Can BALPA be trusted to represent scope companies?
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tandemrotor,
Re: the INTERIM 6 year scope deal on the RJ
After a few preliminary enquiries with BACX management, none of them knows anything thing about an interin deal. Of course 90% chance they're lying but, for my peace of mind, share with us the details of the deal, won't you?
Re: the INTERIM 6 year scope deal on the RJ
After a few preliminary enquiries with BACX management, none of them knows anything thing about an interin deal. Of course 90% chance they're lying but, for my peace of mind, share with us the details of the deal, won't you?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: London, UK
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Dear hec7or
I think Quidnunc may be teasing & winding us all up...
Please don't give yourself a coronary infarct!
All the best,
BD
PS If some of our T & C's improve then that will gradually improve them all & we shall all benefit?
I think Quidnunc may be teasing & winding us all up...
Please don't give yourself a coronary infarct!All the best,
BD
PS If some of our T & C's improve then that will gradually improve them all & we shall all benefit?
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: England
Posts: 335
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So when the Nigels get their mitts on GB and BMed - Please don't moan when you are doing a there and back Paphos and night Malta and a quick Beirut night stop !
Mind you - you lot would probably run crying to BALPA and make the foresaid trips several days -- Forget the cost base !
Mind you - you lot would probably run crying to BALPA and make the foresaid trips several days -- Forget the cost base !
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think you'll find Gatwick do some night charters already. No great shakes. Nor do I think a quick nightstop in Beirut is likely to be any less palatable than a prolonged slip in Saudi or Kuwait where people are actively trying to kill Brits.
Hec7or - perhaps a soupcon of reality would do you some good. I think you'll find all the BA routes at BHX were transferred to a subsidiary, and the result has been something of a disaster. Passenger numbers and satisfaction down significantly, loss of many major corporate contracts, huge reliability problems, appalling punctuality (BACX now one of the least punctual airlines in UK) and the operation transformed from being profitable to loss making in less than 12 months. All that without any significant increase in low cost competition at BHX. As for routes that we thought 'were below us', I think you'll find that almost all the subsidiarys routes at BHX were former BA routes, many of which were still served, and all of which were removed under protest by BA crews.
In your operation, you and your management do not co-operate
And you basis for this unsubstantiated garbage is what?
Perhaps in future you should actually do some research into what goes on in BA before you come on here spouting your preconceived notions and stereotypes?
Hec7or - perhaps a soupcon of reality would do you some good. I think you'll find all the BA routes at BHX were transferred to a subsidiary, and the result has been something of a disaster. Passenger numbers and satisfaction down significantly, loss of many major corporate contracts, huge reliability problems, appalling punctuality (BACX now one of the least punctual airlines in UK) and the operation transformed from being profitable to loss making in less than 12 months. All that without any significant increase in low cost competition at BHX. As for routes that we thought 'were below us', I think you'll find that almost all the subsidiarys routes at BHX were former BA routes, many of which were still served, and all of which were removed under protest by BA crews.
In your operation, you and your management do not co-operate
And you basis for this unsubstantiated garbage is what?
Perhaps in future you should actually do some research into what goes on in BA before you come on here spouting your preconceived notions and stereotypes?
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Preferably on terra firma.
Posts: 742
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fifty Four
With all due respect, merged seniority lists are NOT the answer to the whole SCOPE issue. Many pilots (F/Os) who are with franchise companies and anticipate a command opportunity within five years would have that time extended to perhaps ten or even twenty years if such a merger were to take place. As someone else posted previously, "we have mortgages too you know".
Tandemrotor summed up the situation when he stated that BA have not recruited for several years so for this reason alone there has been very little movement in the seniority list. The franchise companies of course HAVE been recruiting since September 2001 (some on a large scale) and as such a BMed F/O with three years or more seniority would still find himself at the bottom of a very large BA seniority list instead of being near the top of a relatively short one.
I don't know how many BA F/Os would benefit from a SCOPE agreement but I can hazard a guess as to how many franchise F/Os would be disadvantaged by it.
Question : When the idea of setting up franchises was first suggested during the mid-nineties I don't believe that many BA pilots had an issue with it as they were glad that the less prestigious and loss making routes were being thrown out. Is that not the case? The only reason that SCOPE has come about is as I have outlined above.
Maybe if BA start to recruit again (as has been rumoured) then that will be enough to placate BA F/Os who in turn will decide to leave the franchise pilots alone.
September 11th 2001 hit EVERY industry to a greater or lesser extent. It seems to me that because of the events of that day and how it has affected BA then their pilots feel that the world should owe them a living and because the franchise companies have continued to recruit and flourish then they are entitled to some of that success.
I have digressed slightly from the original thread but should it happen that Balpa fail to protect the interests of the franchise pilots by allowing senior BA F/Os to steal (yes steal) their commands (as has happened at GSS) then I foresee the IPF gaining a significant moral victory as well as a noticeable increase in membership subscriptions.
HoleyMoley
I think my words echo your previous post.
With all due respect, merged seniority lists are NOT the answer to the whole SCOPE issue. Many pilots (F/Os) who are with franchise companies and anticipate a command opportunity within five years would have that time extended to perhaps ten or even twenty years if such a merger were to take place. As someone else posted previously, "we have mortgages too you know".
Tandemrotor summed up the situation when he stated that BA have not recruited for several years so for this reason alone there has been very little movement in the seniority list. The franchise companies of course HAVE been recruiting since September 2001 (some on a large scale) and as such a BMed F/O with three years or more seniority would still find himself at the bottom of a very large BA seniority list instead of being near the top of a relatively short one.
I don't know how many BA F/Os would benefit from a SCOPE agreement but I can hazard a guess as to how many franchise F/Os would be disadvantaged by it.
Question : When the idea of setting up franchises was first suggested during the mid-nineties I don't believe that many BA pilots had an issue with it as they were glad that the less prestigious and loss making routes were being thrown out. Is that not the case? The only reason that SCOPE has come about is as I have outlined above.
Maybe if BA start to recruit again (as has been rumoured) then that will be enough to placate BA F/Os who in turn will decide to leave the franchise pilots alone.
September 11th 2001 hit EVERY industry to a greater or lesser extent. It seems to me that because of the events of that day and how it has affected BA then their pilots feel that the world should owe them a living and because the franchise companies have continued to recruit and flourish then they are entitled to some of that success.
I have digressed slightly from the original thread but should it happen that Balpa fail to protect the interests of the franchise pilots by allowing senior BA F/Os to steal (yes steal) their commands (as has happened at GSS) then I foresee the IPF gaining a significant moral victory as well as a noticeable increase in membership subscriptions.
HoleyMoley
I think my words echo your previous post.
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have digressed slightly from the original thread but should it happen that Balpa fail to protect the interests of the franchise pilots by allowing senior BA F/Os to steal (yes steal) their commands (as has happened at GSS) then I foresee the IPF gaining a significant moral victory as well as a noticeable increase in membership subscriptions.
Stop accusing BA pilots of stealing your work when you took it from us in the first place.
The mismanagement of CX is a seperate issue, however BAR (at BHX certainly) always made money with BA pilots on the Master Seniority List so we can't be that expensive.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Man Flex. I agree that the problem that BA pilots have could be solved if BA were able to expand their profitable routes and hence create a demand for more pilots. This is almost impossible in the current competetive aviation environment that BA have not yet adjusted to. They are also dragged down by the profligate attitude of the past that leaves them with £5billion of debts: compare that to Lufthansa debts of £500 million. Debts don't come without a cost - they have to be serviced, and of course eventually the capital has to be paid back: both are very onerous problems which severly limit expansion for at least 5 to 10 years.
BACC can't do much about it now - apart from live out the past.
BACC can't do much about it now - apart from live out the past.
Join Date: Feb 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BAR made a profit at BHX?!! Are you sure?.
I remember them flying 2's &3's as their pax loads in the airbus alot of the time; why do you think BA was so keen to get rid.
I always have to laugh when I see these comments about franchisees taking the work/promotions from mainline. When are you guys going to realise. B.Med, GB & Maersk (when they were around) did NOT do BA work it was their own work. They flew the routes well before they became franchisees.
The deal was to get more pax by using the BA name & in return BA got a fee and was able to claim a bigger route network than they really had. Offering routes they could not make pay by themselves given their huge overhead structure.
For proof look at Duo (used to be Maersk) at BHX. Are you going to accuse them of taking your work? they are still flying the same routes. BA only came onto the STR and MXP after the franchise ended. MXP wasn't paying anyway so Duo dropped it and they are beating BA behinds on STR because they offer a better service cheaper.
Everyone knows BA want to slim down mainline regional & consolidate on long haul its been the direction for years now. It's not the fault of franchisees that this is how they choose to do it.
I remember them flying 2's &3's as their pax loads in the airbus alot of the time; why do you think BA was so keen to get rid.
I always have to laugh when I see these comments about franchisees taking the work/promotions from mainline. When are you guys going to realise. B.Med, GB & Maersk (when they were around) did NOT do BA work it was their own work. They flew the routes well before they became franchisees.
The deal was to get more pax by using the BA name & in return BA got a fee and was able to claim a bigger route network than they really had. Offering routes they could not make pay by themselves given their huge overhead structure.
For proof look at Duo (used to be Maersk) at BHX. Are you going to accuse them of taking your work? they are still flying the same routes. BA only came onto the STR and MXP after the franchise ended. MXP wasn't paying anyway so Duo dropped it and they are beating BA behinds on STR because they offer a better service cheaper.
Everyone knows BA want to slim down mainline regional & consolidate on long haul its been the direction for years now. It's not the fault of franchisees that this is how they choose to do it.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tandemrotor didn't elaborate on the 'interim' nature of the RJ100 scope agreement and how it affects BACX. No wonder:
The agreement that BALPA and BA have reached is that after June 2010, provided the RJ 100 leases are extended, all RJ100 flying will revert to BA mainline flight Crew. If the lease are not extended but BACX acquires other RJ100, that flying too reverts automatically to BA pilots after June 2010.
I wonder if anyone has told the BACX RJ100 pilots?
The agreement that BALPA and BA have reached is that after June 2010, provided the RJ 100 leases are extended, all RJ100 flying will revert to BA mainline flight Crew. If the lease are not extended but BACX acquires other RJ100, that flying too reverts automatically to BA pilots after June 2010.
I wonder if anyone has told the BACX RJ100 pilots?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: London
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The facts:
BA shorthaul is pretty much farcked up.
The LCCs have nabbed most of the bread, the private jet operators a lot of the jam. London Airways is still trying to operate a European network at a premium product level which very few people want. With massive debts and inefficiently overpaid managers and crews they are loosing money.
Longhaul London Airways is making money and in 2 years time will be making an obscene amount of money. Just like they have done in every economic upturn.
The answer - split to BOAC and BEA. Except BEA would be shagged without those Golden Heathrow slots. So. Give a lot of it to the Franchises who make a decent go of it without the debt burden and overpay/idle managers.
When the time comes for them to renew the contract hold a gun to their head and force them to take what would be BEA crews - although at the time it looks like making the franchises agreeing to let BA pilots in. Crews join, BA then announces it wishes to divest itself of its European 'division' and splits it off to a wholly owned subsidiary. In a few years time said subsidiary is sold off to a 3rd party.
Hey presto BA got rid of shorthaul and now makes tons of money doing the only thing it knows how to.
BA shorthaul is pretty much farcked up.
The LCCs have nabbed most of the bread, the private jet operators a lot of the jam. London Airways is still trying to operate a European network at a premium product level which very few people want. With massive debts and inefficiently overpaid managers and crews they are loosing money.
Longhaul London Airways is making money and in 2 years time will be making an obscene amount of money. Just like they have done in every economic upturn.
The answer - split to BOAC and BEA. Except BEA would be shagged without those Golden Heathrow slots. So. Give a lot of it to the Franchises who make a decent go of it without the debt burden and overpay/idle managers.
When the time comes for them to renew the contract hold a gun to their head and force them to take what would be BEA crews - although at the time it looks like making the franchises agreeing to let BA pilots in. Crews join, BA then announces it wishes to divest itself of its European 'division' and splits it off to a wholly owned subsidiary. In a few years time said subsidiary is sold off to a 3rd party.
Hey presto BA got rid of shorthaul and now makes tons of money doing the only thing it knows how to.
the lunatic fringe
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Everywhere
Age: 67
Posts: 618
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BAR made a profit at BHX?!! Are you sure?.
BA mainline leaving BHX was a political issue, not an economic one.
L337
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Jellystone Park
Posts: 65
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Holy goodness etc.
'round midnight, are you sure abut that agreement? I don't think many of the BACX RJ crews know about that? Is that fact, or just another rumour. Most of us are expecting that BACX will continue to contract till it just has BHX and MAN. At that point, we reckoned the props would be gone, and the Company slimmed to the point that BA took the remaining pilots (RJ and Emb145) onto the master seniority list, albeit at the bottom, but with grandad rights, and that then we would probably continue flying on a 'regionalised' salary but with jobs.
What you outline is a blasted disaster, the Embs are already being returned as the leases run out, and I think the first RJ goes back in less than two years.
Do you mean to suggest that we will be effectively out of a job????? We have taken so much of a shafting from BA over the last two years, most of us are only still here because we believed by any standards the worst MUST be over. Spill the beans, is this for real?
What would happen if the Emb 170/90 were acquired? Yes, I know maybe a pipedream, but would that be affected in like fashion, given it's below alleged the scope threshold??
It really would be nice to be told some of this by our so called Company, they're very good at communicating job cuts, SOP changes and the penalty for taking food off the aircraft (dismissal), but t important things like agreements which f#ck our future, they are awful.
'round midnight, are you sure abut that agreement? I don't think many of the BACX RJ crews know about that? Is that fact, or just another rumour. Most of us are expecting that BACX will continue to contract till it just has BHX and MAN. At that point, we reckoned the props would be gone, and the Company slimmed to the point that BA took the remaining pilots (RJ and Emb145) onto the master seniority list, albeit at the bottom, but with grandad rights, and that then we would probably continue flying on a 'regionalised' salary but with jobs.
What you outline is a blasted disaster, the Embs are already being returned as the leases run out, and I think the first RJ goes back in less than two years.
Do you mean to suggest that we will be effectively out of a job????? We have taken so much of a shafting from BA over the last two years, most of us are only still here because we believed by any standards the worst MUST be over. Spill the beans, is this for real?
What would happen if the Emb 170/90 were acquired? Yes, I know maybe a pipedream, but would that be affected in like fashion, given it's below alleged the scope threshold??
It really would be nice to be told some of this by our so called Company, they're very good at communicating job cuts, SOP changes and the penalty for taking food off the aircraft (dismissal), but t important things like agreements which f#ck our future, they are awful.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 56
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would be interesting to know the truth of this one.
It will cause total mayhem within BACX if it is indeed true.
I don't think anyone expects - or ever expected a free lunch, just fair treatment. The worst thing about this latest 'factoid' is unfortunately that it fits entirely with the way BA management and BA BALPA have treated us ever since BA bought us. Nobody will be surprised, but a lot will be quite ropable.
Sorry, I suppose this is off thread a little, however, even if only partially true it shows that BALPA membership is completely worthless unless one is a member of Big Airways, and thus nicely puts the thread back on message.
It will cause total mayhem within BACX if it is indeed true.
I don't think anyone expects - or ever expected a free lunch, just fair treatment. The worst thing about this latest 'factoid' is unfortunately that it fits entirely with the way BA management and BA BALPA have treated us ever since BA bought us. Nobody will be surprised, but a lot will be quite ropable.
Sorry, I suppose this is off thread a little, however, even if only partially true it shows that BALPA membership is completely worthless unless one is a member of Big Airways, and thus nicely puts the thread back on message.
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kurtz/Cornflake,
Unfortunately what I have said is printed black on white. On the strict interpretation of the document, if BACX acquires Emb 170/190 BA pilots have no claim. It is also clear in this document that the BACX 146 fleet will not be replaced by an aircraft of 100 seats or more. The spirit of the document tends to point towards BA pilots doing all 100 + seat flying from 2010 onwards.
So the answer is that I do not know what happens to BACX RJ100 pilots in 2010, but if they stay on this type they won't be flying for BACX.
If you want confirmation, let's here from Tandemrotor. He let the cat out of the bag and I did a little bit of research. He knew about this deal when he was seconded to BACX. Bacx pilots knew nothing about this and BACX management have said nothing about it either, I understand.
Also Re: GSS
The document makes it clear that command positions of any additional freighters contracted by BA Cargo will be available for aspirational bidding by mainline flight crew. That's excalty what happened (and will happen again if GSS acquire another BA 747), so the veracity of the document is unquestionable.
And now I suggest you go to Tim de la Fosse at BACX and see what he has to say about this.
I'll finish with the second stated goal of BALPA:
"To inspire members’ confidence by demonstrating real concern for their needs."
So is big Balpa still working for your needs????
Unfortunately what I have said is printed black on white. On the strict interpretation of the document, if BACX acquires Emb 170/190 BA pilots have no claim. It is also clear in this document that the BACX 146 fleet will not be replaced by an aircraft of 100 seats or more. The spirit of the document tends to point towards BA pilots doing all 100 + seat flying from 2010 onwards.
So the answer is that I do not know what happens to BACX RJ100 pilots in 2010, but if they stay on this type they won't be flying for BACX.
If you want confirmation, let's here from Tandemrotor. He let the cat out of the bag and I did a little bit of research. He knew about this deal when he was seconded to BACX. Bacx pilots knew nothing about this and BACX management have said nothing about it either, I understand.
Also Re: GSS
The document makes it clear that command positions of any additional freighters contracted by BA Cargo will be available for aspirational bidding by mainline flight crew. That's excalty what happened (and will happen again if GSS acquire another BA 747), so the veracity of the document is unquestionable.
And now I suggest you go to Tim de la Fosse at BACX and see what he has to say about this.
I'll finish with the second stated goal of BALPA:
"To inspire members’ confidence by demonstrating real concern for their needs."
So is big Balpa still working for your needs????
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
'round midnight
Well done.
Just a couple of clarifications:
"if BACX acquires Emb 170/190 BA pilots have no claim."
Not strictly true. It would of course depend on which variant. The 195 has over 100 seats!
"The spirit of the document tends to point towards BA pilots doing all 100 + seat flying from 2010 onwards.
Not strictly true. It's the letter of the document!
All I would say is, don't worry too much! 6 years is a VERY long time in aviation.
"He knew about this deal when he was seconded to BACX."
Not strictly true. Much remained undisclosed (possibly even undecided) until after the secondees arrived!
Just to balance the equation, anyone familiar with the BACX RJ operation will already know that much of what my 'colleague' Hand Solo has to say, is also, not strictly true!
Well done.
Just a couple of clarifications:
"if BACX acquires Emb 170/190 BA pilots have no claim."
Not strictly true. It would of course depend on which variant. The 195 has over 100 seats!
"The spirit of the document tends to point towards BA pilots doing all 100 + seat flying from 2010 onwards.
Not strictly true. It's the letter of the document!
All I would say is, don't worry too much! 6 years is a VERY long time in aviation.
"He knew about this deal when he was seconded to BACX."
Not strictly true. Much remained undisclosed (possibly even undecided) until after the secondees arrived!
Just to balance the equation, anyone familiar with the BACX RJ operation will already know that much of what my 'colleague' Hand Solo has to say, is also, not strictly true!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm intrigued Tandemrotor. If Ive not been strictly accurate then please feel free to correct me, either on this thread or by PM. I certainly don't want to be spouting half-truths (or even outright fibs) on this forum, but the info I get is definitely first hand.
MELmonkey
Breaking even according to the latest from the Directors.
My flights have had load factors in excess of 70% this week, and with 83% of my duty hours this month being actual flying I think I'm pretty efficient as far as any LHR based operator goes.
And BOAC are shagged without the 30% of their customers they get from short-haul European transfers. The overheads on shortahaul are leaner than you think, and shorthaul revenue is affected by the policy of splitting the revenue of transfer passengers with longhaul on the proportion of total mileage flown. That has a big impact when up to 50% of your passengers are transferring, an impact that few franchises would be willing to accept.
Rumble:
I've got 1000+ sectors on the Airbus at BHX that say the loads were a lot better than you claim.
MELmonkey
BA shorthaul is pretty much farcked up.
which very few people want. With massive debts and inefficiently overpaid managers and crews they are loosing money
. Except BEA would be shagged without those Golden Heathrow slots. So. Give a lot of it to the Franchises who make a decent go of it without the debt burden and overpay/idle managers
Rumble:
I remember them flying 2's &3's as their pax loads in the airbus alot of the time;
HS,
I totally agree with you on the unrepresemtative accounting techniques apparently used to split feeder and longhaul revenue. I recall LBA being "uneconomic" on Viscounts with 100% load factors! Getting 200/8000 of the fare to HKG was not the right proportion.
I totally agree with you on the unrepresemtative accounting techniques apparently used to split feeder and longhaul revenue. I recall LBA being "uneconomic" on Viscounts with 100% load factors! Getting 200/8000 of the fare to HKG was not the right proportion.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Timbucktoo
Posts: 79
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thread creep..................
Around Midnight you are right on the money.
Balpa cannot be all things to all men and there is the proof. A cosy deal struck to keep BACC happy and $od the rest of the infidels.
Nothing wrong with Balpa looking after its main customer but lets get real. It cannot be all things to all men (gross conflict of interest) and whilst Champagne Jim and Raffles Merv sip Bolly with their millionaire pension potters and concern themselves about non resident tax breaks the real world of scabby Commercial aviation needs proper independent and impartial representation.
IPF is too small for effect now but at least it is a start. So lets start stoking its coffers and see what can be done.
Blessings
Around Midnight you are right on the money.
Balpa cannot be all things to all men and there is the proof. A cosy deal struck to keep BACC happy and $od the rest of the infidels.
Nothing wrong with Balpa looking after its main customer but lets get real. It cannot be all things to all men (gross conflict of interest) and whilst Champagne Jim and Raffles Merv sip Bolly with their millionaire pension potters and concern themselves about non resident tax breaks the real world of scabby Commercial aviation needs proper independent and impartial representation.
IPF is too small for effect now but at least it is a start. So lets start stoking its coffers and see what can be done.
Blessings
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tandemrotor,
Your absolutely right.
More sleuthing reveals that 'any BA passenger flying anywhere in the UK, in aircraft purchased or leased by BA with 100 seats or more will be flown by BA mainline Flight crew.' And your answer is that 2010 is a long way away... I despair.
What happens to your colleagues at BACX in 2010, when the Emb 170/190/RJ100/146 are still around? Answer: they're forced to leave the BA group and continue their career elsewhere? That's acceptable to you, is it?
It's acceptable to you that most BACX pilots, if not all, have never been told that their furture on type or within BACX ends in 6 years time, because by then it will be time to make way for a BA pilot (who may still be doing his 'A' levels and not even be a brand new cadet yet)?
What is it with you? Does every flying job in the UK frigging belong to you and your BA mates now and in the future? When will you take a good look at yourself and stop bleeting that the world owes you a living for the rest of your life in the company of your choice because you wear a BA badge?
Next you'll be suggesting that if BA lay off pilots, then BACX/GB and Bmed should make room for those made redundant in mainline?
And with all this destructive scope agreement afoot, BACX pilots cannot even have access to mainline... We don't even have the same travel benefits as BA pilots.
All this under the watchful and caring eye of BALPA...
Your absolutely right.
More sleuthing reveals that 'any BA passenger flying anywhere in the UK, in aircraft purchased or leased by BA with 100 seats or more will be flown by BA mainline Flight crew.' And your answer is that 2010 is a long way away... I despair.
What happens to your colleagues at BACX in 2010, when the Emb 170/190/RJ100/146 are still around? Answer: they're forced to leave the BA group and continue their career elsewhere? That's acceptable to you, is it?
It's acceptable to you that most BACX pilots, if not all, have never been told that their furture on type or within BACX ends in 6 years time, because by then it will be time to make way for a BA pilot (who may still be doing his 'A' levels and not even be a brand new cadet yet)?
What is it with you? Does every flying job in the UK frigging belong to you and your BA mates now and in the future? When will you take a good look at yourself and stop bleeting that the world owes you a living for the rest of your life in the company of your choice because you wear a BA badge?
Next you'll be suggesting that if BA lay off pilots, then BACX/GB and Bmed should make room for those made redundant in mainline?
And with all this destructive scope agreement afoot, BACX pilots cannot even have access to mainline... We don't even have the same travel benefits as BA pilots.
All this under the watchful and caring eye of BALPA...