Marginal cost
 

Considering what must be the total cost of a service to Australia and all that contributes to it, I find it rather hard to believe that cabin crew pay was the deal breaker.

For European airlines as a whole, on longhaul, cabin crew represents the biggest single cost category, after fuel. In the last two years it has overtaken sales/distribution/promotion costs, and maintenance & overhaul.

If you think it's easy to make money on Australian routes, think of the airlines who have abandoned the market - Air France, Lufthansa, KLM, Alitalia, Austrian, Olympic ...

Alot of people are just making stuff up on this forum to suit their own personal feelings.

First of all I will address the issue of the Melbourne service. This service was removed because of low loads when it was a part of a shuttle from Sydney or because of the bad utilisation of the aircraft, as mentioned by Wiggy, when it was a terminating flight direct from Singapore. Cabin crew costs pale into insugnificance compared to the costs of having an aircraft sit on the ground or fly with low loads. At certain times of the year the loads were ok but BA being a schedualled carrier has to fly and operate a year long schedual and unless a flight is full it cannot make a profit it has nothing to do with the crew costs.

BA does need to get it's crew costs down as well as get many of it's other costs down, but the example and reasoning that it is the cabin crew costs that caused this flight to be cancelled is completely incorrect.

The link up with Qantas as a full code share partner also played a part in the decision. Many of you may have noticed that British Airways flights to Austrailia are being operated out of Terminal 3 not Terminal 5 and this is also because of our strong link with Qantas and the need for both airlines to operate out of the same terminal.( I am not sure but I think I heard that this was at Qantas's request that we both depart from the same terminal at LHR.)

Now I will address the posts that suggest that BA does not operate flights from the Far East during the day because of the cabin crew union insisting on bunk rest longer than the legal requiremet.

This is yet again totally untrue and just made up information.

The maximum duty day of any one sector flight duty can vary between 11 hours to 14.3 hours long. The duty day starts 1 hour before the flight and ends at chocks. The length of the duty day depends on a number of factors and these are the rest taken before the flight and between the proceeding flight, the time of day of the departure and whether the crew is aclimatised to the time zone or not.

In order to extend a flight beyond the normal maximum duty day as above, and make it a long range flight, bunk rest is required for all the crew. The minimum bunk rest required is 3 hours. So as all Far East flights fall into the long range category, 3 hours is the minimum bunk rest legaly required and for some flights it could be 4 hours. The duty period is increased by one half of the total rest taken. So if three hours rest was taken then the duty day could be increased by 1 1/2 hours only and so 4 hours in the bunk extends the duty day by 2 hours only. So as you can see alot of bunk rest is required by the CAA to extend the flight duty day by just a small amount.

As 3 hours is the bare minimum for a shorter long range flight you can see how achieving this is hard for any airline. 3 hours rest plus 30 mins changeover, between one half of the crew with the other half, and then the second 3 hours rest equals 6 1/2 hours minimum removed from the time available for meal services to be completed.

Now take the time it takes to complete the initial bar and meal service on a flight. It takes approximately 3 hours from take off and until all the meal services are complete. The second smaller meal service takes 1 1/2 hours and it takes a further 1/2 an hour to prepare the cabin for landing. All this adds up to 11.30 hours of rest and service for a short long range flight. Even if BA wanted to do an extra meal service in the middle of the flight there would not be enough time. Or they could maybe put the second meal in the middle, between the two sets of cabin crew rests, but even on day flights many passengers may not want to be woken up or disturbed and then it would leave nothing to serve before landing. The other problem is that there is no space on board the aircraft for a third meal to be stored. The trolley space for even two meal services is very limited.
However BA do provide snacks throuout the flight available from the galley like pot noodles, crisps and buscuits etc.

Now I have gone into a lot of detail for you because I wanted some of you to understand the nature of long range flights and the legal requirement by the CAA for rest during the flight. BA do operate daylight flights to long range destinations and lack of catering space and the long time between meal services is a problem. But it is a problem for all airlines and not just BA.

An ex of mine worked as a pilot for THAI airways and as such I have flown on many of their flights and the bunk rest for their cabin crew is the same and the meal services are at the start and end of the flights just like BA's.

I feel like I have gone on alot but people seem to want to hear detail. It is obviously very anoying for me to see people write incorrect speculation as if it is fact and to rubbish BA cabin crew at the same time. BASSA are at fault for alot of things but crew rest on long range flights is not one nor is the schedual BA adopt nor is where BA fly to the fault of how much BA cabin crew are paid.

Thank you.

Now I hope I haven't upset anyone by explaining the facts and not just guessing the reasons for things. I know that alot of you have been upset by BASSA's industrial action and I too have been upset by this. As I said before I worked during the strike and wanted my union to negotiate not strike but it seems that this IA has caused people to try and blame crew for everything.

Some crew are paid well at the moment and BA are addressing this but I hope no one would want current crew, who have mortgages etc., to have their pay taken off them. Remember BA agreed to all our pay and conditions. Times have changed and the future costs are being addressed and I hope an agreement can be made.

That's what happens when you get a lot of people with too much time on their hands and little else to occupy their lives......Forums eh??:rolleyes::)

BA Annual Meeting Live
 

From the Daily Telegraph website covering the BA AGM live

BA annual meeting live: striking cabin crew, air taxes, Iberia merger - Telegraph

11.25am ... Broughton gets the boot in

First up is Martin Broughton, the Chelsea supporting chairman who doubles up with a job at Liverpool FC. He wastes no time going in two-footed at Bassa - the militant wing of the Unite union that represents the cabin crew.

"They have misrepresented management to their members. They have misrepresented their members' views to management," he says. "The board's patience with Bassa has now been exhausted. "We will win the right to manage."

Walsh's round robin

Willie Walsh, the BA chief executive, picks up the theme, aruing that the airline has made the crew an offer that provides "a genuine opportunity to end this dispute".

IMHO this is good news and shows how the board is firmly behind Willie Walsh's actions

P21

Betty Girl
 

Great explanation there Betty - the only thing that upsets me is its QANTAS:p

Python21:

Thank you for the link. The question and answer period was rather what I expected.

Never fun events when there is an industrial dispute. I agree that it does seem that the Board is still strongly backing Mr. Walsh which is good, in my opinion, for stockholders looking for the most productive result out of the BASSA situation.

I appreciate that betty girl and others are only trying to set the record straight, but you are in fact encouraging those who believe that with a ticket comes entitlement.

Theses 27+ pages have become the equivalent to a party line where people are gossiping about the private lives of celebrities that they believe they are entitled to know about because they once went to see a movie with them in.

Luckily it seems to be the same handful of people who don't seem to understand where the line goes.

Oh so sorry Dollydaydream. I will correct it now.
Spelling is not my best subject.
Many thanks.

One Outsider.

You are right but this forum is here and people, a few not all, are giving incorrect information out and even when they are corrected, by people that actually work for the airline, they continue.

I just wanted to explain things the way they really are because I am sure that alot of people that come on this thread actually might appreciate the facts not something made up and written as if it is fact. Not even an ' I think this might be the case' etc. is accoumpanied by some of these posts and then people say thank you to the posters for keeping them informed and explaining things to them, when infact alot of it is complete tosh.

As I said before I value all our customers and I don't mind that people have a view but what I would ask is that people make it clear if things are just an opinion or a view or maybe even ask someone, who might have more knowledge of the subject, if they feel it is true and pose their post as a question not as fact.

But having said all that I do think it is valuable to hear what outsiders to the industry think.

Many thanks

Patronizing, but an opinion you're entitled to.

I might suggest that as the strike is newsworthy it may be of interest for some individuals to discuss ongoing events.

As a stockholder and an individual who consults for two airlines in the States my curiosity is natural and it takes nothing to keep a window open from time to time to track progress.

This IA has the potential to have rather far reaching consequences and until such time as the Forum Moderators decide to eliminate passenger commentary I will continue participating.

Diplome,
If it makes you feel any better I usually find your posts very informative and interesting and I value your contribution.

Believe it or not I don't usually post on this particular thread. I did a month or so back when someone quoted what I had said, on another thread, out of context and more recently when I have seen incorreect information being said as if it were fact.

Most of the time I just have a look from time to time to see what people like you think.

Not true that a flight cannot make a profit unless it is full. I pick that up because the issue of posters making things up was raised. I'd hazard a guess that full flights don't always make a profit either. It's a lot more complex than that.

I had intended to answer your original point this morning but at 0430, my fingers and eyes refused to co-ordinate with each other.

When our relationship with our employer starts to seriously disrupt those that have bought a ticket to fly with us, then I'm afraid it does become their business and they have every right to ask questions.



Diplome,

I am rather regretting that comment as in the cold light of day, I've realised what that makes me, the long termer! :{ :{ :{

http://i32.tinypic.com/2hn6x53.jpg

And I didn't look to dissimilar from that this morning....

Nice one Jetset Lady. I worked at Gatwick for the best part of 40 years and I can tell you after most night shifts I looked like that too. Good to see you still have a great sense of humour.

Desk jocky i think you are splitting hairs. I will clarify that for you. Unless it is full most of the time, or the airline is able to charge very high fairs because of lack of competition etc etc etc.
I think my post was detailed enough but there I have added that in for you.
Plus I completely forgot to mention the much higher fuel costs at the moment that affect many flights that were once profitable but now no longer are.

That's really clever Jetset lady. I feel like that sometimes too.

Whaddaya mean after? That was when I started! :(

(Sorry. No more thread drifts, I promise!)

@Betty girl Thank you for your detailed explanation of the requirements for CC on long haul. :ok:

.

So, to use an extreme example, a customer pays several thousands of £s for a long haul flight, LHR to wherever. No entitlement?
With a ticket does come entitlement as defined by the Ts & Cs (a favourite Bassa theme)

If people have a problem with the product they have purchased they should take it up with the company via the relevant department. Their business is with the company not individuals or groups of employees.

The terms and conditions of employment is a matter between employer and employee only, it is nobody else's business. If anybody believe that the relationship between employer and employees affect the product offered, then either don't buy the product or address any grievances to the company. It is not ok to personalize it by singling out individuals or groups.

As I said, luckily it seems to be only the same handful of people who believes that purchasing a product from a company gives them certain rights and entitlements that extend beyond the product purchased, including the personal affairs of employees.

That is just not on.

Jetset Lady:

I've had a few of those myself. Never a good thing :)

Betty girl:

Thank you. As I stated earlier, I believe that most of the individuals that post here absolutely enjoy the exchange with staff....especially when questions arise.

I can assure you that there are many posters here who have a greater knowledge regarding this dispute, communications, court testimony, etc., than some Cabin Crew. Its been a fun and interesting mental exercise, though an unfortunate and serious undertaking for many.

A small group here, granted, but you would have to be in denial or avoiding every newspaper article, travel forum, business forum, etc., to think that there isn't a quite sizeable number of individuals commenting on the BA/BASSA issue.

Both BA and BASSA have made specific requests for the public and/or stockholders support. That support isn't obtained without questions.

The fact that you have commented in both this thread and on the Cabin Crew thread reveals your own interest in the subject.

Err, until the employee stands in the street waving a banner about stating (often incorrectly) those T's & C's. or indeed screams at me from a passing bus, or takes out a full page advert in the paper, or produces a video with a poor CC member explaining her woes, or causes my annual holiday to be cancelled, or.....

I think privacy in this issue went a log time back....

Just so that we're all clear - This is an open thread, and for the reasons well-covered by Diplome, Snas and others, it is available to all for comment.

In so being, it serves a useful function for all sides in the dispute, and indeed, will do so in the aftermath.

BTW - Always wondered - what is a 'math' for an aftermath to come after?


:E

Desk JockeyIndeed it is, it also depends to a large degree if the financial instructions of the Board or CEO is for a route to make a profit across:

• A year
• A quarter
• A month
• The combined round trip
• Every single rotation
• etcetera

Some routes may not break even all year but are sufficient to keep the route as a feeder or because the peak seasonal covers the shortfall of other seasons. Complicated it certainly is.

Indeed so, Paxboy. And even then it can be more complex, because some routes that are largely point to point, almost pure corporate travel are known to generate significant profits even on 40% load factors if properly inventory managed, much to the surprise of operations who'd promptly can the service during disruption in favour of busier routes and then wonder why they got shouted at by Commercial...:=

PAXboy

Of course it is complicated. That is exactly why it is so unfair of people to completely blame BA cabin crew for all it's woes. Which is what has been going on on here alot recently.

We are aparently to blame for the service BA provide on it's long range flights!!!

We are aparently the reason why BA pulled out of Melbourne!!!!!

We seem to all have been condemed as the devil itself whether we went on strike or not.

I mentioned flights being full because that was relevant to the route that was being discussed Melbourne. It was cancelled as a result of the low loads partly.

Yes lots of flights can be shown to make a loss. Most of the Eurofleet network makes a loss on paper and this is because profit is worked out on kilometer flown. So therefore for someone flying from Amsterdam to Los Angeles the bulk of the ticket profit goes to the longhaul sector, but of course without the shorthaul sector feeding into longhaul, longhaul could not make that profit. So yes it is very complicated and not all black and white as some of you seem to think.

I am sorry if I seem a bit touchy but I do realise some of you are unhappy that some of my collegues went on strike but that does not make every thing wrong with the airline industry the fault of BA cabin crew.

Incidentaly as Easyjet was used as an example by one poster of perfect rostering. Easyjet cabin crew may not get early report payments ect. but they take home more that BA eurofleet main crew do.

Bettygirl
 

Double drops very rarely make commercial sense. They're usually done for prestige reasons more than anything, to expand a network. It isn't hard to work out why - effectively you're reducing the available inventory on the primary route for one thing, as well as the whole matter of utilisation and direct operating cost.

Betty Girl:

I would strongly disagree with this statement. Most posters here have repeatedly thanked the non-striking Cabin Crew and mosts post differentiate between the two.

You are entitled to your opinion but expect healthy debate when someone disagrees with a stance. So far the only thing I see you as having an issue with is statements made regarding rostering issues.

That's only one subject out of the many that have come up for discussion here.

London-Australia is a difficult route to operate if your hub is at one end of the route, rather than at one of the stopovers enroute.

Cultural/historical links aside, it is telling that BA and Virgin are the only European airlines to operate to Australia.

I think if BA had the choice it would pull out of Australia altogether and transfer passengers to Qantas at BKK/SIN, but WW has said that BA needs to serve SYD if it is to be seen as a global airline.

Virgin launching adding HKG-SYD to its HKG route made no sense commercially and seemed to have been done for reasons of vanity more than anything else. They cannabilised their loads on LHR-HKG as a consequence.

I note that none of the interested parties made much comment on these words. I am sure maximising stock value is far more important to some, than the words contained above. I am sure more sweating of assets will increase dividend payouts.

BA cabin crew's working hours in the air and duty hours are within the limits set by the EU.

If there are problems with the current rostering system at LGW, then that begs the question why their BASSA representatives have not raised it with management and offered constructive proposals to improve it.

Answers on a postcard...

And do you know how many times in the past ten years BA shareholders have actually received a dividend?

Mod TS (pologies TCreep)
 

You'm beain't from round ere then, but then you're probably a bit younger too.

aftermath:
a second crop or growth of grass in the same season,
after the first harvest or mowing

[15th century. < math 'mowing' < Old English mæþ]

Try working for yourself, Litebulbs. No sick pay, no chance of a paid day off, nothing. If I'm confined to my bed, I get not a penny from anyone. I don't recall ever getting a shred of sympathy from anyone about that - my choice, my downside. Everyone chooses what they do, and there are good points and bad points. I can point to things like final salary pension schemes if you would like me to?

I am sure BA would be receptive when the current plan, as it appears to get, at best, to the LGW model.

The thrust of Jetset Lady's excellent post that you have selectively quoted Litebulbs was that current scheduling (presumably agreed/decided by BASSA) is a mess; it was far better in her previous airline where the union had co-operated with management to agree a sensible system.

I would imagine most contributors to this thread would wish that a similar relationship between BA & a sensible CC union existed.

Working so much that it make you sick is just a bad point? I'm sure kids up chimneys is a cost effective job too?

R Knee:

Well done :ok: (addendum: By the way, where did you find the source. I looked for it after the query but first search came up rather blank)

Mariner9:

Exactly...and "sensible" being the optimum.

Perhaps Cabin Crew will be address their representation after this dispute is behind them. It would be a great step forward for Cabin Crew and BA.

And most of you ignored. I am reasonably sure that the duty of care lays at the employers door.