BALPA withdraw from Open Skies Court Case

[Devillish]

Maybe - but 'past performance is no guarantee' either...

If BA had a poor Industrial Relations history then that is part of the mix. However, the onus is also on the union to avoid pitching up with utterly mental demands that leave the company no other option.

As for Jim McAusland making a 'well informed' plea to the City to unseat Willie - I nearly fell off my chair. There is very little investor sympathy towards any Union (nothing personal) but I think that even my mates can see through a deposition request from a Union that is in dispute with its CEO. It's a cold hard world.

BA pilots are - in general - wonderfully trained and well selected individuals. That is, of course, in part due to a whole bunch of systematic management policies and activity - it doesn't happen by magic. Managers have to agree that it is desirable, spend the money and manage the process. Pilots are a massive part of that but it seems astonishingly arrogant to suggest that BA Pilots are good despite their management.

BA is good because it is a good company (in a rubbish sector, by the way). What is also thunderingly arrogant is the notion that pilots from outside the airline (a pool which BA also draws from) are in some way inferior. What happens when a BA pilot is recruited? Do they walk through a smokey portal like on 'Stars in Their Eyes' to emerge as some form of Sky God? I think not - they benefit from training and environment that is supported by - guess who - British Airways PLC, not BALPA (although they appear to have a valuable contribution to training a technical).

I suspect that OpenSkies will take a very similar approach - that they will select, hire and fire in a very similar way and that it will be successful. They will have a hard time - it's a tough sector, and getting tougher - but I do not think that they are the industry-screwing force that BALPA claim... ...some airlines are asking pilots to PAY to be on the aircraft. Are OpenSkies doing that? Apparently not. Some airlines pay less than OpenSkies (quite a few looking at the figures here) so where did all of this b*****it and vitrol come from? BA, I suppose - no wonder they want a clean start.

[WhoopWhoop Whoops]

I see the first Open Skies Departure is EX JFK on the 19th June.

Departing ORY 20th June.

Interesting ? Starting a new low cost business operation by positioning an empty B757 across the atlantic first.

Are they afraid of the French not turning up for the big startup event??

Will it use the BA JFK terminal to just rub it in to BALPA and the BA Staff?

I await developments.

[chrisbl]

The comments by Devillish are amongst the most coherent in this thread.

I am sure people feel agrieved when previous assurances are not upheld but in any business, such assurances are only valid if the circumstances remain the same.

In the aviation world today, circumstances are different. Open Skies is just that. Without the feather bedding of the previous bi lateral agreements any assurances are just not possible to deliver.

The open skies policy has forced all the transatlantic airlines to reshape thei businesses, BA has as much if not more to lose by doing nothing.

Open Skies is their response to a political change in the aviation landscape, whether it works or not is something else but they have the absolute right to manage the business as they see fit for the political, legal and economic environment they face.

By doing nothing the future of BA would be grim. The future of BA staff would be grimmer.

This talk of getting the TGWU to take up the cause is just plain stupid. They have not been able to halt the tide of change in other industries.

The world has changed and is changing so rapidly that no one has any idea what the rules are.

I suspect that if the open skies nogotiators from the EU and US had known what was going to happen with oil, the economy (ie credit crunch), then they might not have been so enthusiastic about open skies and the risks it has now brought to the airlines they were hoping to help.

Welcome to the brave new world - at least be grateful you dont work in the UK housebuilding industry where 5000 people lost their jobs last week through no fault of themselves.

[SR71]

Imagine you were running a huge multi billion dollar business that was very profitable. One day after years of 'cordial' relations and many discussions a union comes along ands asks for one big thing (let's call it all pilots on one seniority list) or else they'll ballot their members to strike.

In defence of the BA pilots, that is a gross mis-representation of the situation isn't it?

BA decided it (effectively) wanted to outsource BA pilots jobs....having seen how successful Jetstar and American Eagle have been at doing the same.

BA pilots in conjuction with BALPA said (perhaps 'endeavoured to say' is a more accurate statement) "Errr....'No!'."

What were BALPA supposed to do?

That is a pure, unmitigated threat. As a negotiator you have no place to go to meet halfway. Whichever way you cut it one side wins and one side loses.

Whilst I agree with many of your principled arguments, the jaded workforce knows that the reality is their management play hard and fast with the cash flow that they earn for them....a £350 million fine here, an expensive botched Terminal 5 launch there....

Still, perceived management incompetence doesn't change the economic reality...just leaves a bitter taste in your mouth...

However, I would like to know whether, when in discussions, BA did say they would concede to putting OS pilots on the master seniority list if BA pilots would concede some of their more "expensive" T&C's?

Because OS pilots on their own T&C's for the duration of their "OS freeze" with a right to subsequent employment on Mainline T&C's doesn't save BA a great deal does it...if we're honest...

[raveng]

Great post from Devillish.

[Shaka Zulu]

SR71 thanks for a balanced reply.
It's obvious that many outsiders will not know how the industry works and apply basic principles that can't be brought over from other industries.
Fair enough to do so but a reality check is needed.

We asked explicitly during a conference with WW, that if we match the OS business plan on cost , point for point, would he allow OS pilots to be on the BA Mainline Seniority list: answer NO.
Convienently this question was cut out of the DVD recording that was sent to all BA pilots!!

Also, in discussion with BA it has been said that they might 'entertain' the thought of putting them on MSL IF we gave up a couple of the top paypoints in BA. Now to me, BA is playing just as much hardball as we are. We know it's an issue about cost/flexibility. Even with that given to BA before discussion they would not entertain it.
You can draw conclusions yourself!

Question is: where to go from here?

there is the rub, it is obvious that the OS guys want the expansion for themselves and I can't blame them. I just hope that enough common sense exist to learn from past mistakes. Mistakes that I know little about aside from reading the VARY varied postings mainly on this forum.
It does not serve the pilot community to go at loggerheads with eachother again...

Indeed if (and its a big if at the moment) we can preserve anything of our present job as we know it, it is going to be through unity between unions in different countries and less of an screw the rest attitude.
Short sightedness is helping no-one.
Call it Utopian I think but we owe it to ourselves to do something about the things we see happening right in front of our eyes.
We're alright Jack for another couple of years, but what lies behind that??!!

[Skylion]

Devillish's posts are spot on.
This was always a most curious dispute and appears to have been manufactured to raise emotions.
There is no proposal by BA to back BA mainline into BA Openskies.
Unlike the oft quoted Jetstar, Openskies does not plan to operate into or out of BA mainline home territory,- the UK.
All there was was an unsubstantiated fear that BA might be tempted to allow Openskies to take over mainline routes. There was no evidence of such a plan or intention.
There was therefore nothing other than an underlying mistrust of BA's management hyped by BALPA to have a strike about. If BA had stated that they intended to back BA Mainline into Openskies there would have been a real issue for industrial action,- but they didn't and in fact firmly denied it.Whether you trust them not to change their mind in the future is not relevant. Only when an objectionable proposal is on the table is there a reasonable basis for industrial action. If strikes were the norm whenever a staff group had fears about what might or might not happen in the future there would never be a moments industrial peace.
BA took the action it did in confronting BALPA to protect its business, its customers, its shareholders and the future of other staff groups. They had no reasonable option and would have been negligent if they had not done so.
The whole affair is most unfortunate, especially as it widened to include a personal attack on Walsh, and it should never have happened. The management of the union have not covered themselves in glory.

[757flyer]

Do you think the next BALPA move will be to allow BA secondees to OS filling the command seats? I cant see that if BA will not allow OS pilots onto the mainline list that mainline pilots should be allowed into OS. Would be BACX all over again and the whole sorry bitter process again.

[M.Mouse]

Surely this thread is drifting dangerously into reasoned debate? Please stop.

[WhoopWhoop Whoops]

My guess that the secondee situation is likely to go the other way .........

Now that BA has managed to set up a separate low cost operation.

BA could pull back its F/O,s that currently have command slots at GSS.

GSS does not want them as it screws up promotion for GSS F/O,s and causes their copilots to leave GSS because BA pilots take half the command slots, the extra training must cost GSS .

The original deal was brought about by a BALPA demand.

BA would want a cheaper charter deal no doubt from GSS after if they did the dirty on that one no doubt.

It seems to me, to be a possible next test by BA to see if BALPA would again back down in face of the new legal barrage that would inevitably result

GSS is not even a BA subsidiary so the BAPLA legal position is weak.

[WhoopWhoop Whoops]

My guess that the secondee situation is likely to go the other way .........

Now that BA has managed to set up a separate low cost operation.

BA could pull back its F/O,s that currently have command slots at GSS.

GSS does not want them as it screws up promotion for GSS F/O,s and causes their copilots to leave GSS because BA pilots take half the command slots, the extra training must cost GSS .

The original deal was brought about by a BALPA demand.

BA would want a cheaper charter deal no doubt from GSS after if they did the dirty on that one no doubt.

It seems to me, to be a possible next test by BA to see if BALPA would again back down in face of the new legal barrage that would inevitably result

GSS is not even a BA subsidiary so the BAPLA legal position is weak.

Anyway I am sure BA would claim it was a demand from GSS and outside their control. GSS is non union I believe.

WARNING THIS IS PURE SPECULATION

[Carnage Matey!]

One thing that did become clear from the legal ruling is that Article 43 does not apply to the existing BA Scope clause in the UK. It's under that deal that the GSS secondee arrangement exists. BA would be a little daft to go and poke a stick in that hornets nest right now. GSS could kick the secondees out any time they like. Their problem is that BA then couldn't use GSS for their cargo without breaking the Scope agreement.

[WhoopWhoop Whoops]

I fully agree that Willie would be unlikely to prod BALPA again at the moment.

But it is clear that he wants to run the show his way and will use the courts at the drop of a hat.

I just cannot see him not wishing to put the scope agreement in the bin when convenient to him and trashing this GSS arrangement could be be a start.

[Devillish]

My view is so narrow because I confine it only to the real world

Yes, I know the industry very well, thank you. That is why I am currently employed in this position.

Look, the simple situation is this - Unions were primarily created to protect the workers' rights when society had very few social protections. The social protections that were previously (and rightly) sought by Unions and activist groups are now in place. Therefore, unions have a diminishing role (in BALPAs case they stated previously that the strategy was to become a partner or stakeholder).

Within the UK and Europe workers unions now primarily play the role of trying to increase terms and conditions - companies naturally wish to challenge that. That is pretty much it - the real world. It is right and proper for BALPA to seek to increase pay and conditions both within BA and without it.

The situation over OpenSkies was exactly this: OS pilots on the master list or we're off. That is NOT negotiation - that is making a demand. This is also where BALPA will fall foul of all sorts of TU legislation (like going on strike over a third party). Next tactic - 'Let's fight it over the SCOPE agreement instead - shhhhh! everyone shut up about OpenSkies'. But - whoops - what about GO, BMED, GB, BACON/CitiExpress blah blah blah... Now here is where I get confused - you cannot pick and choose elements of what is notionally a point of principle.

That chap from ALPA youTubes his hand-wringing missive to the planet as a whole bunch of 'normal people' scratch their heads and say "but this has already happened - BA have been franchising for years".

All the while the whole seniority debate is propped up by nice chunky salaries at the top with the added bonus of a final salary scheme to make the wait all worthwhile. Now there is a foul stench to this whole thing... How long will it be before the armies of well intentioned twentysomethings with a pocketful of debt and tat salaries start asking the bigger questions - like, 'how will I pay my mortgage?' or 'whoa, twenty years to command and a stagnant list!'

"You don't understand - aviation is a special case..." - I hear it again and again. Nope, not so special - It is just an industry very used to protectionism. Stockholm Syndrome is alive and well - you grow to love the system which has caused your profession to lag wages in real terms despite a shortage of appropriately qualified individuals.

Within your own sector non-seniority based systems (like the corporate market) have seen a jump in wages that far outstrip the airlines. Go figure.

So back to BALPA and the BACC - The chairman of the BACC himself is on record as stating that he would '...seek equalisation of OS and BA terms and conditions after three years...' if the seniority lists were conjoined. I am presuming that he means to drag the Ts and Cs up rather than force BA pilots to take a pay cut. So, funny old thing, this is nothing like the 'price promise' that the public face of BA BALPA gave in respect of OS pilots.

I think the Company Council doth protest a little too much.

Look boys and girls, I have no axe to grind - just an alternate view. I thought that you clever pilot-types were objective, impassive, steely-eyed and all that? Take a look at the system that lays in front of you and ask yourself if you would rather join the real world or get bumped along on the fringes to go the way of the train driver.

[Human Factor]

Within your own sector non-seniority based systems (like the corporate market) have seen a jump in wages that far outstrip the airlines. Go figure.

It's not that I disagree, Devilish. You have made some valid points. However, the only way to remove the seniority system is as a whole, globally. At the same time, you would need to remove the obstacles preventing EU pilots from working outside the EU and vice versa, otherwise there is absolutely no benefit to pilots in the majors ditching seniority based systems. If you look at the likely rationalisation of the industry over the next few years, there will be no more than a dozen major players left (within Europe, probably three) and I for one would not wish to give up a command with a major for anything other than a command with another major.

[Captain Correlli]

Devillish for DFO

I thought that you clever pilot-types were objective, impassive, steely-eyed and all that?

Fantastic posts Devillish! Actually, some of us are as you describe above, that is why this thread has provoked so much debate from within and without BA.

Some of us also agree that a seniority system is bunkum - you don't find it in HM Forces! Unfortunately, the seniority system has been in place for a long time, and has actually worked to the advantage of the employer as well, although with decreasing returns in recent years - hence some employers attempts at changing things. You wouldn't find a consultant surgeon having to start again on the ward floor if he moved hospitals, and the same should be true of pilots. I think OS and the inevitable copycats will bring this to an end sooner rather than later. Innovation and change are what move things along, and while BALPA has proved very useful in maintaining Ts and Cs for BA, I think this will, looking back, be seen as the first crack in the wall.
The future of air travel is bleak anyway, and as you say, generally aviation is a rubbish sector with utterly pathetic margins when compared to other sectors. The future is more and more expensive air travel, which will lead to the less well qualified and skilled airline pilots, and hence the airlines they work for, going under.
Darwinism has finally caught up with Aviation, remarkable that it was a union which precipitated things!

[genghis khan 01]

The problem with much of this industry is that when you look up you see a bunch of ar*eholes. When you look down you merely see a bunch of smiling faces. We need to get in the real world otherwise we will go the same way as the dinosaurs.

[Ray D'Avecta]

Devillish, thank you sir (or madam) for raising the level of this debate. . For far too long, the pilot body has been fixated on the black / white traditional view. Alternative views such as yours force us to consider the "shades of grey" ....... which may indeed be the future.

[SR71]

...All the while the whole seniority debate is propped up by nice chunky salaries at the top with the added bonus of a final salary scheme to make the wait all worthwhile. Now there is a foul stench to this whole thing... How long will it be before the armies of well intentioned twentysomethings with a pocketful of debt and tat salaries...

Within your own sector non-seniority based systems (like the corporate market) have seen a jump in wages that far outstrip the airlines. Go figure.

Ah yes, the corporate sector....

That'd be the sector that today (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...pound13bn.html) is reported to have shelled out £12.6 billion of bonuses inspite of the £15 billion hole in UK bank finances...where the guys at the top get 8 figure salaries (not 6, and even, when they f**k everything up!) and the guys at the bottom get...?

What a paragon of virtue that sector is....the stench of it....



I guess you fly a desk Devillish?

So you ought to appreciate that its the devilish detail that renders your "broad brushstroke" characterisation of the BA situation somewhat wide of the mark...

Answer me why, if BA's intention was only to fly a "handful" (6, was it?) of OS aircraft (out of 200+?), and they already make a good 10% margin on a £9 billion turnover (more if corporate hadn't frittered away £XXX million in fines and compensation), they'd even want to touch pilot T&C's?

Corporate "smash and grab"?

Ah, the hegemony of big business....

Tell you what though, Genghis Khan is right...

[Ray D'Avecta]

SR71,

Ah yes, the corporate sector....

Ermm......no, actually

I think the reference was to the corporate aviation sector.

...........but nice rant about the financial sector, though.