Mass Sit-In BA Engineers at LGW 14/06/02
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Sussex
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good evening gentlemen. As a serving Licenced Engineer at LGW I am very grateful for the discussions you are holding and the sympathy you have for us. To answer the question of what we hope to get out of our action I,ll tell you. The reduction in routes out of LGW has impacted on all ground staff, loaders, tug drivers as well as engineers. However the mismanagement have offered both loaders and the tuggies a variety of options such as redeployment, severence or early retirement where appropriate. Engineers have been offered a posting to LHR on 4 on 4 off pattern if they volunteer, or a 7 on 3 off, 7 on 4, off earlies and lates pattern if they dont. So naturally we would like parity with our more militant colleagues.
Secondly one of our union reps worked out the cost of working the 767 line at LGW and presented his findings to the mismanagement. He was told that his figures were incorrect and to prove it mismanagement gave him their figures. Gentlemen the difference was £9.00 a day over life of the line. We have the space and the skills to do this work and a proven track record in majors.
Because we don't down tools at the drop of a hat, because all we really want to do is come in and fix aeroplanes we are getting, what we see as disproportionate treatment. Sitting on our toolboxes goes against the grain.
We would have more RJ100 and ATR cover if mismanagement hadn't cancelled courses and stopped paying agreed allowences.
Thank you for your support, please stick with us.
Long live the GFF
Secondly one of our union reps worked out the cost of working the 767 line at LGW and presented his findings to the mismanagement. He was told that his figures were incorrect and to prove it mismanagement gave him their figures. Gentlemen the difference was £9.00 a day over life of the line. We have the space and the skills to do this work and a proven track record in majors.
Because we don't down tools at the drop of a hat, because all we really want to do is come in and fix aeroplanes we are getting, what we see as disproportionate treatment. Sitting on our toolboxes goes against the grain.
We would have more RJ100 and ATR cover if mismanagement hadn't cancelled courses and stopped paying agreed allowences.
Thank you for your support, please stick with us.
Long live the GFF
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Secret Squirrel
As someone 'in the business' but who does not work for an airline:
No question about it, give me a well maintained a/c, looked after by a properly rested and motivated engineer any time please. Hope the engineers can get things sorted out soon.
BUT, BUT, BUT
BA staff cannot expect support or understanding from their customers with an attitude like yours.
If you are getting upset at anti-BA sentiments then don't call us pondlife if we use another carrier !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why should the public, sorry, great unwashed to you, have any sympathy at all with BA staff (the public usually fails to differentiate between pilots, engineers or whatever), if that is how you think of us? Actually been on several low cost flights recently and they're not bad. STN is a dream compared to LHR and e.g. the Ryanair coach available in Venice was cheap and convenient.
If that is how 'non-management' in BA views its customers, is it any wonder that there is little public support for the staff, even when there is a genuine problem, such as LGW engineering.
No good blaming BA management alone for all the airlines woes with an attitude like that mate.
"Yet another chance to have a go at BA; how boring. BA, believe it or not, are in a much stronger position than you think so let's stop all this BA bashing nonsense. Yeah sure, the low costers are doing well and good luck to them but their true colours are beginning to tell amoungst the travelling public and most of my flights are generally full with a healthy proportion of business travellers. So where do these figures come from for the low costers?; I'll tell you, in the main it's a cross section of the undisirable public, the pondlife who have been duped into thinking that it's cheaper to fly low cost only to find later that a similar trip on a BA/BM/other non UK national carrier would not only get them to their desired destination (as opposed to 1 1/2 hours drive away from where they actually want to get to) but that the flight wouldn't have to be met by the police."
As someone 'in the business' but who does not work for an airline:
No question about it, give me a well maintained a/c, looked after by a properly rested and motivated engineer any time please. Hope the engineers can get things sorted out soon.
BUT, BUT, BUT
BA staff cannot expect support or understanding from their customers with an attitude like yours.
If you are getting upset at anti-BA sentiments then don't call us pondlife if we use another carrier !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Why should the public, sorry, great unwashed to you, have any sympathy at all with BA staff (the public usually fails to differentiate between pilots, engineers or whatever), if that is how you think of us? Actually been on several low cost flights recently and they're not bad. STN is a dream compared to LHR and e.g. the Ryanair coach available in Venice was cheap and convenient.
If that is how 'non-management' in BA views its customers, is it any wonder that there is little public support for the staff, even when there is a genuine problem, such as LGW engineering.
No good blaming BA management alone for all the airlines woes with an attitude like that mate.
"Yet another chance to have a go at BA; how boring. BA, believe it or not, are in a much stronger position than you think so let's stop all this BA bashing nonsense. Yeah sure, the low costers are doing well and good luck to them but their true colours are beginning to tell amoungst the travelling public and most of my flights are generally full with a healthy proportion of business travellers. So where do these figures come from for the low costers?; I'll tell you, in the main it's a cross section of the undisirable public, the pondlife who have been duped into thinking that it's cheaper to fly low cost only to find later that a similar trip on a BA/BM/other non UK national carrier would not only get them to their desired destination (as opposed to 1 1/2 hours drive away from where they actually want to get to) but that the flight wouldn't have to be met by the police."
Guest
Posts: n/a
Cargosales,
Chill out a bit, maybe SS's opinions could have been worded a bit different. But don't be offended by what is said in these forums even the title of the passengers forum on this site is Passengers and SLF (they are one and the same), just the same as I, as a BA employee won't be offended by your generalisation that all BA staff think their customers are an annoyance to be tollerated because thats not true either. I've worked for lots of public facing industries and believe me the great unwashed is a term of endearment.
Chill out a bit, maybe SS's opinions could have been worded a bit different. But don't be offended by what is said in these forums even the title of the passengers forum on this site is Passengers and SLF (they are one and the same), just the same as I, as a BA employee won't be offended by your generalisation that all BA staff think their customers are an annoyance to be tollerated because thats not true either. I've worked for lots of public facing industries and believe me the great unwashed is a term of endearment.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Merstham, Redhill
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, OK,
As mainfrog says, maybe I could have worded it a little different. I didn't mean to suggest that ALL the LCA's travelling public are pondlife. As for the tenuous connection between that and that I think BA's customers are pondlife, well you'll have to explain that one to me, I'm sorry.
In anticipation of your - I'm sure - very detailed explanation of how you came to the conclusion that 2 + 2 = 5, I take every care to ensure that customers recieve the best service I am able to offer. All I ask is that they be polite and if they have a genuine grievance, I will go out of my way to make it as painless as possible - if it is within my power!
If they are stroppy and offensive to me or my crew then they will initially get the benefit of the doubt as we have to draw on our own experiences. If after a few moments they can't see the futility of aggression then they get nothing from me. It's as simple as that. I have to cope with enough stress during a working day without pandering to 'pondlife'.
I think you'll agree that most of us (with the exception of the eternally patient - which I am not: I do not suffer fools gladly and in turn I try not to be one either) act in a similar manner. These, and other reasons are why I choose a) not to work the other side of the cockpit door, and b) to work for a scheduled airline. In all fairness, however, the latter is more luck than judgement but I am grateful nonetheless.
Back to engineers:
It ould be nice if just once, mismanagement realised the worth of morale, wouldn't it?
As mainfrog says, maybe I could have worded it a little different. I didn't mean to suggest that ALL the LCA's travelling public are pondlife. As for the tenuous connection between that and that I think BA's customers are pondlife, well you'll have to explain that one to me, I'm sorry.
In anticipation of your - I'm sure - very detailed explanation of how you came to the conclusion that 2 + 2 = 5, I take every care to ensure that customers recieve the best service I am able to offer. All I ask is that they be polite and if they have a genuine grievance, I will go out of my way to make it as painless as possible - if it is within my power!
If they are stroppy and offensive to me or my crew then they will initially get the benefit of the doubt as we have to draw on our own experiences. If after a few moments they can't see the futility of aggression then they get nothing from me. It's as simple as that. I have to cope with enough stress during a working day without pandering to 'pondlife'.
I think you'll agree that most of us (with the exception of the eternally patient - which I am not: I do not suffer fools gladly and in turn I try not to be one either) act in a similar manner. These, and other reasons are why I choose a) not to work the other side of the cockpit door, and b) to work for a scheduled airline. In all fairness, however, the latter is more luck than judgement but I am grateful nonetheless.
Back to engineers:
It ould be nice if just once, mismanagement realised the worth of morale, wouldn't it?
Last edited by Secret Squirrel; 19th Jun 2002 at 16:34.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: I dunno
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The main problem that this and many other situations relating to engineers terms and conditions highlights is the lack of a proper body to represent us. If we had a body such as BALPA (should have been taken when it was offerd years ago) then we would have a much better chance of having our experience and qualifications rewarded with appropriate terms and conditions.
I think the first thing to go would be the ridiculous 7 and 3, 7 and 4 shift pattern, it is a joke and a recipe for disaster regardless of how far you have to commute. 4 on 4 off is not perfect but it is workable.
The prospect of both pilots and engineers being represented by the one body would cause seizures within the management community. Only a thought.
I think the first thing to go would be the ridiculous 7 and 3, 7 and 4 shift pattern, it is a joke and a recipe for disaster regardless of how far you have to commute. 4 on 4 off is not perfect but it is workable.
The prospect of both pilots and engineers being represented by the one body would cause seizures within the management community. Only a thought.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Green and pleasant land
Posts: 658
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
mainfrog / secret squirrel
Ok, maybe my post could have been worded better too. Didn't mean to imply that ALL BA staff thought that way, nor that they thought BA customers were pondlife. And no, terms like SLF don't bother me at all.
At the risk of going further off-thread, it's just that I keep encountering what I deem/perceive to be an arrogant attitude on the part of certain BA staff and from BA on a corporate level too. Annoys me because so many - but definitely not all - BA staff do give great service (on the ground and on both sides of the cabin door). Particularly frustrating given the state of the market and the need for what is supposed to be our premier flag carrier to regain its place on the world stage. Pride in one's company is great but ...
Anyway, shall we let the engineers have their forum back
Ok, maybe my post could have been worded better too. Didn't mean to imply that ALL BA staff thought that way, nor that they thought BA customers were pondlife. And no, terms like SLF don't bother me at all.
At the risk of going further off-thread, it's just that I keep encountering what I deem/perceive to be an arrogant attitude on the part of certain BA staff and from BA on a corporate level too. Annoys me because so many - but definitely not all - BA staff do give great service (on the ground and on both sides of the cabin door). Particularly frustrating given the state of the market and the need for what is supposed to be our premier flag carrier to regain its place on the world stage. Pride in one's company is great but ...
Anyway, shall we let the engineers have their forum back
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: LHR
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The local press have run a story on the sit it.
http://icsurreyonline.icnetwork.co.u...l&siteid=50101
http://icsurreyonline.icnetwork.co.u...l&siteid=50101
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ITLBEFINE HAS A POINT
As civil aviation is becomes more and more controlled by accountants ( lap dogs of major shareholders) it is obvious to those of us at the coal face of the industry that saftey will be compromised at some stage.
I feel that it is high time the unions/associations representing ATC, Engineers, & Flight Crew worked towards forming an 'Aviation Union/Association' which had the industry at heart and strived to get Safety to the top of the agenda.
Personally I would like to see anyone employed at the cutting edge of UK Aviation- WELL PAID-WELL RESTED- MOTIVATED & EQUIPPED WITH STATE OF THE ART TECHNOLOGY befitting one of the richest countries in the World.
Additionally a major benefit of having a single organisation would be to sideline the issue of secondary industrial action as we would all be part of the same team and able to fight several corners!
As civil aviation is becomes more and more controlled by accountants ( lap dogs of major shareholders) it is obvious to those of us at the coal face of the industry that saftey will be compromised at some stage.
I feel that it is high time the unions/associations representing ATC, Engineers, & Flight Crew worked towards forming an 'Aviation Union/Association' which had the industry at heart and strived to get Safety to the top of the agenda.
Personally I would like to see anyone employed at the cutting edge of UK Aviation- WELL PAID-WELL RESTED- MOTIVATED & EQUIPPED WITH STATE OF THE ART TECHNOLOGY befitting one of the richest countries in the World.
Additionally a major benefit of having a single organisation would be to sideline the issue of secondary industrial action as we would all be part of the same team and able to fight several corners!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 361
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with some of these guys sentiments , but really - as part of the long/short term strategy of the airline depends on survival, some of these changes are inevitable.
ALOT of work has been transferred to LHR, and alot more to come yet, naturally the staff have to go with it.
If LGW has lost half it's flight's, there is no point in the same amount of staff still working there.
Many Engineers/pilots/crew have NO option but to go with it.
I know, I left Eurogatwick 6 years ago,for many of these reasons but i haven't looked back since.
It is making economic sense to have the majority of BA's flights from LHR fitting in with the wide range of connections.Also duplicating flights at airports only 35 miles apart does not make good financial reasoning.
BA expects alot from it's staff , but sometimes the staff expect a heck of alot back.(i.e.You can't have hundreds of staff sitting around at LGW doing nothing!,Much as some will think it's their god-given right .)
I strongly believe in 2 things - the company's survival & good terms/conditions for all.
It is obvious there are too many suits within the company
,and this must be addressed in the immediate future.
Your priority now is to get a better fixed/flexible roster pattern to eliminate fatigue and tiredness,also to ensure there is reasonable coverage at base - but also to ensure the survival of the company.
I'm sorry if some of what I say seems harsh,but these are VERY tough times in the airline industry - we have to be realistic and build on our future prospects - we are in aviation for the love of it, - but also to be profitable / progressive.
ALOT of work has been transferred to LHR, and alot more to come yet, naturally the staff have to go with it.
If LGW has lost half it's flight's, there is no point in the same amount of staff still working there.
Many Engineers/pilots/crew have NO option but to go with it.
I know, I left Eurogatwick 6 years ago,for many of these reasons but i haven't looked back since.
It is making economic sense to have the majority of BA's flights from LHR fitting in with the wide range of connections.Also duplicating flights at airports only 35 miles apart does not make good financial reasoning.
BA expects alot from it's staff , but sometimes the staff expect a heck of alot back.(i.e.You can't have hundreds of staff sitting around at LGW doing nothing!,Much as some will think it's their god-given right .)
I strongly believe in 2 things - the company's survival & good terms/conditions for all.
It is obvious there are too many suits within the company
,and this must be addressed in the immediate future.Your priority now is to get a better fixed/flexible roster pattern to eliminate fatigue and tiredness,also to ensure there is reasonable coverage at base - but also to ensure the survival of the company.
I'm sorry if some of what I say seems harsh,but these are VERY tough times in the airline industry - we have to be realistic and build on our future prospects - we are in aviation for the love of it, - but also to be profitable / progressive.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: south coast
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anti-Ice
[BA expects alot from it's staff , but sometimes the staff expect a heck of alot back.(i.e.You can't have hundreds of staff sitting around at LGW doing nothing!,Much as some will think it's their god-given right .)]
I think you should credit engineers with a bit more intelligence. Nobody expects a free ride. All except that some changes are inevitable. What they want is for engineering management to compulsory move people only as (truly) a last resort and then with suitable compensation for those affected.
Not to be threatened, intimidated and bullied in a manner than I am sure BALPA members would not have to endure. All this with complete disregard to human factors. If an engineer makes a mistake on his 7th day of an 04:30 start and an 40 mile drive to work do you think the company will back him up?
[BA expects alot from it's staff , but sometimes the staff expect a heck of alot back.(i.e.You can't have hundreds of staff sitting around at LGW doing nothing!,Much as some will think it's their god-given right .)]
I think you should credit engineers with a bit more intelligence. Nobody expects a free ride. All except that some changes are inevitable. What they want is for engineering management to compulsory move people only as (truly) a last resort and then with suitable compensation for those affected.
Not to be threatened, intimidated and bullied in a manner than I am sure BALPA members would not have to endure. All this with complete disregard to human factors. If an engineer makes a mistake on his 7th day of an 04:30 start and an 40 mile drive to work do you think the company will back him up?
Thread Starter
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: The Beautiful South
Posts: 199
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anti-Ice.
In reply to your comments.......
BA Engineers at LGW are fully aware that as the Flights out of Gatwick reduce, then there will be a reduction of maintenance workload.
What we find incomprehensible is the fact that the company is not offering severance.......... There would be many that take up a half decent offer to leave BA's employment, indeed the industry as as a whole (because there are plenty of less stressful, better paid and better working condition jobs available)......although people are reluctant to change, especially as an Licensed Engineer has put in many years of study and hard work to achieve his (or hers) "Status".
BA's problem is that they do not pay their Engineers nowhere near enough.
There are many jobs available at LHR which are going unfilled .........WHY ? See previous statment.
BA cannot attract sufficient staff willing or able to live within a reasonable distance of LHR.
Easy answer for BA (mis)management..........FORCIBLY move staff from Gatwick to cover the shortfall.......( expect them to travel 600 plus miles a week and force them onto archaic, soul destroying shift patterns) meanwhile many,many flights at Gatwick are delayed or cancelled due to no Engineering cover (ATRs RJs particularly)
In reply to your comments.......
BA Engineers at LGW are fully aware that as the Flights out of Gatwick reduce, then there will be a reduction of maintenance workload.
What we find incomprehensible is the fact that the company is not offering severance.......... There would be many that take up a half decent offer to leave BA's employment, indeed the industry as as a whole (because there are plenty of less stressful, better paid and better working condition jobs available)......although people are reluctant to change, especially as an Licensed Engineer has put in many years of study and hard work to achieve his (or hers) "Status".
BA's problem is that they do not pay their Engineers nowhere near enough.
There are many jobs available at LHR which are going unfilled .........WHY ? See previous statment.
BA cannot attract sufficient staff willing or able to live within a reasonable distance of LHR.
Easy answer for BA (mis)management..........FORCIBLY move staff from Gatwick to cover the shortfall.......( expect them to travel 600 plus miles a week and force them onto archaic, soul destroying shift patterns) meanwhile many,many flights at Gatwick are delayed or cancelled due to no Engineering cover (ATRs RJs particularly)
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: LHR
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anti-ice, it’s very easy to say “work at LHR, engineers at LGW, move engineers from LGW to LHR. Problem solved”.
Moving engineers from LGW to LHR would result in them travelling anything from 40 to 90 miles a DAY, on Europe’s busiest motorway just to get to work. Put that together with an archaic shift pattern (7/3/7/4 earlies/lates) over a period of time you’re going to get a lot of fatigued and stressed engineers carrying out maintenance on aeroplanes YOU and YOUR passengers may end up flying on. If anything goes wrong you won’t care because you won’t be around and the tired engineer will be in the dock with no support from the company. Can you see BA saying ‘Yes Your Honour, all our fault, we made him drive 80 miles a day for a year’? Didn’t think so.
The allowances on offer are only available for two years and would result in just about everyone being out of pocket. I’m not talking a few pounds here. I’m not entitled to relocation so if I don’t want to drive I can rent accommodation in the Heathrow area and this will cost me over £3000 for the first two years and then over £5000 for the rest of my working life.
Engineers can’t be compared to flight/cabin crew. We work different shift patterns. Some crew are bussed from LGW to LHR the night before a flight. Stay in a hotel. Start work the next day and are away for up to 7 days. They come back. Stay in a hotel. Then get bussed back to LGW. It’s not quite the same as driving up and down the M25 seven days in a row.
If BA wants to move all their flights from LGW to LHR then fine. But they can’t expect all their engineers to pack up their toolboxes and move just like that.
There comes a time when people have to decided whether their family/health/life comes before their job. Especially if the job isn’t that great (anymore).
Moving engineers from LGW to LHR would result in them travelling anything from 40 to 90 miles a DAY, on Europe’s busiest motorway just to get to work. Put that together with an archaic shift pattern (7/3/7/4 earlies/lates) over a period of time you’re going to get a lot of fatigued and stressed engineers carrying out maintenance on aeroplanes YOU and YOUR passengers may end up flying on. If anything goes wrong you won’t care because you won’t be around and the tired engineer will be in the dock with no support from the company. Can you see BA saying ‘Yes Your Honour, all our fault, we made him drive 80 miles a day for a year’? Didn’t think so.
The allowances on offer are only available for two years and would result in just about everyone being out of pocket. I’m not talking a few pounds here. I’m not entitled to relocation so if I don’t want to drive I can rent accommodation in the Heathrow area and this will cost me over £3000 for the first two years and then over £5000 for the rest of my working life.
Engineers can’t be compared to flight/cabin crew. We work different shift patterns. Some crew are bussed from LGW to LHR the night before a flight. Stay in a hotel. Start work the next day and are away for up to 7 days. They come back. Stay in a hotel. Then get bussed back to LGW. It’s not quite the same as driving up and down the M25 seven days in a row.
If BA wants to move all their flights from LGW to LHR then fine. But they can’t expect all their engineers to pack up their toolboxes and move just like that.
There comes a time when people have to decided whether their family/health/life comes before their job. Especially if the job isn’t that great (anymore).
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: I dunno
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It all again comes back to representation, at the risk of repeating myself, It all comes back to...... oops.
There may be valid reasons and a genuine need to relocate staff during times of restructuring, but there are also ways of doing it and still retaining the will of the people involved ie change shift patterns to a 4 0n 4 off pattern if 24 hour cover is needed if not go to 3 earlies, 3 lates and 3 off. All have thier merits and drawbacks, but if you have no-one that management take seriously to represent you then you are fighting a losing battle.
Flt Crew would not accept the shift patterns etc that we engineers work and we do not have periods of "discretion", the only reason shift patterns such as 7/3 and 7/4 exist is to have the maximum cover for the least amount of bodies regardless of the fatigue effects of this particular pattern - the bottom line is no representation, no say.
The idea is a good one for a combined representative body but how it could be formed is beyond me. I suppose a start could come from BALPA looking at the merits and perhaps coming up with an idea as they are really the main, if not only truely recognised body.
Anyway said my bit, feel better now good luck at Gatwick.
There may be valid reasons and a genuine need to relocate staff during times of restructuring, but there are also ways of doing it and still retaining the will of the people involved ie change shift patterns to a 4 0n 4 off pattern if 24 hour cover is needed if not go to 3 earlies, 3 lates and 3 off. All have thier merits and drawbacks, but if you have no-one that management take seriously to represent you then you are fighting a losing battle.
Flt Crew would not accept the shift patterns etc that we engineers work and we do not have periods of "discretion", the only reason shift patterns such as 7/3 and 7/4 exist is to have the maximum cover for the least amount of bodies regardless of the fatigue effects of this particular pattern - the bottom line is no representation, no say.
The idea is a good one for a combined representative body but how it could be formed is beyond me. I suppose a start could come from BALPA looking at the merits and perhaps coming up with an idea as they are really the main, if not only truely recognised body.
Anyway said my bit, feel better now good luck at Gatwick.
Join Date: May 2001
Location: South East
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This has not just happened. For the last couple of years we have been losing Engineers to LHR.
Last year people who were to be posted were called in to see Management. The conversation went roughly thus:
Manager:" You are on the list to be posted to LHR. There are positions available in areas A,B & C. If you volunteer we can get you into your preferred area. Where would you like to volunteer to work?"
Engineer:" I would prefer to work in area A"
Manager:" So you are volunteering to transfer to area A?"
Then the management can state that they are not forcing people to move but have lots of happy chappies and everything id hunky dory!
This year the incentive to volunteer is to go on a 4/4 shift - but as the line is due to last only 9 months and they can swap your shift at 7 days notice it's not worth diddley squat.
The main problem is that they are running out of people who want to move. We are in the situation where people being moved are going to have to drive past Gatwick every day to get to LHR. If you saw the story in BA news recently you will see that the people displaced by the closure of BAVS at LGW were offered options. We are back in the situation that the short haul crews found themselves in after the takeover of Dan Air in the Dan Brewin days. In other words a return of the FIFO mentality.
Some Engineers want to leave but it is not the story that they have found another job they want to go to but may have to look for something which will pay less just to get a job. That is why we are asking for the Severence packages which are not on offer to Engineers. Engineering management state that the problem isn't an overall shortage of skilled Engineers due to not training anybody over the last 6 years. They tell you that we have 20 on the PEP programme (the modern day apprenticeship) and hundreds of other young people on training! The PEPs exist (20 where will that get us?) but the others? Who knows who they are. where they are or even what they are training for.
The problem isn't the way that Engineering are being treated. the problem is hoe Engineering are treating their Engineers, a very sublte but very important distinction to make.
Last year people who were to be posted were called in to see Management. The conversation went roughly thus:
Manager:" You are on the list to be posted to LHR. There are positions available in areas A,B & C. If you volunteer we can get you into your preferred area. Where would you like to volunteer to work?"
Engineer:" I would prefer to work in area A"
Manager:" So you are volunteering to transfer to area A?"
Then the management can state that they are not forcing people to move but have lots of happy chappies and everything id hunky dory!
This year the incentive to volunteer is to go on a 4/4 shift - but as the line is due to last only 9 months and they can swap your shift at 7 days notice it's not worth diddley squat.
The main problem is that they are running out of people who want to move. We are in the situation where people being moved are going to have to drive past Gatwick every day to get to LHR. If you saw the story in BA news recently you will see that the people displaced by the closure of BAVS at LGW were offered options. We are back in the situation that the short haul crews found themselves in after the takeover of Dan Air in the Dan Brewin days. In other words a return of the FIFO mentality.
Some Engineers want to leave but it is not the story that they have found another job they want to go to but may have to look for something which will pay less just to get a job. That is why we are asking for the Severence packages which are not on offer to Engineers. Engineering management state that the problem isn't an overall shortage of skilled Engineers due to not training anybody over the last 6 years. They tell you that we have 20 on the PEP programme (the modern day apprenticeship) and hundreds of other young people on training! The PEPs exist (20 where will that get us?) but the others? Who knows who they are. where they are or even what they are training for.
The problem isn't the way that Engineering are being treated. the problem is hoe Engineering are treating their Engineers, a very sublte but very important distinction to make.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: south coast
Posts: 3
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CessnaEng
“The problem isn't the way that Engineering are being treated. the problem is hoe Engineering are treating their Engineers, a very sublte but very important distinction to make”
Very well said. I am sure you will agree the problem can be traced right to the very top of engineering. Many junior/middle managers will tell you in private that they do not necessarily agree with some of the policies of recent years but they will not disagree with them because it is their job to agree with them. What this actually means is that they fear for their own positions. Most of their positions are short-term and their future position depends upon their current (perceived) performance.
Regarding PEPs. Although the company would like to consider them “modern day apprenticeships” this is far from the case. There is much less ‘hands on’ practical work and much more emphasis on academic qualifications. Having spoken to some of them I can tell you that very few desire to become ‘hands on’ engineers. Some simply wish to get their Licences/Degree and pursue more fruitful employment elsewhere and others have management aspirations within BA.
“The problem isn't the way that Engineering are being treated. the problem is hoe Engineering are treating their Engineers, a very sublte but very important distinction to make”
Very well said. I am sure you will agree the problem can be traced right to the very top of engineering. Many junior/middle managers will tell you in private that they do not necessarily agree with some of the policies of recent years but they will not disagree with them because it is their job to agree with them. What this actually means is that they fear for their own positions. Most of their positions are short-term and their future position depends upon their current (perceived) performance.
Regarding PEPs. Although the company would like to consider them “modern day apprenticeships” this is far from the case. There is much less ‘hands on’ practical work and much more emphasis on academic qualifications. Having spoken to some of them I can tell you that very few desire to become ‘hands on’ engineers. Some simply wish to get their Licences/Degree and pursue more fruitful employment elsewhere and others have management aspirations within BA.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Crawley, Sussex, UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Back in 1988 BA had a similar problem when they Merged (Took Over) British Caledonian. They announced to all the B-Cal engineers that their contracts were invalid and they must sign new ones or walk.
Many people signed new contracts and were awarded a golden payment that went some way to compensating them for the loss of a large chunk of their salary that they would suffer on a BA contract.
4th year B-Cal apprentices like myself were told similar stories. Sign and beome a fitter (£20pw more than a B-Cal apprentice rate) or become a BA 3rd yr apprentice on £100pw less.
Following the take over many staff were moved between LGW and LHR without their thoughts and hapiness being taken into account. This was why BA became known as Bad Attitude.
For the following two years (until I could take no more) it was impossible for anyone that was ex B-Cal to get any training or recognition for what they had done.
On the good side, the staff that did not sign new contracts and were told to walk later took BA to court. Having spent 18 months or so contracting around the world, BA were ordered to take them back in their original posts at their original salary with back pay.
Bad Attitude seems to have some back!
Many people signed new contracts and were awarded a golden payment that went some way to compensating them for the loss of a large chunk of their salary that they would suffer on a BA contract.
4th year B-Cal apprentices like myself were told similar stories. Sign and beome a fitter (£20pw more than a B-Cal apprentice rate) or become a BA 3rd yr apprentice on £100pw less.
Following the take over many staff were moved between LGW and LHR without their thoughts and hapiness being taken into account. This was why BA became known as Bad Attitude.
For the following two years (until I could take no more) it was impossible for anyone that was ex B-Cal to get any training or recognition for what they had done.
On the good side, the staff that did not sign new contracts and were told to walk later took BA to court. Having spent 18 months or so contracting around the world, BA were ordered to take them back in their original posts at their original salary with back pay.
Bad Attitude seems to have some back!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Crawley, Sussex, UK
Posts: 49
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bearing in mind it was 12-13 years ago and I left there 12 years ago, I cant remember any names but there were a number of fitters, CLT's and Supervisors from the hangars and one or two from the ramp.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A quick message to all you captains and f/o's at BA, dont forget if theres a defect put it in the book , dont leave it till the end of the day.
support the Gatwick Freedom Fighters .
support the Gatwick Freedom Fighters .