Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Aircrew Forums > Military Aviation
Reload this Page >

3,000 jobs to go at Waste O'Space

Wikiposts
Search
Military Aviation A forum for the professionals who fly military hardware. Also for the backroom boys and girls who support the flying and maintain the equipment, and without whom nothing would ever leave the ground. All armies, navies and air forces of the world equally welcome here.

3,000 jobs to go at Waste O'Space

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 25th Sep 2011, 12:16
  #1 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 503
Received 40 Likes on 10 Posts
3,000 jobs to go at Waste O'Space

BAE Systems to cut 3,000 jobs - Telegraph

BAE Systems to cut 3,000 jobs

BAE Systems, Britain’s biggest manufacturer, is poised to cut 3,000 jobs in a major setback for the UK economy.

Graham Ruddick and Patrick Hennessy
6:29PM BST 24 Sep 2011
The Sunday Telegraph understands the job losses could be announced as early as this week and will be focused on the company’s military aircraft division in Warton, Lancashire, and Brough, Yorkshire.
BAE is concerned about the time it could take to secure export orders for the Eurofighter Typhoon as orders from the partner nations, including the UK, slow amid cuts to defence budgets.
The Government is thought to be aware of the company’s deliberations and is preparing contingency plans for workers who could lose their jobs.
In a statement last night, BAE confirmed it has “informed staff that we are reviewing our operations” and plans to slow Typhoon production.
BAE employs 14,000 staff in Military Air and Information, for which the Typhoon is a core project.
The company has a 33pc stake in the Eurofighter project, alongside EADS and Finmeccanica, which has received orders for more than 550 planes from the four partner nations – the UK, Germany, Italy and Spain.
Final assembly of the Typhoon in the UK is taking place at Warton and more than 100 planes have been delivered to the Ministry of Defence and Saudi Arabia.
The aircraft has been used by British forces in Libya, highlighting the capabilities of the Typhoon to other countries contemplating a modernisation of their air force.
The long-term future of the Eurofighter project is based on securing exports.
A deal with Saudi Arabia for 72 aircraft was agreed in 2007 but the partners are also chasing deals with countries such as India, Japan, Oman and Malaysia.
An agreement with India could be worth $11bn (£7.1bn) for 126 aircraft and effectively make the country a “fifth partner” in the project by securing its future.
The Eurofighter has been shortlisted by the Indian government alongside France’s Dassault Rafale, but a final decision may not be made until next April.
BAE said last night in a statement: “In order to bridge the gap between current demand and future anticipated export contracts the production rate on the current Typhoon programme for the partner nations will be slowed.
“BAE Systems recognises that the long-term future of Typhoon is based on its export potential and therefore we need to ensure we are in the best possible position to secure those opportunities. Extending the production programme will help us achieve this.
“We will now work through the impact of this decision and we remain committed to making Typhoon a success both in the UK and overseas markets.”
The chief executive of BAE, Ian King, warned in February that the company would continue to study its workforce and capacity as defence spending is slashed in the UK and other Western nations.
BAE cut 15,000 jobs in 2009 and 2010, as it prepared for a slowdown in markets such as armoured vehicles.
The company continued: “BAE Systems has informed staff that we are reviewing our operations across various businesses to make sure the company is performing as effectively and efficiently as possible, both in delivering our commitments to existing customers and ensuring the company is best placed to secure future business.
“As the outcome of this review becomes clear, we will, as always, communicate to our employees as a priority.”
I'm sad for the individuals involved but this has to be good news for us in the military? Hopefully no more rip offs, no more sub standard kit, no more pretending its OK to sell your kit on to foreign companies whilst the UK Military soldier on with the old stuff, no more jobs on the board for 2-4 stars for setting up a contract...nuff said.

They should never have sold out of Airbus (20% stake) as the civil market is booming compared to the military market. Their books have now run dry on the military market and the sale of a dozen or so Mantis is never going to save them (heaven forbid if that ever happens).

iRaven
iRaven is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 12:40
  #2 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bouncing around the Holding pattern
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You reap what you sow I suppose. Pretty small job losses compared to HM Forces, for which I'm sure some of the blame sits at the door of BAe Systems.
TurbineTooHot is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 16:14
  #3 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,894
Received 2,833 Likes on 1,210 Posts
I'm sad for the individuals involved but this has to be good news for us in the military? Hopefully no more rip offs, no more sub standard kit, no more pretending its OK to sell your kit on to foreign companies whilst the UK Military soldier on with the old stuff, no more jobs on the board for 2-4 stars for setting up a contract...nuff said.

They should never have sold out of Airbus (20% stake) as the civil market is booming compared to the military market. Their books have now run dry on the military market and the sale of a dozen or so Mantis is never going to save them (heaven forbid if that ever happens).

iRaven
Problem in the first paragraph has to be addressed by the MOD. you reap what you sow and been a being an "open" contract for the likes of the Nimrod AEW from what I think I have read, one item at fault was the size of the computer used, but although recognised by the company there was no benefit to BAe to replace the inadequate item with something that would do the job, instead they reaped financial benefits by trying to squeeze software onto a computer too small for the job and hence cost over runs and major problems...... There needs to be contract cast in stone that penalises the companies as in Commecial Aviation. BA I believe is having there 777 fleet fitted at Boeings expense with Winglets? due to the over runs in the Dreamliner deliveries as part of the compensation package.......

Second I agree, it's all about seeing a return to the investors, I think it was the ATP ( Advanced Technical Problem) and 146 that suffered when they shifted the sales offices from the UK to Toulouse? Rumour was the sales staff were offered big commisions on the rest of the Aircraft for sale ( ATR?) hence the UK stuff wasn't pushed and eventually the lines were closed down.
If the likes of Hawker can take over the production of the 125 and still be selling them and making a profit, why couldn't Bae?, I realise they were looking at the investment costs of the new version, but the 800 etc still sells well.
NutLoose is online now  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 16:51
  #4 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Quite near 'An aerodrome somewhere in England'
Posts: 26,806
Received 270 Likes on 109 Posts
Throughout his many years at 't Big House, Old Scrotum, 't Bungling Baron Waste O' Space's wrinkled retainer, had provided loyal service to 't Master. Whether taking Boogeroff, 't Baron's flatulent whippet for long walks oop snicket, or simply polishing 't Baron's big brass bound buggery boots, he had always carried out his duties with care and dedication.

Then came 't day he werr summoned to 't Baron's office oop at 't werrks....

"Scrotum, savings have terr be made, tha knaws. So tha's fired. Gerrout!"

And the poor old sod wandered off into the gathering gloom of a Lancastrian autumn, wondering when it had all begun to turn to worms for 't Bungling Baron.....
BEagle is online now  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 17:37
  #5 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: The Whyte House
Age: 95
Posts: 1,966
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
One less company for us redundees to gain gainful employment I suppose.
Willard Whyte is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 17:54
  #6 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You reap what you sow I suppose. Pretty small job losses compared to HM Forces, for which I'm sure some of the blame sits at the door of BAe Systems.
I really think you need to look and think at what you have written here and re-consider your words. Just a suggestion before……….
SRENNAPS is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 18:01
  #7 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 794
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
'One less company for us redundees to gain gainful employment I suppose'

WW,

Maybe, maybe not...they do lots of other defencey things, including subs, but my bigger question is are they a good company to work for?

Good luck!

G
gijoe is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 18:45
  #8 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 4,334
Received 80 Likes on 32 Posts
'One less company for us redundees to gain gainful employment I suppose'
Got to agree with GI Joe on this one - why would you want to work for them? Plus live in Blackpool, Preston and Hull? No thanks...

LJ
Lima Juliet is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 18:54
  #9 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Bouncing around the Holding pattern
Posts: 205
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
SRENNAPS.

I put blame for some of the Forces redundancies at the door of BAe, which is in turn now suffering job losses because we can't sustain purchases from them at huge overrunning costs. What wording should i reconsider? Please refrain from your lecturing tone.
IMHO the lack of competition in the UK defence industry has led to an impossible situation where we are obliged to buy what BAe are selling regardless of cost or quality.
TurbineTooHot is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 19:19
  #10 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Great Britain
Age: 51
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 5 Posts
TurbineTooHot

Nail, head, firmly, hit, spot on!

CPL Clott
Corporal Clott is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 19:26
  #11 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Tennessee - Smoky Mountains
Age: 55
Posts: 1,602
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Throughout his many years at 't Big House, Old Scrotum, 't Bungling Baron Waste O' Space's wrinkled retainer, had provided loyal service to 't Master. Whether taking Boogeroff, 't Baron's flatulent whippet for long walks oop snicket, or simply polishing 't Baron's big brass bound buggery boots, he had always carried out his duties with care and dedication.

Then came 't day he werr summoned to 't Baron's office oop at 't werrks....

"Scrotum, savings have terr be made, tha knaws. So tha's fired. Gerrout!"

And the poor old sod wandered off into the gathering gloom of a Lancastrian autumn, wondering when it had all begun to turn to worms for 't Bungling Baron.....
Well so much for the RAF and Mess Stewards, but I thought this thread was about BAE Systems?
Roadster280 is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 19:28
  #12 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by TurbineTooHot
SRENNAPS.

I put blame for some of the Forces redundancies at the door of BAe
Sorry but until we stop blaming industry and realise that it's the outdated and incompetent manner we use to "buy stuff" that sees us hooped in everything we do nothing will ever change
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 19:33
  #13 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: Great Britain
Age: 51
Posts: 340
Likes: 0
Received 11 Likes on 5 Posts
incompetent manner we use to "buy stuff" that sees us hooped in everything we do nothing will ever change
MOD procurement successes:

C-17 GLOBEMASTER
MQ-9 REAPER
E-3D SENTRY
and soon to be
RC-135W RIVET JOINT

Spot the common thread??? Not a whippet or a flat cap in sight!

CPL Clott
Corporal Clott is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 19:44
  #14 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Oxon
Age: 66
Posts: 1,942
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
CC,

Now that is a very very very impressive list
Seldomfitforpurpose is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 19:46
  #15 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 503
Received 40 Likes on 10 Posts
Yes, C-17 to cover for the delay in A400 (yes, I know its not waste o'space direct involvement but they are sub contracted), E-3D to cover NIMWACS, MQ-9 because Phoenix was a disaster (GEC-Marconi made it but they became the SYSTEMS part of BAE later on) and RJ because of further Nimrod bungling.

Then there's the cost over-runs and delays for Astute, the carriers and Type 45.

Rubbish! is to weak a word...

iRaven
iRaven is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 19:50
  #16 (permalink)  
Thread Starter
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 503
Received 40 Likes on 10 Posts
To add to CPL's list of successes - CH47 Chinook and AH64 Apache. They only went wrong when we started to screw around with the original designs.
iRaven is offline  
Old 25th Sep 2011, 20:04
  #17 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: La Belle Province
Posts: 2,179
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by iRaven
They only went wrong when we started to screw around with the original designs.
While no great fan of BAESYSTEMS, I wonder how many of their troubled programmes, such as those mentioned above, would come off the list if that same criteria were applied to them also?
Mad (Flt) Scientist is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2011, 01:46
  #18 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hanging off the end of a thread
Posts: 32,894
Received 2,833 Likes on 1,210 Posts
MOD procurement successes:

C-17 GLOBEMASTER
Err... leasing them at what it would nearly of cost to buy them with provisos on how and when they could be operated then at the end of the lease having to shell out again to buy them does not smack as a success in these eyes. Though to be fair it was a Brown fiasco

Leasing RAF planes wastes nearly £500m - Times Online
NutLoose is online now  
Old 26th Sep 2011, 05:20
  #19 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: South Wales
Age: 63
Posts: 729
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
TurbineTooHot

Please accept my apologies. I nether meant to offend or come across in a lecturing tone.

Perhaps I should have added: "before...........the men in the black suits take you away"
SRENNAPS is offline  
Old 26th Sep 2011, 07:44
  #20 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Lake District
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Maybe, maybe not...they do lots of other defencey things, including subs, but my bigger question is are they a good company to work for?
So far so good...Although I'm nothing to do with the air side of things.
Vim_Fuego is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.