Willie Gets Inflation-busting Pay Rise
 

There is no way I am going to vote for a pay cut whilst Willie is being rewarded!

This just sends the wrong signal - Willie should be ashamed - he should forgo this pay rise and take a permanent pay CUT too along with the rest of us! :mad:

from The Times....

BA chief Willie Walsh gets pay rise despite record losses

News of Willie Walsh's pay rise is embarrassing timing as the chief executive is negotiating pay cuts with his employees

Willie Walsh, the chief executive of British Airways, will receive an inflation-busting pay rise taking his salary to £743,000 this year and could gain a further £1.1 million in deferred share bonuses.

The pay award was published in the airline's annual report on Wednesday, but the timing is embarrassing as Mr Walsh is negotiating pay cuts with his employees. He said last night that he would forego his annual bonus of up to £550,000 in shares this year.

Mr Walsh waved his cash bonus of £700,000 last year after the botched opening of Heathrow's Terminal 5 and he has said that he will work for free during July.

BA lost £401 million last year and Mr Walsh has called for significant cost cutting as the airline faces its "worst ever trading environment".

According to BA's annual report, Mr Walsh's basic salary will rise by 6 per cent to £743,000 this year and he will waive a performance bonus of up to 75 per cent of this figure.

Mr Walsh will also receive up to £1.1 million of shares as part of the long-term incentive program.

The remuneration committee said that it had decided management needed an incentive for this year and has changed the performance criteria so that bonus payment is not contingent on the airline making a profit.

Bonuses will now be paid on meeting a financial plan rather than hitting a profit margin target. The importance of punctuality and customer satisfaction have been downgraded as elements on the bonus calculation.

The fact that they can sack you, and the fact that the law cannot make them reinstate you even if it was found to be illegal is kosher. The amount of money they would have to pay is also kosher, and is based on info that BALPA sent out during the Openskies dispute.

BA's intention to impose at the end of the month if no satisfactory negotiated agreement is reached is also kosher.

The idea that BA will sack the first 2000 who do not show up for work - that is just my opinion, and it is based on what I would do if I was leading BA. To be honest, I am not sure how many other options Willie actually has.

13 please,

In this case LGW should get the same agreement as LHR which of course will never happen because of the costs involved. We do have Destination Payment but isn't it amusing that when both DFW and IAH, ex-LGW routes, came to LHR they were all of the sudden entitled to such payment and 3 MBT instead of 2 MBT which they got down at Gatters? It's in our agreement, yes, but definitely an insult towards our collagues down there. How much money is left in this pot?

HiFlyer14,

I also think one of the mods in that forum is a BASSA rep! I'm still trying to find out whether it's the chairman itself. I have no idea how we should start voicing our opinions. It'll be a really tough battle when you think that 85% voted for a ballot. I also think the union representatives actually want to strike and are determined to do so.

A strike will hit us hard financially (crew who say otherwise are dull) and those costs need to be taken from somewhere. That's my concern.

Willie Walsh is a clever chap who doesn't seem afraid of a fight. Does anyone else see a potential reason for the deliberate timing of the announcement about his pay?

He wouldn't be trying to goad the BASSA leadership into a decision, would he?

:eek:

Must admit GS-Alpha may be onto something.

As he has said there's nothing to stop Willie sacking someone, illegally or otherwise, on day 1 of a Strike...and we know from experience that Willie is quite happy to use the Courts to spin things out and/or to bankrupt a Union...

So Day one of any IR Willie sacks the first 1000 no-shows, tells them "see you at the Tribunial" in 6/12/18 months and encourages everyone else to return to work....yep BA are 1000 CC down and as I understand IR the sacked workers can't be replaced for ?90 days - but he's after manpower reduction anyway....

I'm not spinning this from any management viewpoint, but it is the sort of info BALPA was pushing out prior to the Openlies fiasco...I do hope our colleagues get similar info from BASSA before putting pen to paper.

As for Willie's payrise, I too, reckon it sucks, and if it was announced to deliberately provoke the Unions then we really are seeing the man's true nature.

Andyis..
 

Interesting you use the term "circus", I thought BA was supposed to be a Major Airline....Personally I was brought up with the phrase "leadership by example"...silly me.:bored:

OK, for the benefit of Wiggy, The Airlines' Chief Executive is getting a payrise. It doesnt mean that everyone else in the Airline should get the same pay, or payrise.

He is tasked with keeping the airline going. Reward as is required.

If you aren't happy with Willie's pay,instead of whinging about it, why not apply to do his job?

Andy
 

Yep, I agree reward is reward..and if he keeps the airline afloat you'll get no arguments from me about his payrise. You'd also get no arguments from me if all the Crew of the BA38 or the Flight Crew of the 744 who had the flap issue out of JNB recently had also got significant financial reward - their efforts also helped keep BA afloat....but the Company line is they were just their job - as is Willie.

Look, Willie will be worth every penny if he can keep BA afloat, but he hasn't done that yet. What he has done ( or someone has done it on his behalf) is significantly raise the temperature of the debate and IMHO made it difficult for the Reps of even the moderate Unions such as BALPA to sell a cost/cutting/benefit cutting/T&C cutting package to their members. If he didn't mean to do that then taking the payrise was massive blunder, if he did mean to do that then I sure as heck hope he has a cunning plan......

worldoffers,

I have read your post 4 times, I think now I can make some sense of it.

FYI, and from the hotel contract, "upgraded rooms are to be at no additional expense to British Airways" so no savings there then.:ugh::ugh:

You mention internet access, but offer no background as to Pilots and Cabin Crew e working agreements.:ugh::ugh: FYI I am paying for my internet access right now.

Nope wide of the mark again, you show crass understanding of our working lives and days.

On the Upper deck of a 747 I can't remember the last time I had the choice from a first class menu, that's not a moan because the crew food that is loaded is fine by me.

In fact last night with 6 people in first there was nothing left over, in fact those people that paid £4K for their ticket didn't even get a choice of meals.:eek: and BA want them to fly with us again??

Left over club food, might happen sometimes, but you can't depend on it.

You mention private health care must go, fine by me, 3 years ago I was grounded by the CAA, like many other BA pilots each year. I was back at work in 21 days largely due to BAs private health care. If I had waited for the NHS I would have been out of action for over 90 days,all the time being paid a basic wage, and another pilot being paid overtime to cover my work.
Now you go away and do the math and see if private health care should go!

Before you spout such illiterate nonsense why don't you do some research:=

I am 100% sure he does. He has openly said that imposition will be the result should any work group fail to comply with his cost saving requirements by the end of this month.

Imposition means disruption of some sort soon after. He MUST have a plan, and it MUST be bulletproof. I'll be voting yes to whatever it is that BALPA have negotiated for us, because I know that imposition would be far worse. BASSA members are not going to have that option it seems, because their union is not really making all that much effort to meet BA's targets. I feel sorry for the crew, because in my opinion their union is SERIOUSLY underestimating Willie's resolve.

Da Dog , upgraded rooms are at an extra cost as it is negotiated at time of the contract , We give you X amount of rooms in return for the contract , if standard room are booked all across , no need for negotiation . £ 1 per room per head saves a lot of money for over 16000 people in total . Do the maths .
Change change change is coming this time and its for everybody . you can vote , ballot , march to waterside , do what you like , it will happen , same as open skies did .
The best thing forward is work with each other , support each other , be one team , not divide and slag .

One thing I don't understand: what makes a strike legal and illegal? If BA and BASSA don't reach an agreement before 30th of June, would it be legal for BASSA to take out their members on a strike?

Virginia,

It's not really the issue. It's about becoming a bit more flexible and cost effective. Think about EF and that they average 500 hours per year! It's nearly equivalent to part-time at full-time pay.

WW could also become more flexible, for instance disruption agreement, and remove some of its clauses. I was on one of the flights last year when the airport in BKK was closed down. Did you know that several aircraft left without any passengers, leaving them behind, because some of the cabin crew insisted on two local nights as part of the agreement? A few of us in the cabin were willing, along with the flight crew, to take minimum rest and try to get the situation sorted out. No! The vast majority of the crew refused to do so because they were entitled to two local nights. The trips were a lot longer than scheduled which actually meant more time in the hotel.

nuigini
 

What grounds would BASSA have for having a strike?

Andy
 

Dunno, but I have, err, heard that WW has just clarified that he is not taking the much mooted payrise....

Rgds

Anyone for a sweepstake on who/what worldoffers is? My money's on junior main crew, BARPS pension, doesn't understand why we aren't all paid the same because we all work on the same aircraft, right? His posts drip with envy and are littered with the kind of ridiculous 'facts' that you only get from Galley FM.

Personally I think junior crew should be flogged harder, with no bunk rest for them to allow the seniors more time. They should also be stripped of telephone allowances (don't need those any more) and the money should be redistributed to pay for the wax for our Ferraris.:}

Worldoffers,

Wrong, wrong and wrong.

Our agreement says:

Where the Hotel wishes and/or is able to upgrade Crew Members to superior rooms it shall do so in the order of preference of Captains, Senior First Officers; First Officers; Cabin Service Directors and Pursers. Any room upgrade shall be at no extra charge to BA Group.

The Times seems to have got information about the allowances:

http://extras.timesonline.co.uk/pdfs...ont_110609.pdf

To be fair The Times are hardly putting any perspective into their reporting, they just quote some of the more affluent destinations without taking into account other areas of the world like India as an example. Perhaps a cabin crew member should send in a sample roster:ok:

The stunning thing is that some of our colleagues still think they are on minimum wage!! On the comments after the Times article yesterday, there were people stating what they get after they have paid National Insurance, Pension/BARP contributions, Crewcard and tax, and trying to get sympathy.

I think that timesonline graphic is fair enough. It does represent the truth.

Lets face it, a 9 day Singapore, £762 for most, £905 for the CSD............and a dinner in the food court costs 4 SIN $. Its a fact. How many crew do you see rush down to the supermarket to stock up for their 48 hours. We cant honestly say that we take 3 meals in the hotel restaurant, can we?

One thing it really highlights is the differential between CSD's allowances and the rest of us. I am now, more than ever, sure that BASSA really does stand for British Airways Senior Stewards (or Stewadresses) Association.

If we cant attract enough people onto the aircraft, and cant entice them to part with enough cash for their seats, we are going to have to alter, and yes, shock horror, probably reduce our remuneration. We will have to make sacrifices, maybe work a bit longer than we had planned, so that we can make ends meet now.

This is our opportunity to control our destiny, if only BASSA will allow us.

Otherwise the future will be dictated to us.

According to the whispers I'm hearing about the results of the Inland Revenue tax review many of our colleagues in the cabin are going to have to rein in their expenditure a little more soon. Having failed to go out and spend their meal allowances the Revenue are planning a sizeable hike in the taxation.

Although this has got all the crew laughing their socks off:D

Quote from JP Europe, times-on line have your say.

Andyismyname
 

I have no idea but according to many crew because the management wants to "mess" around with our allowances and salaries. Not sure if that is sufficient for going on a strike.

I can't honestly say that. I never eat three meals a day and especially not in a hotel restaurant where everything is far too expensive. Walk around the block of the hotel and you'll get tucker for a buck!

Rumour has it that the pilots have agreed a deal with the company. Ballot on the proposal to follow.

Incorrect Ham Phisted.

The BACC (BALPAs BA team) has accepted a package of cuts which will be presented to the pilots to vote on by the end of the month.

Nothing has been agreed, but at least BALPA has a package to propose to their members unlike some head in the sand 1970s groups.

I find it amazing ho much incorrect data has been posted by so many people on this thread. Please folk, just post fact not ill informed opinion or speculation.

Its clear from BALPA that the Inland revenue is reducing the pilots tax free percentage of our TAFB payments (time away from base) but nowhere near as painfully as the cabin crews allowance tax free percentage will be reduced by.

OpenLies, what details do you have of what BALPA's Council have agreed?

And by how much are your, and our tax rates going to change?

There are no details of the BALPA proposals yet, infor will be sent out on Monday. Nor are there any firm details on the tax changes yet, just leaks from inside the review process that our rate is going up and yours is going up further.

Good one open lies, you say

Then go on to say

So are you posting that as fact or is it indeed speculation cos as far I can tell you either know its a fact because your inside the BACC or it is indeed speculation.

Which is after all what the website is about:ok:

One thing for sure, UK PLC needs more Tax revenue, the Tax man has some very smart ways of rewarding its staff in getting this money, most normal working people people will be paying more Tax in future, £750/£900 for a trip to Singapore, am sure the Tax man will be having his eyes on some of that.
.
Also need to remember, as normal working people get paid less or new types work for less money, the poor old Tax man will be working even harder, lean times ahead I think.

I have just read the [Edit]A-Scale NSP Sub Group [Edit ended] missive put around after their Monday meeting! Contains some great lines, and a few shocking ones.

I think this one is excellent and seems to set the tone of the meeting:

Oddly enough, management meetings can be considered part of the working day however meetings for a voluntary participation union group can, honestly, be considered different and outside of the working day.

To those who cannot understand why changes must be permanent. Please, please, please see past the fortress walls of the BASSA rhetoric and look at BA as a whole company. That company desperately needs investors. The major investors provide much of the liquidity that the company needs to continue trading in this current environment. Add to that that investors will want a dividend in the future as a return on their investments and you see the requirement to provide a robust business.

That 'robustness' has been severely tested over the past 15-20 years with every season kicking off with some sort of industrial dispute from one or another department. That is what needs to change. The myriad of rules, clauses, sub clauses and galley FM beliefs need to change. Managers needing to 'clarify' with BASSA if this or that schedule is 'OK'? Gotta go. Get rid of 'industrial' limits and all work to the same scheme.

Until this transparency of working condition is achieved across the board there will be an awful lot of reticence to invest in BA as the company currently stands. Until ALL unionised groups have the ability to engage in meaningful, constructive and adult discussions of disputes then investment will be shortcoming. This is why PERMANENT change is needed. It is not just to spite the workforce but to ensure that the company remains an attractive investment opportunity within the stock market. Lose that and the company will be ruined.

No I am not management, all I want to see is continued employment within the company I enjoy working for.

Cabin Crew are not the only ones who work at BA - there are lots of others too and without all parts of the team, nothing would get off the ground.

The entire workforce of BA is under the gun and having to face changes to their working practices. Although I have sympathy for some of the old practices for crew being dismantled, I really wish they'd see the bigger picture.

If BA has a strike now, there's a very strong possibility the company will fold and thousands of us will be without work. Fine if you're a 25 year old crew member who can get another job.

Try being on the maturer side where work is IMPOSSIBLE to come by.

I work for BA and want to keep the job I enjoy. I'm on a measley salary but I'd rather have that than nothing at all.

Time for crew (and anyone else who thinks a strike is the answer) to stop being so selfish. If you continue that way I hope you won't be complaining when you're earning £5 an hour filling shelves at the local supermarket - you don't get allowances for that. :ugh:

Industrial action : Directgov - Employment

useful info on this government website about the implications for people who chose to go on strike :(

Actually the going rate for a supermarket worker where I live is more like £6. At least you'd be in your own bed every night. Mmm the idea of being a night shift shelf stacker, not having to interact with any of the general public does appeal to me!

In that case Virginia you are clearly in the wrong job and should leave any customer service job immediately and enjoy your new salary of £6 (before tax) an hour unencumbered with the rest of the human race, especially those who pay your wages. Bon Voyage!

ps You could be in your own bed if BASSA would let you do 4 sectors a day instead of whiling away unnecessary hours at Heathrow.

nuigini,

(I do apologise, I've learnt once how to quote, but forgotten-why don't we have a quote button here..!!)

I did say I thought any crew who fly for BA should be on the same salary and T&Cs. But other companies have brought in lower starting salaries, not just BA.

Re the destination payments. They're not always on the the same trips, 1 MIA might get one, the other may not, 'cos there are only so many to go round and they sometimes change with the schedule. To which trips they are attributed, is not set in stone.

On Mid-fleet, we too only got 2 days off after a US trip(1 day off was trialled for a few weeks:ooh:), I didn't mind that, we had bidding also and more control over our lives; when we worked, what time we finished and started etc.

Like I say, if you want a full answer to the destination payment question, why not ask on other 'in-house' forums.


GS-Alpha, thankyou for your reply.:)

FloridaCandle,

I have done 20 years in BA, cabin crew is my third job in the company, and I agree with everything you say.

I personally think if more crew had worked elsewhere within the company, things would be different.

Yes, to most pax we are the face of BA, they spend longer with us than other depts within the company. But we need to remember that most other depts have already been downsized as far as they can go, so most people still at BA are very much needed to keep the company going.

We're all cogs in a very big wheel.

Hmmm why was the destination payment brought in?................it was because people used to go sick and avoid the trip. Even after the sickness policy revamp, the destination payment continues.

No wonder we are slowly going broke. Doh