|
Originally Posted by 212man
(Post 11006497)
probably wasn't read anywhere - more likely a conversation inbound on the ABN 056 radial while drinking and eating rig coffee and stickies, based on all the up to date inside information on company financials and contract status that line pilots are fully briefed on.
|
Originally Posted by helicrazi
(Post 11006503)
So Apache havent given Bristow notice of termination? :oh:
|
As said quite some while ago - Oil & Gas is far too volatile an industry for Babcock. When crises happen, the oil industry generally plummets and AA, SAR, Police and MOD assets are at least stable and often fully supported in their ops.
|
Originally Posted by Rigga
(Post 11006520)
As said quite some while ago - Oil & Gas is far too volatile an industry for Babcock. When crises happen, the oil industry generally plummets and AA, SAR, Police and MOD assets are at least stable and often fully supported in their ops.
|
Originally Posted by 212man
(Post 11006497)
probably wasn't read anywhere - more likely a conversation inbound on the ABN 056 radial while drinking and eating rig coffee and stickies, based on all the up to date inside information on company financials and contract status that line pilots are fully briefed on.
|
So, presumably, these
European Search and Rescue (SAR) Competition Bonanza: Northern Norway SAR, Netherlands SARHC, Ireland SAR Aviation and UK's UKSAR2G - Aerossurance remain the domain of Babcock Public Sector Parasite plc? |
It’s NOT the full picture to say Bristow just lost Apache on cost. There were other factors .... ... apparently.
As someone else pointed out CHC have taken the opportunity to outsource and cut costs. Just before covid came along Bristow were about to be forensically taken apart by ‘streamlining specialists’ from the US. That’s not a rumour, it was stated by senior managers at events this time last year. Needless to say I hear this is yet to happen. This is the third big contract in a row that has not been renewed and that should have alarm bells ringing in Houston. Repsol are still pontificating and have been for months presumably after this news they will think it strengthens their hand for a further reduction on renewal. The new CEO basically lost a whole year while others were making themselves more competitive. Anyone dealing with Bristow from the exterior who are used to the current O&G trends for ‘synergising’ can’t help but wonder how bloated some parts of the business are and how antiquated some of the processes the outside world sees seem. No point blaming the BD guys if what they are selling is a quarter more expensive than anyone else because their costs are higher. Fingers crossed that job losses from all 3 operators can be kept to a minimum. |
Will CHC get the Babcock "Onshore" windfarm work out of Barrow in Furness and the Kinsale Gas Field work out of Cork ? Currently utilising EC135s ?????
|
Is there any connection with the timing of the AerCap/GECAS deal and the CHC/Babcock deal with the Milestone involvement with all these companies? Is this all the consolidation left in the marketplace, or are there more stragglers out there?
|
Originally Posted by dustycraphopper
(Post 11006613)
Will CHC get the Babcock "Onshore" windfarm work out of Barrow in Furness and the Kinsale Gas Field work out of Cork ? Currently utilising EC135s ?????
|
Originally Posted by Mitchaa
(Post 11006620)
I guess the Babcock staff will become CHC staff under TUPE but what happens if there are a lot of duplications?
HR/Finance/Senior Managers etc? Does everyone from both companies that have duplications go into a potential redundancy pool or only those incoming from the other company? With the way the companies are set up (Legally to run an AOC) then there’s going to be a hell of a lot of duplication? I wonder what then happens with Pay agreements if one set of employees (CHC) are paid differently to the other set (Babcock) This isn’t going to happen overnight clearly. |
CHC taking over Apache was confirmed to staff by Bristow management on Tuesday night. CHC take over on 8 July with rumoured two S-92s. Apache evidently played the 120-day termination of contract game as CHC were cheaper.
|
Originally Posted by tu154
(Post 11006642)
Does TUPE apply when you buy a company?
|
Originally Posted by Mitchaa
(Post 11006653)
Using the old Google there I would agree..
https://www.stirling-uk.com/business...e-regulations/ TUPE does not apply when the business transfer occurs by:-
TUPE seems to apply when they want it to apply, seems like a dark art... |
TUPE seems to apply when they want it to apply, seems like a dark art... |
Originally Posted by helicrazi
(Post 11006657)
TUPE seems to apply when they want it to apply, seems like a dark art...
|
A full takeover of one business by another is one of the clearest applications of TUPE. It is at the pure core of TUPE. I would be totally shocked if TUPE didn't come into play here.
|
Originally Posted by Mitchaa
(Post 11006438)
And hopefully the “new CHC” grabs TOTAL by the balls and significantly increases their pricing and gets the market heading back in the right direction again.
I guess Babcock onshore will still exist and also any SAR work, this is merely its offshore division. |
Originally Posted by Mitchaa
(Post 11006753)
Yes I believe 2 x AW139 in Aberdeen.
|
I think Babcock Australia will also include the H175s they have operating up in the Timor Sea.
|
Australian fleet is 10 machines:
2 x EC175B 2 x S-92A 6 x AW139s |
Originally Posted by rrekn
(Post 11006844)
Australian fleet is 10 machines:
2 x EC175B 2 x S-92A 6 x AW139s 2 x S-92 2 x AW139 2 x AW189 |
Originally Posted by Twist & Shout
(Post 11006867)
And CHC’s contribution. (“On contract” machines)
2 x S-92 2 x AW139 2 x AW189 |
Originally Posted by Medevac999
(Post 11006410)
Thanks Ned. I thought they had some contracts in Africa
|
Originally Posted by SNI
(Post 11006982)
Yes, they have. Mozambique. Used to have Ghana as well but not sure they still do.
|
Originally Posted by Evil Twin
(Post 11006904)
Don’t forget the RAAF SAR 139’s
I was just comparing Babcock Off Shore machines with CHC Off Shore machines. It seems the Babcock OS fleet will be added to the CHC OS fleet, and the CHC onshore - as you point out. RAAF SAR AW139s A Navy SAR AW139? An EMS B412 in WA Did they have a B412 with the Army in Darwin? They, the new CHC/Babcock entity, will: Dominate OS in OZ, at least for a little while. Have the military contracts almost exclusively. Must “erk” Babcock a little, being their core business in a way. Have one EMS contract? A lot of people wondering what the structure will be. All in the same uniform, flying red and blue machines, or....? |
In Aberdeen, it doesn’t really help that Babcock and CHC are at opposite sides of the runway |
Originally Posted by Mitchaa
(Post 11007112)
... ... In Aberdeen, it doesn’t really help that Babcock and CHC are at opposite sides of the runway. There are obviously two check in areas and theres not enough room for all the Babcock staff to move into CHC’s existing infrastructure so not sure how they are going to work all that. Looks like it will be a logistical nightmare to manage to be honest, too many aircraft and not enough hangar space on either side so they will have to either work from both locations or start expanding on the CHC side of the runway.
|
Originally Posted by jimf671
(Post 11007202)
Well, lets see. Easy walking distance from a railway station, hotels, B&B and shops on the East side. I always found it a far simpler experience, not least because of Bond's superior communication skills.
Let's see how this plays out, could go anywhere. If it's merely a share purchase, nothing much will change, neither will Tupe apply (the easiest way). The difficult way would be to have bought it entirely, in which case it's all a very complex endeavour: rebranding, repainting, Tupe, T&C's, re-alignment of OPS (will take a very long time seeing CHC operates in a completely different way than Babcock) etc etc. |
Originally Posted by jimf671
(Post 11007202)
Well, lets see. Easy walking distance from a railway station, hotels, B&B and shops on the East side. I always found it a far simpler experience, not least because of Bond's superior communication skills.
|
Means financing two facilities if viable , alignment of policies and operating procedures ( a lengthy process - just throw one set in the shredder and keep the simplest :ok:) , ref IT - keep it simple
|
Originally Posted by PPI Zulu
(Post 11006414)
Unfortunately there will always be some casualties. Senior management, finance, HR will be in the firing line immediately. Unless, as you say, they intend to run BMCS as a separate entity. Can't see that myself though.
|
Originally Posted by Mitchaa
(Post 11007112)
CHC have 3 x AW139 and 2 x AW189 contracted out of Karratha and then another 6 dotted around Australia for the RAAF SAR.
In answer to the last part, CHC are gaining around 30 aircraft to the 100+ they have operating already so suspect everything will become CHC. Be that the aircraft colours, uniforms, IT, procedures and policies etc etc In Aberdeen, it doesn’t really help that Babcock and CHC are at opposite sides of the runway. There are obviously two check in areas and theres not enough room for all the Babcock staff to move into CHC’s existing infrastructure so not sure how they are going to work all that. Looks like it will be a logistical nightmare to manage to be honest, too many aircraft and not enough hangar space on either side so they will have to either work from both locations or start expanding on the CHC side of the runway. |
Of these 500 being quoted, a large amount are going to be necessary to take across.
its unfortunately going to be admin and management that bear the brunt of it. |
Originally Posted by Mitchaa
(Post 11007293)
Depends on whether TUPE is applicable and whether Babcock will be forced into a reduction in numbers before the takeover. I can’t see CHC taking on 500 additional staff when they have just stripped their own company to the bare bones (Where Babcock presumably haven’t and are themselves bloated)
It would be very harsh on CHC employees to be at risk in this case especially having just survived numerous rounds of redundancies over the last few years themselves. CHC’s staff will already be the cream of what they had. The fact that it’s CHC LLC (Based in the Cayman Islands) I would say that TUPE is probably not applicable here as it has no obligation to honour U.K TUPE. I think it’s more likely Babcock will be told to cut their numbers to bare bones before the “official” takeover. If CHC have had to do it recently then it would be only fair that Babcock too were stripped to the bare bones. Saying that, I am sure that this will be one of the very first questions asked when Mark Abbey has his regular town halls. CHC Employees will naturally be concerned if they are having to go through yet another round of redundancies to possibly make way for Babcock employees to replace them. Naturally the Babcock guys could be seen at a disadvantage in consultations as they wouldn’t have the same level of “CHC know how” as their CHC counterparts will have moving forward. Lots of unknowns. Hello. Wrong. “I can’t see CHC taking on 500 additional staff when they have just stripped their own company to the bare bones (Where Babcock presumably haven’t and are themselves bloated” You clearly know little facts. Babcock have as much fat as an anorexic butcher’s pencil. CHC are equally skinny. To make this work there will be casualties and gains in both sides. CHC for example have virtually zero 175 capability or experience and their facilities are only shiny and new in part. Wisdom will be required to make this work. To suggest CHC employees have been treated worse that Babcock is preposterous. All parties deserve a break and I hope that happens. TW. |
More likely Scotia will die on the vine (no more 51% bleed) and CHC Babcock flourish. Taking on whatever pilots or admin it requires from Scotia, of course.
|
I'm sure the 'eye' will be further off the ball than it already has been, with all this now unfolding. This leaving further opportunity for competitors to get a piece of the action. As is already happening on a number of babcocks contracts.
Sometimes you can just simply take on too much! |
Originally Posted by Mitchaa
(Post 11007312)
Sure, the main bulk will be Pilots and Engineering staff. CHC will have a Pilot/Engineer/Aircraft ratio they will need to maintain. That will just be a natural transition and not much real thought needs to be put into that.
The rest however will be the “Duplicate staff” that make up an AOC. CHC would do well to take time and consider the experience and tenacity of the Babcock/Ex Bond team. It’s takes more than engineers and pilots to make business work. And let’s face it, those two factions are somewhat less than optimal when it comes to loyalty, especially in Aberdeen where endless demands of more money is king. Money driven mini despots. CHC bought their way back, Babcock survived and prospered through endless nights of hard graft, despite being owned by a parent company who had no interest in oil & gas and treated there staff in this area with contempt. |
Does this mean in a few years time we'll see some red helicopters with Bond written on the side reappear?
|
Originally Posted by Mitchaa
(Post 11007336)
Clearly the top heavy management structures in Dallas and Houston are to blame for both CHC and Bristow’s demise, no doubt about that. The profits made in the regions are used to fund extortionate salaries for clueless senior managers/directors and upto the CEO’s.
It would be an interesting prospect to ditch the Yanks and leave the companies to people that actually understand front line aviation. One or two UK/European super aviation companies I’m sure would do a lot better. It looks like CHC are doing well to thin that structure out and going by the Apache news above, Bristows cost structure is still far too high to compete. (Couldn’t match CHC’s costs) Time to adapt and cut the fat. Managers don’t need managers that then need senior managers that then need directors that then need Assistant Chiefs that then report to the CEO. Cut out the waste in the middle and these companies should start turning profits. Cut out soulless pilots and engineers who have clearly demonstrated a lack of humanity only previously seen in the dark ages. A good manager is gold dust. A greedy pilot is well a pilot. Buy a mirror and look deep. Both CHC and Babcock have shocking morale issues brought on by greed by core staff and terrible leadership at corporate level and in some aspects local level. Babcock’s safety performance and OTD over the past few years is the top drawer. CHC’s not so much. ABZ is a hellhole of a workplace, not caused by managers, rather damn right greed. I hope for better days. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 13:20. |
Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.