rarely the 3rd highest paid crew member on a flight. despite being 2nd in command. most people in other jobs cannot comprehend this. The argument i hear is "i've been here for 25 years"
big deal.
I can see where BA are coming from. quite simply something is seriously wrong.
you know tesco workers are qualified in first aid too.
Most cc i work with are brilliant and respect the fc profession, i find it strange that some are so resentful of our t&cs. why? i know we both wear nice uniforms and work on a shiny jet but that is where the similarity ends.
The fact is that i'm very rarely the 3rd highest paid crew member on a flight. despite being 2nd in command. most people in other jobs cannot comprehend this. The argument i hear is "i've been here for 25 years"
big deal.
I can see where BA are coming from. quite simply something is seriously wrong.
you know tesco workers are qualified in first aid too.
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Middlesesx
Posts: 2,075
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thewisealderman
Very well said and this all too often applys to BA staff wherever they work within the company. Many staff have spent thier careers admiring their own importance, it has been at epidemic levels for years. It is the passenger that is our most important asset?
Very well said and this all too often applys to BA staff wherever they work within the company. Many staff have spent thier careers admiring their own importance, it has been at epidemic levels for years. It is the passenger that is our most important asset?