3,000 jobs to go at Waste O'Space
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Agree DD
In my tenure, most of the hierarchy, many of whom I knew reasonably well, had little understanding of the RAF, its purpose, needs and how it ticked - at all its levels; and worse, they weren't interested in finding out. There were those who were of high engineering intellect, others with a strong commercial eye, and those with persuasive vocal chords; I met very few who were passionate about ensuring its main customer was well-served. Company men and shilling.
The workforce on the otherhand was impressive: skilled, hardworking, dedicated, and invariably interested in the customer and its operating requirements. They deserve a far, far better fate than that which awaits.
After 27 years with the Air Force, I spent 12 with BAe/BAES which rewarded me well both financially and in lifestyle, and I like to think I gave more than I took. Overall, most of its products over the years are not worthy of the slagging which some here take delight in: none perfect, but they have largely served the UK well, operationally, economically and socially. Nevertheless, as said convincingly by others on here, 'twixt MoD and BAe/BAES senior management the country and the military has not had the best of dealings, hugely so.
Sad but predicatable times for all concerned and, regardless of much of the ongoing political and media commentary, IMHO little to do with current economic or other perceived woes. Further UK military aircraft development and procurement is not conceivable in the distant future, production is coming to an end, with only a brief stay of execution offered by one or two more potential orders, and work is inexorably drying-up. Not rocket-science, regardless of the opinion of that useless strategic guru at Birmingham University: unmanned will not fill the hole, in all respects.
The lights are going out, and these are awful times for all concerned both at the coalface and those elsewhere dependent.
Too long, sorry.
Do you really think it's the guys that organised the contracts, were responsible for cost overruns, involved in junkets etc that got the 'good news'? They're too far up the food chain.
The workforce on the otherhand was impressive: skilled, hardworking, dedicated, and invariably interested in the customer and its operating requirements. They deserve a far, far better fate than that which awaits.
After 27 years with the Air Force, I spent 12 with BAe/BAES which rewarded me well both financially and in lifestyle, and I like to think I gave more than I took. Overall, most of its products over the years are not worthy of the slagging which some here take delight in: none perfect, but they have largely served the UK well, operationally, economically and socially. Nevertheless, as said convincingly by others on here, 'twixt MoD and BAe/BAES senior management the country and the military has not had the best of dealings, hugely so.
Sad but predicatable times for all concerned and, regardless of much of the ongoing political and media commentary, IMHO little to do with current economic or other perceived woes. Further UK military aircraft development and procurement is not conceivable in the distant future, production is coming to an end, with only a brief stay of execution offered by one or two more potential orders, and work is inexorably drying-up. Not rocket-science, regardless of the opinion of that useless strategic guru at Birmingham University: unmanned will not fill the hole, in all respects.
The lights are going out, and these are awful times for all concerned both at the coalface and those elsewhere dependent.
Too long, sorry.
Last edited by jindabyne; 27th Sep 2011 at 21:49. Reason: sp!
1. Don't forget that BAE is about 40,000 strong - just in UK - and doesn't just make airplanes - If you can think of a military application BAE probably makes one of the choices you have.
2. Don't forget they've already made about 5,000 redundant in the last 18-24 months.
Best of luck to all threatened - I know how it feels.
2. Don't forget they've already made about 5,000 redundant in the last 18-24 months.
Best of luck to all threatened - I know how it feels.
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'In my tenure, most of the hierarchy, many of whom I knew reasonably well, had little understanding of the RAF, its purpose, needs and how it ticked - at all its levels; and worse, they weren't interested in finding out. There were those who were of high engineering intellect, others with a strong commercial eye, and those with persuasive vocal chords; I met very few who were passionate about ensuring its main customer was well-served. Company men and shilling.'
...That could be said about any of the Primes that the MOD chooses to engage with. A 'GodDamn' big company based in Wales springs to mind - their general view is that the MOD sponge is fit for squeezing...and they have just been given another massive project to cock up
It is no wonder people generate such opinions as those displayed here. There is no MOD/Industry partnership although it is much flaunted by the MOD.
I feel sorry for the workers, but the management made this.
G
...That could be said about any of the Primes that the MOD chooses to engage with. A 'GodDamn' big company based in Wales springs to mind - their general view is that the MOD sponge is fit for squeezing...and they have just been given another massive project to cock up
It is no wonder people generate such opinions as those displayed here. There is no MOD/Industry partnership although it is much flaunted by the MOD.
I feel sorry for the workers, but the management made this.
G
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
I just read the wiki page on BAES. Not that I'd lean on it in court, but I'm sure the balance of it is true.
Says that BAES employs 104,000 people worldwide, and makes about 5% profit on turnover. So not much profit, and in the overall scheme of things, not a vast reduction in workforce.
Also talks about the sale of the AIrbus shareholding, and that Airbus UK employs 140,000 people directly and indirectly. Surely that can't be true. About 3% of the UK's workforce employed making wings or components for airliners? If it is, it sets in context the (small) size of the BAES aircraft operation in the UK.
Says that BAES employs 104,000 people worldwide, and makes about 5% profit on turnover. So not much profit, and in the overall scheme of things, not a vast reduction in workforce.
Also talks about the sale of the AIrbus shareholding, and that Airbus UK employs 140,000 people directly and indirectly. Surely that can't be true. About 3% of the UK's workforce employed making wings or components for airliners? If it is, it sets in context the (small) size of the BAES aircraft operation in the UK.
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: UK
Age: 53
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
jin
I'm one of those being made redundant as a result of one of BAEs flagship failures, however, having spent just under 4 years at Warton wearing the light blue, I fully echo your comments. The guys and girls I had the pleasure of working with on a daily basis were some of the hardest working, most dedicated people you could ever hope to meet. They were well aware of the customers wants and needs and would try their hardest to accommodate that within the at times ridiculous constraints that were forced upon them. The real shame was that their management just didn't get it and it seemed to me didn't really want to get it, deferring difficult decisions and just sweeping others under the rug!
Sadly it is the hardest working who will likely see the door as those in the more senior positions ensure that 'I'm all right jack' by shifting blame for failure down stream. As they say, sh#t rolls downhill - its not nice and in many cases not deserved.
That's not to say the the blame only lays at one door, the MoD are just not geared up for the cut and thrust of modern business where multi-billion pound contracts are at stake. The constant changing of personnel on PTs just so the high fliers can get their procurement ticks is a joke and does nothing for continuity. I lost count of the number of Sqn Ldrs and above who came and went during my time. As a result there was no way a solid working relationship higher up the food chain ever exist - you just didn't know who you would be working with from one month to the next!
There has to be change from all those involved in defence procurement because at the moment its well and truly fuc@@d but I just don't see when and where the necessary change is going to come from.
I fear for those left in the services and those who manage to hold on within BAEs as the future is not exactly rosy on either side.
For those who do stay I wish you the very best of luck and hope that you turn the corner very soon.
I'm one of those being made redundant as a result of one of BAEs flagship failures, however, having spent just under 4 years at Warton wearing the light blue, I fully echo your comments. The guys and girls I had the pleasure of working with on a daily basis were some of the hardest working, most dedicated people you could ever hope to meet. They were well aware of the customers wants and needs and would try their hardest to accommodate that within the at times ridiculous constraints that were forced upon them. The real shame was that their management just didn't get it and it seemed to me didn't really want to get it, deferring difficult decisions and just sweeping others under the rug!
Sadly it is the hardest working who will likely see the door as those in the more senior positions ensure that 'I'm all right jack' by shifting blame for failure down stream. As they say, sh#t rolls downhill - its not nice and in many cases not deserved.
That's not to say the the blame only lays at one door, the MoD are just not geared up for the cut and thrust of modern business where multi-billion pound contracts are at stake. The constant changing of personnel on PTs just so the high fliers can get their procurement ticks is a joke and does nothing for continuity. I lost count of the number of Sqn Ldrs and above who came and went during my time. As a result there was no way a solid working relationship higher up the food chain ever exist - you just didn't know who you would be working with from one month to the next!
There has to be change from all those involved in defence procurement because at the moment its well and truly fuc@@d but I just don't see when and where the necessary change is going to come from.
I fear for those left in the services and those who manage to hold on within BAEs as the future is not exactly rosy on either side.
For those who do stay I wish you the very best of luck and hope that you turn the corner very soon.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: Scotland
Posts: 217
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have sympathy for the good guys of BAE, many good test engineers I have worked with that have experience that is second to none, great guys and a pleasure for the RAF as we have gained so much from industry, yet that all fell to **** last year and for the 50% of wankers who sat all day reading papers and speaking in a lancashire accent quoting union rules than actually picking up a screwdriver and doing a proper days work , never mind 15 mins tea breaks every 15 mins. After the fallout of that then I got no sympathy, even petty fights between two workplaces over an aircaft that clearly disrupted Typhoon orders. Justice served I agree harsh as I never want one British person to loose a job but for the guys of BAE to complain about work and conditions , it was coming.
The news today about Brough loosing 3/4 of manpower kind of confimrs that F35 is not really in the big picture anymore
The news today about Brough loosing 3/4 of manpower kind of confimrs that F35 is not really in the big picture anymore
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 59
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QTRZulu
Nice post, well put. Agree with you all the way.
RumPunch
Having worked on a site where the Unions used to agree the pay bargaining, it used to frustrate me no end on occasions.
Having a good working knowledge of the intricacies of developing a new product from scratch, the job losses also mean that the potential for the future is severely degraded. Once you lose the experienced guys and gals, you can't just pick someone out of Uni and expect them to produce the same standard of work straight off. Experience is crucial, and you could say that one of the causes of where we are now is the fact that the knowledge level in some areas has been gradually whittled away over decades. New tools, processes, and techniques still need people to make them work properly.
And now we will take another chunk out of the knowledge pot, so our chances of designing and developing new product in the future is reduced further because we won't be as competative as other manufacturers who have retained the skilled people. I know it's a business, but still it's a waste.
My thoughts are with my former colleagues at Brough and Warton, good luck folks and I hope it works out for you
Nice post, well put. Agree with you all the way.
RumPunch
Having worked on a site where the Unions used to agree the pay bargaining, it used to frustrate me no end on occasions.
Having a good working knowledge of the intricacies of developing a new product from scratch, the job losses also mean that the potential for the future is severely degraded. Once you lose the experienced guys and gals, you can't just pick someone out of Uni and expect them to produce the same standard of work straight off. Experience is crucial, and you could say that one of the causes of where we are now is the fact that the knowledge level in some areas has been gradually whittled away over decades. New tools, processes, and techniques still need people to make them work properly.
And now we will take another chunk out of the knowledge pot, so our chances of designing and developing new product in the future is reduced further because we won't be as competative as other manufacturers who have retained the skilled people. I know it's a business, but still it's a waste.
My thoughts are with my former colleagues at Brough and Warton, good luck folks and I hope it works out for you
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
QTRZulu
Well said and I totally agree.
Now that is a statement that sadly sounds familiar……..right across the whole country and in just about every office, department, board room, etc, etc
Just how have we allowed so many idiots, who spout business boll@cks, to be in so many prominent positions? However, when it comes down to it, totally ineffective and spineless and only in it for themselves.
A total culture change is required......
Well said and I totally agree.
The real shame was that their management just didn't get it and it seemed to me didn't really want to get it, deferring difficult decisions and just sweeping others under the rug!
Just how have we allowed so many idiots, who spout business boll@cks, to be in so many prominent positions? However, when it comes down to it, totally ineffective and spineless and only in it for themselves.
A total culture change is required......
Overall, most of its products over the years are not worthy of the slagging which some here take delight in: none perfect, but they have largely served the UK well, operationally, economically and socially.
NIMWACS - complete disaster and massive waste of money.
MRA4 - complete disaster and massive waste of money.
TORNADO F3 - unfit for purpose as F2. Large sums of money and effort spent to get to F3. Useless above 35,000ft (would get above that but needed to be going bloody quickly to stay there). RADAR that took 15years to sort out (I know it was Ferranti/GEC but they made the SYSTEMS of BAESYSTEMS) - sent to first Gulf War with no defensive aids, a RADAR that would be lucky to get a lock against certain adversaries and engines well below spec for desert ops. During the competition for the contract the company lobbied parliament and effectively lied about its capability. I know this as I spent over 10 years flying it.
HARRIER GR5/7/9/9a - so many marks in so little time! No gun, no weapons clearance for Gulf War I.
PHOENIX - GEC again that became BAESYSTEMS. Late, over budget and underperforming. Royal Arty nicknamed it the "bugger off" for good reason.
TYPHOON - late and overbudget. Systems very poor in the early days and more political lobbying and effective lies.
HERTI - a complete disaster when I saw it in theatre, they hadn't learnt much more from the PHOENIX program.
Latest lies and political lobbying have started with their latest unmanned offering - this time with the French on board as well. I only hope that yesterday's announcement means that the deal is off or we'll be saddled with another crock of sh!te.
Grrrr
LJ
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Leon
Aside from your opening remark, I agree with most of your follow-on comments; albeit, as said elsewhere, the culpability arose mostly from joint Ministry/Industry mismanagement. But those specifics don't alter my wider opinion that, over the past four decades, we have had some reasonably decent in-service kit. Not perfect as I said, and sometimes the imperfections had to be corrected in-house; but certainly not always as described in your last sentence.
Aside from your opening remark, I agree with most of your follow-on comments; albeit, as said elsewhere, the culpability arose mostly from joint Ministry/Industry mismanagement. But those specifics don't alter my wider opinion that, over the past four decades, we have had some reasonably decent in-service kit. Not perfect as I said, and sometimes the imperfections had to be corrected in-house; but certainly not always as described in your last sentence.
Another procurement that made my blood boil was the political lobbying by the company to fat boy Prescott and then the whining to the RAF leadership to buy the Hawk 128 (with a promise of a place on the gravy train after 1 year away on retirement). The Team looking at the requirements wanted the Aeromacchi M346 - twin engined, glass cockpit, plenty of room for expansion and a perfect lead-in to Typhoon. But no, for British jobs we had to to take the Hawk 128 thanks to the fat lad's meddling.
Now we're left with an aircraft that has a smaller cockpit than the Hawk T1/T1A - which is great when diet, nutrition and health means that our demographic is getting larger! There will be some creamies sent to Linton in the twighlight of T1/T1A who will not be able to come back to 128 later because they will be too big!!!
Double Grrr
LJ
Now we're left with an aircraft that has a smaller cockpit than the Hawk T1/T1A - which is great when diet, nutrition and health means that our demographic is getting larger! There will be some creamies sent to Linton in the twighlight of T1/T1A who will not be able to come back to 128 later because they will be too big!!!
Double Grrr
LJ
Thread Starter
There seems to be a plan break up BAESYSTEMS into smaller companies - in my non-commercial tiny brain, this would be a good thing as anything with the red and white logo BAESYSTEMS seems to be a tainted brand!
It would be nice to see the names of Hawker, DeHavilland, AVRO, Handley-Page, etc... all make a come back. It has certainly worked for MINI in recent years - we should be proud of the heritage, just not the monster that it has become in the past 20 years.
iRaven
It would be nice to see the names of Hawker, DeHavilland, AVRO, Handley-Page, etc... all make a come back. It has certainly worked for MINI in recent years - we should be proud of the heritage, just not the monster that it has become in the past 20 years.
iRaven
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Malkin Tower
Posts: 847
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
and Ferranti, Thorn, Marconi, Plessey, English Electric, British Thompson Houston, Vulcan Foundry, Vickers SEL, Mirlees, Davey-Paxman, Napier, and countless other British engineering companies that were murdered or emasculated by GEC
The GEC management legacy is the problem within BAE Systems - not the BAe traditions.
The GEC management legacy is the problem within BAE Systems - not the BAe traditions.
BAE shares have underperformed over the past three years, leaving them on a low PE and a high yield. However, despite these low ratios, they could continue to underperform on concerns over defence budget cuts, particularly in the US and the UK as these two countries account for some 70% of group sales. Management has pledged a series of measures, including bolt-on acquisitions, cost reduction, share buybacks and higher dividends, but these do not appear to have had any positive impact on the stock price.
We believe that a radical move is required to reverse the share-price decline and we advocate a complete reversal of the group's long-held strategy in order to unlock the substantial hidden value within the group's business portfolio.
De-merging the US businesses should allow the market to value the two resulting groupings on their individual merits and this could provide an immediate uplift in the valuation of some 36%. Furthermore, an independent BAE Inc could then generate further value for shareholders by merging with or selling itself to one of the US defence companies, releasing a further 10%-20% of value. A similar strategy was successfully pursued by General Dynamics in the last major defence downturn in 1991 and yielded total shareholder returns of over 500% between 1991 and 1994.
We believe that a radical move is required to reverse the share-price decline and we advocate a complete reversal of the group's long-held strategy in order to unlock the substantial hidden value within the group's business portfolio.
De-merging the US businesses should allow the market to value the two resulting groupings on their individual merits and this could provide an immediate uplift in the valuation of some 36%. Furthermore, an independent BAE Inc could then generate further value for shareholders by merging with or selling itself to one of the US defence companies, releasing a further 10%-20% of value. A similar strategy was successfully pursued by General Dynamics in the last major defence downturn in 1991 and yielded total shareholder returns of over 500% between 1991 and 1994.
LJ
Thread Starter
Oh, you want to use the UK threat database rather than the useless NATO one? OK, just hand it over, we'll program it in once the NSA have finished with it.
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Longton, Lancs, UK
Age: 80
Posts: 1,527
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like
on
1 Post
Another procurement that made my blood boil was the political lobbying by the company to fat boy Prescott and then the whining to the RAF leadership to buy the Hawk 128 (with a promise of a place on the gravy train after 1 year away on retirement). The Team looking at the requirements wanted the Aeromacchi M346 - twin engined, glass cockpit, plenty of room for expansion and a perfect lead-in to Typhoon. But no, for British jobs we had to to take the Hawk 128 thanks to the fat lad's meddling.
Now we're left with an aircraft that has a smaller cockpit than the Hawk T1/T1A - which is great when diet, nutrition and health means that our demographic is getting larger! There will be some creamies sent to Linton in the twighlight of T1/T1A who will not be able to come back to 128 later because they will be too big!!!
Double Grrr
Now we're left with an aircraft that has a smaller cockpit than the Hawk T1/T1A - which is great when diet, nutrition and health means that our demographic is getting larger! There will be some creamies sent to Linton in the twighlight of T1/T1A who will not be able to come back to 128 later because they will be too big!!!
Double Grrr
Jindabyne
How so? I know this for a fact as I had a guy coming to fly for me whilst he waited for a Typhoon/Tornado cockpit. About 3 weeks to go I got a call from 22Gp saying could they have him back as he needed to fly T1/T1A before it went or he would not fit in the 128 for a refresher in a couple of years after I had finished with him.
Or are you denying that fatboy Prezza ordered that the deal be struck to save his double-chins for the chop by his constituents near Brough?
Or is it that the Macchi M346 is inferior? I think not!
Do tell
LJ
Total and utter nonsense!
Or are you denying that fatboy Prezza ordered that the deal be struck to save his double-chins for the chop by his constituents near Brough?
Or is it that the Macchi M346 is inferior? I think not!
Do tell
LJ
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: The Fletcher Memorial Home
Age: 59
Posts: 303
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
LJ
Wake up and smell the coffee! Of course politics were involved in the purchase of the Mk128, isn't that what politicians do? If they want to get re-elected they don't sign up to deals that will make their constituents redundant, regardless of the topic.
As for buying the Macchi, if that deal had gone ahead then the 900 job losses at Brough would have been six years ago. Just because you didn't get the toy you wanted is no reason to throw them out of the cot and blame everyone else.
When it comes down to it, BAE is a business. If you don't act like a business you go under, and you have to sell things to do that. How many non-US built aircraft/tanks/ships does teh US military have? Virtually none, and that is because the US defence contractors have the whole thing sewn up. We as a country don't have a big enough military to support that.
P.S. your hated TMk1 is one of the few non-US designs in the US inventory as the T38 Goshawk, but they don't like to talk about it
Wake up and smell the coffee! Of course politics were involved in the purchase of the Mk128, isn't that what politicians do? If they want to get re-elected they don't sign up to deals that will make their constituents redundant, regardless of the topic.
As for buying the Macchi, if that deal had gone ahead then the 900 job losses at Brough would have been six years ago. Just because you didn't get the toy you wanted is no reason to throw them out of the cot and blame everyone else.
When it comes down to it, BAE is a business. If you don't act like a business you go under, and you have to sell things to do that. How many non-US built aircraft/tanks/ships does teh US military have? Virtually none, and that is because the US defence contractors have the whole thing sewn up. We as a country don't have a big enough military to support that.
P.S. your hated TMk1 is one of the few non-US designs in the US inventory as the T38 Goshawk, but they don't like to talk about it
Join Date: May 2006
Location: 2 m South of Radstock VRP
Posts: 2,042
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
iRaven, an interesting association; I think. The Millipede bloody annoyed me today by making a salient point regarding "asset strippers". BBC News - Labour conference: Miliband war on 'fast buck' society
Is it a coincidence that Woodford (and probably Brough and Salmesbury in due course) is probably worth more per year as a prime building site than it was as one of production? Now it's mentioned, it can't be easy for the poor buggers from Woodford who were "offered" jobs at wonderful Warton. BAES, the 1 Site model aircraft (after Typhoon) factory.
Ed Miliband has declared war on "predatory, asset-stripping" companies, in his speech to the Labour conference.