BA Pilots to ballot for strike over OpenSkies
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: West London
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA Pilots
On the 14th, HF repeats that OpenSkies pilots on the mainline seniority list are BA pilots. It is also true of course that OpenSkies pilots not on the mainline seniority list will be BA pilots. They won't have an automatic right to bid onto a mainline fleet, but OpenSkies is a BA company
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: West London
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OpenSkies commands
MANBLK is actually quite right.
BALPA / BACC have asked for preferential secondments into LHS at OpenSkies. In other words, mainline get to bid first (possibly subject to a cursory interview), the command is theirs based on mainline seniority. Openskies RHS occupiers only get what's left and only then or with growth will openSkies continue to recruit DEPs.
Clearly "big" BALPA see the inequity and have pressed for access to mainline for OpenSkies DEPs as the price to be paid (by the company notice, not the union).
The OpenSkies CC becomes a puppet CC to the BACC as most joiners under these terms see their future in BA proper, aspiring to a bidline seniority and PP that most people can't realistically expect.
BACC at the same time maintains control of all BA LH flying and commences the journey on closing the T&Cs gap.
Bingo!!
My guess, some secondments, no seniority and messy strike action, with BACC attempting to unseat WW. I wouldn't.
BALPA / BACC have asked for preferential secondments into LHS at OpenSkies. In other words, mainline get to bid first (possibly subject to a cursory interview), the command is theirs based on mainline seniority. Openskies RHS occupiers only get what's left and only then or with growth will openSkies continue to recruit DEPs.
Clearly "big" BALPA see the inequity and have pressed for access to mainline for OpenSkies DEPs as the price to be paid (by the company notice, not the union).
The OpenSkies CC becomes a puppet CC to the BACC as most joiners under these terms see their future in BA proper, aspiring to a bidline seniority and PP that most people can't realistically expect.
BACC at the same time maintains control of all BA LH flying and commences the journey on closing the T&Cs gap.
Bingo!!
My guess, some secondments, no seniority and messy strike action, with BACC attempting to unseat WW. I wouldn't.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: southeast
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If we don't 'take on' wee Willie over this, we're stuffed - we have no choice but to stand firm over this issue..........IMHO of course, but I would wager that the majority (increasing rapidly) of my colleagues feel the same. I would venture to suggest that it's Willie who shouldn't be taking us on. The mood amongst the pilots is moving towards belligerance at a rate of knots. Oh, and didn't Willie take the Aer Lingus pilots on and lose both the struggle and his position? Or am I misinformed? 
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the 14th, HF repeats that OpenSkies pilots on the mainline seniority list are BA pilots. It is also true of course that OpenSkies pilots not on the mainline seniority list will be BA pilots.
They won't have an automatic right to bid onto a mainline fleet but OpenSkies is a BA company.
As far as I'm concerned, OS pilots are more than welcome, provided they are on the seniority list. Otherwise, they are potentially a danger to my terms and conditions and I'll be standing next to Tandemrotor. Sorry but I have to protect my livelihood first.
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm with Tandemrotor and HF. Any pilot handing in notice to their current employer to join OpenLies had better know exactly what they are getting into. The nickname I've already heard is 'Scab-Air' - emotive maybe, but when you upset 3000+ BA pilots, emotions do run high.
Pilots joining OpenLies at the moment are playing into BA's hands - the masterplan being to drive a wedge into the T's and C's of the entire employment market in the UK.
Pilots joining OpenLies at the moment are playing into BA's hands - the masterplan being to drive a wedge into the T's and C's of the entire employment market in the UK.
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 2,044
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OS: Surely "warning off" OS applicants is a job for BALPA to do, if appropriate 
My understanding, as a BA pilot, is that our "argument" is with BA, and that BALPA have issued no instructions, warnings or advice to potential OS applicants.
For those who have applied, or even been accepted, surely the only issue is whether or not they end up on the BA Seniority list? They may or may not be interested in whether that becomes the case...
In short, as far as I see the situation, I am not in agreement with your "attitude" to (potential) OS pilots...
NoD
My understanding, as a BA pilot, is that our "argument" is with BA, and that BALPA have issued no instructions, warnings or advice to potential OS applicants.
For those who have applied, or even been accepted, surely the only issue is whether or not they end up on the BA Seniority list? They may or may not be interested in whether that becomes the case...
In short, as far as I see the situation, I am not in agreement with your "attitude" to (potential) OS pilots...
NoD
Whilst I generally agree with the basic stance that is being taken by the BACC due WW’s obvious Trojan Horse tactics, I think people like Tandem are not making it easy for union HQ in dealing with this with their comment regarding the prospects of anyone who might be “foolish” enough to apply to this company.
Once the lawyers start, the status of a group of staff in a subsidary relative to those in the parent company and the so called “clear blue water” is likely to become very muddy, particularly if one group is facing a redundancy situation. The term “mainline” is unlikely to have much meaning in court and any attempt to shed one group of staff when another part of the organisation is recruiting for the same role would not be impossible, but it would be difficult. BA managed to get round this to some extent with BAcon by “selling”
it as a going concern, but they were very much aware that as a solvent company continuing recruiting externally, that they would have significant legal difficulties just dumping a bunch of pilots regardless of whether they were in a subsidiary. This latest development will be very awkward for BALPA too if they don’t stick solidly to basic principles. If that means going nuclear 
then so be it, but they need to be decisive.
If I had legitimately applied for and been accepted for a job with a BA company funded and equipped by BA managed by BA Directors and was then shortly afterwards dumped due to some totally predictable “industrial development”, I would certainly be expecting my union (including NEC members who happened to be on the BACC) to fight for my colleagues and my own right to continuous employment within that group of companies ahead of external recruits, regardless of whether I was on a master seniority list.
Big BALPA have some skilled negotiators who I am sure will be will be well aware of the need to represent all pilots caught up in this. Some comments here suggest that the BACC alone have the sole discretion to waiver BA’s selection system if and only when it suits them to achieve some particular political aim. Either the full recruitment process is vital and must be maintained for anyone going on the BA list, or it must be scrapped particularly for anyone already working in the same role within the group already flying Group owned aircraft.
Statistically, a good 75% of the BACon pilots would have failed to pass the tests. Would this have meant that they were all unsuitable to do the same job in a different part of the company? Personally, in most cases, I think not. The BACC has to make its mind up though and either go with the demands of those who are obsessed by Clingons and watering down the brand, or not support any further attempts by management to divide and create further prejudice amongst a group of professional workers. BA at the same time should also make its mind up for once and accept form the start that if it wants to buy or create a new airline operation then the crews that go with the deal are either fit for purpose from day one, or they are not. If there is any doubt then the deal should not proceed, they can't just keep making it up as they go along. It is not the job of a union either to help perpetuate unpleasant prejudices between groups of professionals doing the same job, something in which in my view, they have been guilty of until now.
In the case of BACon, there appeared to be a significant number of people on the BACC not to mention management who had an “over my dead body” approach to relaxing entry criteria even though they were of course happy to turn a blind eye to accepting 30 or so Bacon RJ 100 pilots only, without any form of selection, just because it happened to fulfil a short term aim. It didn't go unnoticed that the Scope enforced secondees in Bacon became known through out the company (BA) to have ended up in one of the most highly paid and cushiest SH posts in the company and this sort of thng wasn’t missed by the likes of WW. More ill though out secondment fudges like this will not help in the long term.
Tempers may be frayed, but I think TR, HR and others should tone it down for a while (in public) until the big meetings come to their natural conclusion. BA learnt quite a lot about what they could or could not get away with in the five years it took them to asset strip the LHR slots and then shed BACon, but they also learnt that some things weren’t quite as simple as they thought they would be
.
Once the lawyers start, the status of a group of staff in a subsidary relative to those in the parent company and the so called “clear blue water” is likely to become very muddy, particularly if one group is facing a redundancy situation. The term “mainline” is unlikely to have much meaning in court and any attempt to shed one group of staff when another part of the organisation is recruiting for the same role would not be impossible, but it would be difficult. BA managed to get round this to some extent with BAcon by “selling”
it as a going concern, but they were very much aware that as a solvent company continuing recruiting externally, that they would have significant legal difficulties just dumping a bunch of pilots regardless of whether they were in a subsidiary. This latest development will be very awkward for BALPA too if they don’t stick solidly to basic principles. If that means going nuclear then so be it, but they need to be decisive.If I had legitimately applied for and been accepted for a job with a BA company funded and equipped by BA managed by BA Directors and was then shortly afterwards dumped due to some totally predictable “industrial development”, I would certainly be expecting my union (including NEC members who happened to be on the BACC) to fight for my colleagues and my own right to continuous employment within that group of companies ahead of external recruits, regardless of whether I was on a master seniority list.
Big BALPA have some skilled negotiators who I am sure will be will be well aware of the need to represent all pilots caught up in this. Some comments here suggest that the BACC alone have the sole discretion to waiver BA’s selection system if and only when it suits them to achieve some particular political aim. Either the full recruitment process is vital and must be maintained for anyone going on the BA list, or it must be scrapped particularly for anyone already working in the same role within the group already flying Group owned aircraft.
Statistically, a good 75% of the BACon pilots would have failed to pass the tests. Would this have meant that they were all unsuitable to do the same job in a different part of the company? Personally, in most cases, I think not. The BACC has to make its mind up though and either go with the demands of those who are obsessed by Clingons and watering down the brand, or not support any further attempts by management to divide and create further prejudice amongst a group of professional workers. BA at the same time should also make its mind up for once and accept form the start that if it wants to buy or create a new airline operation then the crews that go with the deal are either fit for purpose from day one, or they are not. If there is any doubt then the deal should not proceed, they can't just keep making it up as they go along. It is not the job of a union either to help perpetuate unpleasant prejudices between groups of professionals doing the same job, something in which in my view, they have been guilty of until now.
In the case of BACon, there appeared to be a significant number of people on the BACC not to mention management who had an “over my dead body” approach to relaxing entry criteria even though they were of course happy to turn a blind eye to accepting 30 or so Bacon RJ 100 pilots only, without any form of selection, just because it happened to fulfil a short term aim. It didn't go unnoticed that the Scope enforced secondees in Bacon became known through out the company (BA) to have ended up in one of the most highly paid and cushiest SH posts in the company and this sort of thng wasn’t missed by the likes of WW. More ill though out secondment fudges like this will not help in the long term.
Tempers may be frayed, but I think TR, HR and others should tone it down for a while (in public) until the big meetings come to their natural conclusion. BA learnt quite a lot about what they could or could not get away with in the five years it took them to asset strip the LHR slots and then shed BACon, but they also learnt that some things weren’t quite as simple as they thought they would be
.
Last edited by biddedout; 20th Jan 2008 at 13:51.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
biddedout
Your thinking on the mainline secondments to BACON appears a little 'muddled'. However that is now a dead issue.
Hope you are enjoying life as an ex-rasher.
More importantly:
Anyone who thinks there will be no casualties in the impending dispute, underestimates just how nasty (and lengthy?) this action has the potential to become.
The stakes are very high for both sides.
I just wouldn't want anyone to be surprised!
Your thinking on the mainline secondments to BACON appears a little 'muddled'. However that is now a dead issue.
Hope you are enjoying life as an ex-rasher.
More importantly:
Anyone who thinks there will be no casualties in the impending dispute, underestimates just how nasty (and lengthy?) this action has the potential to become.
The stakes are very high for both sides.
I just wouldn't want anyone to be surprised!
I agree, its likely to be very nasty and messy, but I just don't think BALPA should be led down the path of trying to invent dome kind of secondment arrangement on the hoof just avoid a bigger confrontation. Good luck to you all though.
Creating situations in which another group of pilots train BA pilots, fly with BA are tested by BA pilots pilots on aircraft insured and owned by BA and yet at the same time not accepting them as being the right stuff to be a BA pilot is not something that a Union should get involved with. Hence, I agree, 100% on the BA list or not at all, but I simply do not think secondment arrangements for political reasons are healthy for the industry.
My only regret about being an ex rasher is that we didn't see what a farce it was more quicky on and try to force some action to remove some of the Waterside mismanagement strings. What has become very aparent is just how efficient the sharp end of BAcon had actually become.
As for my understanding of the secondment arrangement into Bacon, I can only go by what our reps were telling us at the time so I could be very wrong, but I do know that none of them moved into managment within 3 months of the ink drying.
How is he getting on these days? Is the Bobby the Scope Kid likely to be joining you??
Creating situations in which another group of pilots train BA pilots, fly with BA are tested by BA pilots pilots on aircraft insured and owned by BA and yet at the same time not accepting them as being the right stuff to be a BA pilot is not something that a Union should get involved with. Hence, I agree, 100% on the BA list or not at all, but I simply do not think secondment arrangements for political reasons are healthy for the industry.
My only regret about being an ex rasher is that we didn't see what a farce it was more quicky on and try to force some action to remove some of the Waterside mismanagement strings. What has become very aparent is just how efficient the sharp end of BAcon had actually become.
As for my understanding of the secondment arrangement into Bacon, I can only go by what our reps were telling us at the time so I could be very wrong, but I do know that none of them moved into managment within 3 months of the ink drying.
How is he getting on these days? Is the Bobby the Scope Kid likely to be joining you??
Last edited by biddedout; 20th Jan 2008 at 14:25.
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
NoD - point taken, I know that OS pilots will be represented by BALPA and of course anyone has the freedom to apply for any job they wish.
I was just emphasising that there is a bit of a row going on and that perhaps potential employees should be aware of the facts...
I was just emphasising that there is a bit of a row going on and that perhaps potential employees should be aware of the facts...
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi biddedout
Just to clarify: As far as inventing some kind of secondment arrangement "on the hoof" is concerned. Management's very first approach was to offer exactly that with OpenLies. We could have secured ALL the available commands on that basis! Balpa were not interested. Perhaps because of the mistakes that were made in Bacon?? Maybe for other reasons. (Perhaps there are bigger fish to fry!)
Which is why I suspect you were not told the truth about BACC's resistance to Bacon pilots joining the Master Seniority List. I think you were exceptionally badly represented, and I cannot imagine why the BACC would be the group to block the incorporation of Bacons into mainline.
I'm sure you should be looking elsewhere.
However: Even BA pilots have not yet woken up to the intensity to which this dispute will be escalated.
Who knows where this might end up?
Anyone who claims to know is either lying, extremely naive, or just lacking in imagination!
That's all.
Just to clarify: As far as inventing some kind of secondment arrangement "on the hoof" is concerned. Management's very first approach was to offer exactly that with OpenLies. We could have secured ALL the available commands on that basis! Balpa were not interested. Perhaps because of the mistakes that were made in Bacon?? Maybe for other reasons. (Perhaps there are bigger fish to fry!)
Which is why I suspect you were not told the truth about BACC's resistance to Bacon pilots joining the Master Seniority List. I think you were exceptionally badly represented, and I cannot imagine why the BACC would be the group to block the incorporation of Bacons into mainline.
I'm sure you should be looking elsewhere.
However: Even BA pilots have not yet woken up to the intensity to which this dispute will be escalated.
Who knows where this might end up?
Anyone who claims to know is either lying, extremely naive, or just lacking in imagination!
That's all.
Last edited by Tandemrotor; 21st Jan 2008 at 00:37.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: "Big silver bird in sky"
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As a BA pilot I totally support BALPA in wanting Openlies pilots on the master seniority list and welcome ALL pilots to be able to apply for the jobs available after current BA pilots have been given the opportunity, I suspect there will be plenty of positions available but the selection process has to be the same as the rest of us went through.
Also if Openlies is not crewed by pilots on the mainline seniority list why pray tell should BALPA represent a bunch of pilots operating for what would be a company operating totally in a non British enviroment.
Please can all of us PROFESSIONAL PILOTS treat each other with respect and courtesy and save our vitriol for our scum management.
Also if Openlies is not crewed by pilots on the mainline seniority list why pray tell should BALPA represent a bunch of pilots operating for what would be a company operating totally in a non British enviroment.
Please can all of us PROFESSIONAL PILOTS treat each other with respect and courtesy and save our vitriol for our scum management.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Stop Press
Well, this afternoon the BACC have formally told BA of the intent to ballot for strike action over Openskies.
Legal formalities mid week, then the propaganda will start flying and the ballot papers will be issued.
Legal formalities mid week, then the propaganda will start flying and the ballot papers will be issued.
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA Pilots to ballot for strike over OpenSkies
Here's a press release
British Airways Pilots Vote On Strike
Updated:16:35, Monday January 21, 2008
British Airways pilots are to be balloted for strikes in a dispute about the airline's plans to launch a subsidiary business.
If the pilots do strike, it will be the first time they have taken action since 1980.
Pilots could strikeThe British Airline Pilots Association (Balpa) says all of BA's 3,200 pilots will vote on whether to launch a campaign of industrial action.
The dispute flared over the airline's announcement of a new subsidiary, OpenSkies, due to start in June and offering luxury seat flights from continental Europe to America.
The union wants there to be "open access" to jobs between the airline and the new unit.
Balpa had been due to announced the ballot last Thursday but delayed the news following the crash-landing of a BA aircraft at Heathrow airport.
The union said the row was not about safety and stressed it had nothing to do with last week's incident at Heathrow.
General secretary Jim McAuslan said: "We hope the BA leadership will think again. This is not about money and it is not about safety. We have been prepared to accept that a service will need lower costs to build business and that Balpa would be able to crew the service to meet the BA business case.
"But we are not prepared to see the pilot body broken up in the way BA plans and are bemused as to why they will not use BA pilots."
OpenSkies is due to start with one Boeing 757 aircraft operating from New York to Brussels or Paris, with a second 757 added later in the year.
BA plans to have six 757s in operation by the end of 2009
British Airways Pilots Vote On Strike
Updated:16:35, Monday January 21, 2008
British Airways pilots are to be balloted for strikes in a dispute about the airline's plans to launch a subsidiary business.
If the pilots do strike, it will be the first time they have taken action since 1980.
Pilots could strikeThe British Airline Pilots Association (Balpa) says all of BA's 3,200 pilots will vote on whether to launch a campaign of industrial action.
The dispute flared over the airline's announcement of a new subsidiary, OpenSkies, due to start in June and offering luxury seat flights from continental Europe to America.
The union wants there to be "open access" to jobs between the airline and the new unit.
Balpa had been due to announced the ballot last Thursday but delayed the news following the crash-landing of a BA aircraft at Heathrow airport.
The union said the row was not about safety and stressed it had nothing to do with last week's incident at Heathrow.
General secretary Jim McAuslan said: "We hope the BA leadership will think again. This is not about money and it is not about safety. We have been prepared to accept that a service will need lower costs to build business and that Balpa would be able to crew the service to meet the BA business case.
"But we are not prepared to see the pilot body broken up in the way BA plans and are bemused as to why they will not use BA pilots."
OpenSkies is due to start with one Boeing 757 aircraft operating from New York to Brussels or Paris, with a second 757 added later in the year.
BA plans to have six 757s in operation by the end of 2009
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is it is a case of damned if you do damned if you don't in this as if pilots strike it will encourage BA to possibly put more routes out to Europe, if you don't they might do it anyway.
Is it too late for talks now or are BA and BALPA meeting on a regular basis?
Is it too late for talks now or are BA and BALPA meeting on a regular basis?
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
pressman
The likelyhood is that OpenLies will be almost universally unattractive to those currently working in mainline. The lower pay won't be such a problem, but the planned rosters that I have seen will be an absolute nightmare to live through.
So direct entry into OL will be required regardless.
This is NOT about mainline access INTO OpenLies! Hardly any of us want that kind of misery.
The stakes are much, much higher than that!
The likelyhood is that OpenLies will be almost universally unattractive to those currently working in mainline. The lower pay won't be such a problem, but the planned rosters that I have seen will be an absolute nightmare to live through.
So direct entry into OL will be required regardless.
This is NOT about mainline access INTO OpenLies! Hardly any of us want that kind of misery.
The stakes are much, much higher than that!