BA flies back into profit
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA flies back into profit
From the BBC:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2167581.stm
From a business perspective I would say this is encouraging as these results are better than last year's which were before Sept 11th. Despite the profits are mainly as a result of lowering costs it shows two things:
1. Management are taking the action required to get the airline back to profitability.
2. When business does pick up - likely to be the end of the year IMO - then profits should really start to pick up.
Before anyone flames me, I do not work for BA in any shape, size or form (no pun intended
), I'm merely stating a few facts etc and looking at it from an objective point of view so please don't shout at me because I haven't mentioned why they may be bad management other areas!
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/2167581.stm
From a business perspective I would say this is encouraging as these results are better than last year's which were before Sept 11th. Despite the profits are mainly as a result of lowering costs it shows two things:
1. Management are taking the action required to get the airline back to profitability.
2. When business does pick up - likely to be the end of the year IMO - then profits should really start to pick up.
Before anyone flames me, I do not work for BA in any shape, size or form (no pun intended
), I'm merely stating a few facts etc and looking at it from an objective point of view so please don't shout at me because I haven't mentioned why they may be bad management other areas!
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The news does look promising, but I think there may be trouble ahead, as the Pilots were unhappy with thier pay before sept11, and it has not gone up since then!
All of the Yank airlines paid off thier pilots in a big way at the beggining of last year and I'm sure the BA fly boys were hoping for the same. If they start making extravegant pay claims, without helping to reduce costs, it may get turbulent
Better fasten that seatbelt!
All of the Yank airlines paid off thier pilots in a big way at the beggining of last year and I'm sure the BA fly boys were hoping for the same. If they start making extravegant pay claims, without helping to reduce costs, it may get turbulent
Better fasten that seatbelt!
Join Date: May 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Short term results. BA have lowered their fares that they cant sustain. In the mean time easyJet are about to take on and probably end BA shorthaul all but a few feeder detinations. BA has a long way to go.
How sad for our flag carrier, the airline we should be proud of, the innovator. The airline that can't attract good management. Perhaps our former CEO Babs will take the helm and sort it out.
Good Luck BA- your going to need it.
How sad for our flag carrier, the airline we should be proud of, the innovator. The airline that can't attract good management. Perhaps our former CEO Babs will take the helm and sort it out.
Good Luck BA- your going to need it.
ENTREPPRUNEUR
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: The 60s
Posts: 566
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
London, Aug. 2 (Bloomberg)
-- British Airways Plc said fiscal full-year sales will decline as air travel fails to recover after the Sept. 11 attacks and Europe's biggest airline faces competition from Ryanair Holdings Plc and other low-fare rivals.
Fiscal first-quarter revenue fell 11 percent to 2.05 billion pounds ($3.2 billion) amid a "soft'' market and will remain lower over the 12 months, Chief Executive Rod Eddington said on a conference call. The carrier posted a 54 percent increase in profit for the quarter ended June 30 after cutting costs 15 percent.
"It did very well on the cost side as it cut capacity, but I have mixed feelings about the warning that there will be further pressure on revenues,'' said Martin Borghetto, an analyst at Morgan Stanley who rates the stock neutral.''
British Airways is firing more than 11,000 workers, cutting routes and grounding planes after the Sept. 11 attacks reduced air travel by as much as one-third. It's lowered fares on 108 routes as it loses passengers to low-cost rivals including EasyJet Plc.
The stock fell as much as 10.5 pence, or 7 percent, to 139.5p, after earlier rising as much as 3.3 percent to 155p. It traded at 140p at 12.18 p.m. in London. The shares are down 28 percent this year, compared with a 7 percent drop in the Bloomberg Europe Airlines Index.
Eddington wouldn't say whether the airline expects to post a profit for the full fiscal year, which ends March 31.
"I think what happens on the revenue front will answer the question for us,'' he said. "No one in the industry expects the revenue to recover anytime soon.''
1st-Quarter Net
First-quarter net income rose to 40 million pounds, or 3.7 pence a share, from 26 million pounds, or 2.4p, a year earlier. That beat the 24 million-pound loss predicted by a Bloomberg News survey of analysts.
"These are a very strong set of figures, driven very much by cost reductions,'' said Tim Rees, a fund manager at Clerical Medical Investment, which owns about 3.25 percent of the shares of the U.K. carrier.
British Airways said it cut labor costs by 14 percent, fuel costs by 24 percent, selling costs by 15 percent and other operating costs by 20 percent in the quarter.
The U.K. carrier has cut 7,562 of 10,000 jobs it aims to eliminate by the end of its fiscal year, Eddington said. A restructuring charge of 120 million pounds, which the airline had already announced, will be spread over the rest of the fiscal year.
The disposal of planes and other assets contributed 19 million pounds to first-quarter net profit, compared with 92 million pounds last year, when it sold low-cost unit Go Fly Ltd.
-- British Airways Plc said fiscal full-year sales will decline as air travel fails to recover after the Sept. 11 attacks and Europe's biggest airline faces competition from Ryanair Holdings Plc and other low-fare rivals.
Fiscal first-quarter revenue fell 11 percent to 2.05 billion pounds ($3.2 billion) amid a "soft'' market and will remain lower over the 12 months, Chief Executive Rod Eddington said on a conference call. The carrier posted a 54 percent increase in profit for the quarter ended June 30 after cutting costs 15 percent.
"It did very well on the cost side as it cut capacity, but I have mixed feelings about the warning that there will be further pressure on revenues,'' said Martin Borghetto, an analyst at Morgan Stanley who rates the stock neutral.''
British Airways is firing more than 11,000 workers, cutting routes and grounding planes after the Sept. 11 attacks reduced air travel by as much as one-third. It's lowered fares on 108 routes as it loses passengers to low-cost rivals including EasyJet Plc.
The stock fell as much as 10.5 pence, or 7 percent, to 139.5p, after earlier rising as much as 3.3 percent to 155p. It traded at 140p at 12.18 p.m. in London. The shares are down 28 percent this year, compared with a 7 percent drop in the Bloomberg Europe Airlines Index.
Eddington wouldn't say whether the airline expects to post a profit for the full fiscal year, which ends March 31.
"I think what happens on the revenue front will answer the question for us,'' he said. "No one in the industry expects the revenue to recover anytime soon.''
1st-Quarter Net
First-quarter net income rose to 40 million pounds, or 3.7 pence a share, from 26 million pounds, or 2.4p, a year earlier. That beat the 24 million-pound loss predicted by a Bloomberg News survey of analysts.
"These are a very strong set of figures, driven very much by cost reductions,'' said Tim Rees, a fund manager at Clerical Medical Investment, which owns about 3.25 percent of the shares of the U.K. carrier.
British Airways said it cut labor costs by 14 percent, fuel costs by 24 percent, selling costs by 15 percent and other operating costs by 20 percent in the quarter.
The U.K. carrier has cut 7,562 of 10,000 jobs it aims to eliminate by the end of its fiscal year, Eddington said. A restructuring charge of 120 million pounds, which the airline had already announced, will be spread over the rest of the fiscal year.
The disposal of planes and other assets contributed 19 million pounds to first-quarter net profit, compared with 92 million pounds last year, when it sold low-cost unit Go Fly Ltd.
Last edited by twistedenginestarter; 18th Aug 2002 at 09:11.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Surrey
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Moving in the right direction. There are still a lot of costs that can be brought down (CC, MT etc) but, subject to another event out of BAs control, traffic will pick up and things will improve.
BTW, the new fares will have to be sustainable to compete in the SH market. With the new online search engine and other initiatives, there is no reason for these fares to be uncompetetive.
The major issue BA will have to contend with is the rising frustration of the pilots. There are many valid concerns that need to be addressed namely pay, scope and pensions.
Bottomline though is don't write them off yet you 'schaden Fraude' lot. (Excuse spelling).
BTW, the new fares will have to be sustainable to compete in the SH market. With the new online search engine and other initiatives, there is no reason for these fares to be uncompetetive.
The major issue BA will have to contend with is the rising frustration of the pilots. There are many valid concerns that need to be addressed namely pay, scope and pensions.
Bottomline though is don't write them off yet you 'schaden Fraude' lot. (Excuse spelling).
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
B calm,
it is not just the pilot's who are frustrated with Pay, or pensions, wroking hours etc... All staff should be treated the same.
With out the Pilot the company would be going nowhere, with out the other staff the pilots would be going nowhere. Sort of need each other don't they!?
it is not just the pilot's who are frustrated with Pay, or pensions, wroking hours etc... All staff should be treated the same.
With out the Pilot the company would be going nowhere, with out the other staff the pilots would be going nowhere. Sort of need each other don't they!?
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: UK
Posts: 1,914
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr. C & B, you wouldn't by any chance be 'other staff' would you? Could you explain WHY ALL staff should be treated the same? For years pilots have watched other 'favoured' groups in BA receive special treatment. WHY do pilots HAVE to be treated 'the same' as all these other people now? I'm afraid the BA pilots are the only essential group in BA- nobody else is needed- their services can be bought in. Pilots are authorised by the CAA to operate BA services- if other pilots can be bought in and operating BA planes on worldwide routes in 6 months- well I'll believe it when I see it!
The pilots don't need other staff. There are far too many 'other staff'. Most of us would like to see fewer staff than the giant American airlines with far more planes than BA that have fewer staff than BA. So please stop trying to hang onto BA pilots and hope some goodies will fall to other staff if the pilots are going to get any (of course, that's if you're 'other staff'!)! What is needed desperately in BA is a LOT of ruthless culling- we could lose 20,000 staff and still not reach the efficiency levels of British low cost operators or the big American carriers. Ayling's legacy to BA was to create a giant 'Civil Service' of non-productive and useless staff doing pretend jobs (not surprising considering his background of the Civil Service doing.........), and until BA gets rid of that drag to revenue, it will carry on being crippled and obese and have a lousy share price! Sorry if it hurts, but just compare staff numbers with competitor airlines.
-------------------------------
Skippy tried, Skippy failed, now resign!
The pilots don't need other staff. There are far too many 'other staff'. Most of us would like to see fewer staff than the giant American airlines with far more planes than BA that have fewer staff than BA. So please stop trying to hang onto BA pilots and hope some goodies will fall to other staff if the pilots are going to get any (of course, that's if you're 'other staff'!)! What is needed desperately in BA is a LOT of ruthless culling- we could lose 20,000 staff and still not reach the efficiency levels of British low cost operators or the big American carriers. Ayling's legacy to BA was to create a giant 'Civil Service' of non-productive and useless staff doing pretend jobs (not surprising considering his background of the Civil Service doing.........), and until BA gets rid of that drag to revenue, it will carry on being crippled and obese and have a lousy share price! Sorry if it hurts, but just compare staff numbers with competitor airlines.
-------------------------------
Skippy tried, Skippy failed, now resign!
Last edited by Notso Fantastic; 2nd Aug 2002 at 15:43.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Notso
Exactly who are the these other people in BA who have got much better treatment than the pilots - As a member of the groundstaff of BA who works mainly with other airlines I can assure you that BA flight crew are some of the most pampered people I have ever come across. There are very few companies that supply limo's, nights in hotels if you have an early flight, excessively long stopovers, etc. etc
I think that you would be better off trying to ensure the survival of the company by cutting out some of the spanish practises rather than slagging off other hard working members of staff who are paid considerably less than you.
I do not begrudge any pilot in BA his money - but if there is money in the company available for pay-rises it should be shared amongst all the staff.
We all know that every department in the company is overmaned (including aircrew) and that there are an excessive amount of managers. We are also aware that skippy has failed and should go - bring back Babs perhaps?
So Notso, please try and remain calm and hope for the best.
For years pilots have watched other 'favoured' groups in BA receive special treatment
I think that you would be better off trying to ensure the survival of the company by cutting out some of the spanish practises rather than slagging off other hard working members of staff who are paid considerably less than you.
I do not begrudge any pilot in BA his money - but if there is money in the company available for pay-rises it should be shared amongst all the staff.
We all know that every department in the company is overmaned (including aircrew) and that there are an excessive amount of managers. We are also aware that skippy has failed and should go - bring back Babs perhaps?
So Notso, please try and remain calm and hope for the best.
range
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, been reading too much BA News again have you Jet II.Let me debunk some of the utter garbage you've just spouted:
Exactly who are the these other people in BA who have got much better treatment than the pilots - As a member of the groundstaff of BA who works mainly with other airlines I can assure you that BA flight crew are some of the most pampered people I have ever come across
CSDs(big pay rise), IM staff (superior staff travel), middle managers (superior staff travel, health care, bonuses), etc etc. I'd love to think I was pampered but, staying in the same hotels as other crews I just can't see it. No limo to work like EK, no 6 figure salary like the Americans, no share options like Go, fewer days off and less pay than KL, LH, AF, no 3 crew ops on all transatlantic flights. I could go on.
There are very few companies that supply limo's, nights in hotels if you have an early flight, excessively long stopovers, etc. etc
Limos? Haven't been in a limo since a friends stag night. Do you mean private hire taxis, of the ilk used by many major organisations which set up long term contracts due to the daily requirement for many journeys to and from airports. Or Perhaps you mean a minibus that we often get. How would you prefer us to get to the airport on a nightstop? By train?
Nights in hotels if you have an early flight? Don't remember one of those last time I had the 05:30 CDG. Perhaps you refer to the one off agreement to allow LHR based long haul crew to have the previous night in an LGW hotel if, and only if, they have a very early report the next day. Much the same way as you'd get a hotel from BA if you were sent to work away from your base with an early start the next day. I should think the corporate discount rate on a hotel is a bargain compeared to paying US rates of pilot pay.
Excessively long stopovers? Would you care to specify which? Stopovers are dictated in the first instance by CAA regulated minimum rest times, then by the BA schedule. I'd hardly call one night in New York, two nights in Singapore or 12 hours in Sydney excessive. If somebody finds themselves somewhere for a long time its because BA don't have a return flight for a long time.
Incidentally all these things you describe are pretty much bog standard in most airlines.
I think that you would be better off trying to ensure the survival of the company by cutting out some of the spanish practises rather than slagging off other hard working members of staff who are paid considerably less than you.
Tell that to the tug drivers who earn more than the CEPs. Did you know the average wage in BA is £27000, whereas the starting wage of a CEP is around £19000? Why not specify some of these spanish practices instead of just slagging people off? Care to name any other departments which have produced the same level of productivity increases over the last five years?
I do not begrudge any pilot in BA his money - but if there is money in the company available for pay-rises it should be shared amongst all the staff.
What is this, communist Russia? I can't think of any other company that operates in this way, why should BA? I think you do begrudge BA pilots their money.
We all know that every department in the company is overmaned (including aircrew)
An interesting but utterly wrong misconception. The company know the schedules, the Flight Time Limitations, the retirements, the new hires (none at the moment) and they crank them all into a large supercomputer each year to produce a forecast of how many pilots we need. Flight Ops has the most exact figures for staff requirements of any department, and they have the minimum number of staff they can get away with. Know of any other departments that do this? If we have so many staff, why aren't we letting any go? Why are we desperately short of pilots on the Airbus and the 744? Overmanning is rife in BA, but not in Flight Ops.
Exactly who are the these other people in BA who have got much better treatment than the pilots - As a member of the groundstaff of BA who works mainly with other airlines I can assure you that BA flight crew are some of the most pampered people I have ever come across
CSDs(big pay rise), IM staff (superior staff travel), middle managers (superior staff travel, health care, bonuses), etc etc. I'd love to think I was pampered but, staying in the same hotels as other crews I just can't see it. No limo to work like EK, no 6 figure salary like the Americans, no share options like Go, fewer days off and less pay than KL, LH, AF, no 3 crew ops on all transatlantic flights. I could go on.
There are very few companies that supply limo's, nights in hotels if you have an early flight, excessively long stopovers, etc. etc
Limos? Haven't been in a limo since a friends stag night. Do you mean private hire taxis, of the ilk used by many major organisations which set up long term contracts due to the daily requirement for many journeys to and from airports. Or Perhaps you mean a minibus that we often get. How would you prefer us to get to the airport on a nightstop? By train?
Nights in hotels if you have an early flight? Don't remember one of those last time I had the 05:30 CDG. Perhaps you refer to the one off agreement to allow LHR based long haul crew to have the previous night in an LGW hotel if, and only if, they have a very early report the next day. Much the same way as you'd get a hotel from BA if you were sent to work away from your base with an early start the next day. I should think the corporate discount rate on a hotel is a bargain compeared to paying US rates of pilot pay.
Excessively long stopovers? Would you care to specify which? Stopovers are dictated in the first instance by CAA regulated minimum rest times, then by the BA schedule. I'd hardly call one night in New York, two nights in Singapore or 12 hours in Sydney excessive. If somebody finds themselves somewhere for a long time its because BA don't have a return flight for a long time.
Incidentally all these things you describe are pretty much bog standard in most airlines.
I think that you would be better off trying to ensure the survival of the company by cutting out some of the spanish practises rather than slagging off other hard working members of staff who are paid considerably less than you.
Tell that to the tug drivers who earn more than the CEPs. Did you know the average wage in BA is £27000, whereas the starting wage of a CEP is around £19000? Why not specify some of these spanish practices instead of just slagging people off? Care to name any other departments which have produced the same level of productivity increases over the last five years?
I do not begrudge any pilot in BA his money - but if there is money in the company available for pay-rises it should be shared amongst all the staff.
What is this, communist Russia? I can't think of any other company that operates in this way, why should BA? I think you do begrudge BA pilots their money.
We all know that every department in the company is overmaned (including aircrew)
An interesting but utterly wrong misconception. The company know the schedules, the Flight Time Limitations, the retirements, the new hires (none at the moment) and they crank them all into a large supercomputer each year to produce a forecast of how many pilots we need. Flight Ops has the most exact figures for staff requirements of any department, and they have the minimum number of staff they can get away with. Know of any other departments that do this? If we have so many staff, why aren't we letting any go? Why are we desperately short of pilots on the Airbus and the 744? Overmanning is rife in BA, but not in Flight Ops.
Join Date: Jun 1996
Location: Check with Ops
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand,
He said"overmaned". I assumed he meant we brushed our hair too much......maybe that's where mine went.
As to the rest of your post, if I could support it more than 100%, I would.
He said"overmaned". I assumed he meant we brushed our hair too much......maybe that's where mine went.
As to the rest of your post, if I could support it more than 100%, I would.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: London
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe the short haul fares are sustainable.....
Goforfun:
An interesting point about the low cost fares - I believe that the prices will be sustainable. Firstly because, as B clam says, they will have to be sstainable in order to compete with the likes of easyJet, otherwise they may as well return to BOAC. But, more importantly, they are sustainable as the reduction in manpower means that the costs are lower, enabling a lower price as well as aircraft utilisation increasing from approximately 7 hours per day to 9 hours per day (short haul). Therefore, the prices will be sustainable.
Another point that I believe is a valid point not to be overlooked is that if BA continues with prices similar to those of easyJet, Ryanair and Go etc, but with with customer service that BA is renowned for, then I believe that they will start to attract passengers back from the low-cost carriers. I know that if I had the choice of flying to, for example, Paris with fares the same price, I would go with BA over easy. That doesn't even go into the airports I could use which would be more convenient or other bits and bobs like frequent flyer programmes.
You can see then, that this could then lead to BA's business on short-haul increasing and therefore revenues increasing which would again increase the sustainability of the fares.
Also, I believe that easyJet in particular will start to struggle in the years to come. This is primarily due to its expansion inreasing at too great a rate. If they buy Deutche BA as well as Go I don't think that they will be able to cope with such a large expansion without inreasing its costs base greatly. For example, they will need to utilise all of the easy and Go aircraft a hell of a lot to keep fares low - not to mention the 100 or so new aircraft that may be ordered. With more arcraft comes more paperwork, maintenance, spare parts, pilots etc etc which all adds up to a far larger cost base. On top of that, is the demand really going to be there. In particular, with 100 new aircraft, despite deliveries over several years, will demand really increase that much? I think not, but if it were to come from somewhere then it would come from pax swapping to easy from other carriers, such as BA and BMI for example. However, as I have already mentioned, they are cutting their costs dramatically to come into line with low-cost carriers. Therefore, I don't think that the low-cost carriers will have as easy a time as some may think... (no pun intended)
Food for thought anyway....
An interesting point about the low cost fares - I believe that the prices will be sustainable. Firstly because, as B clam says, they will have to be sstainable in order to compete with the likes of easyJet, otherwise they may as well return to BOAC. But, more importantly, they are sustainable as the reduction in manpower means that the costs are lower, enabling a lower price as well as aircraft utilisation increasing from approximately 7 hours per day to 9 hours per day (short haul). Therefore, the prices will be sustainable.
Another point that I believe is a valid point not to be overlooked is that if BA continues with prices similar to those of easyJet, Ryanair and Go etc, but with with customer service that BA is renowned for, then I believe that they will start to attract passengers back from the low-cost carriers. I know that if I had the choice of flying to, for example, Paris with fares the same price, I would go with BA over easy. That doesn't even go into the airports I could use which would be more convenient or other bits and bobs like frequent flyer programmes.
You can see then, that this could then lead to BA's business on short-haul increasing and therefore revenues increasing which would again increase the sustainability of the fares.
Also, I believe that easyJet in particular will start to struggle in the years to come. This is primarily due to its expansion inreasing at too great a rate. If they buy Deutche BA as well as Go I don't think that they will be able to cope with such a large expansion without inreasing its costs base greatly. For example, they will need to utilise all of the easy and Go aircraft a hell of a lot to keep fares low - not to mention the 100 or so new aircraft that may be ordered. With more arcraft comes more paperwork, maintenance, spare parts, pilots etc etc which all adds up to a far larger cost base. On top of that, is the demand really going to be there. In particular, with 100 new aircraft, despite deliveries over several years, will demand really increase that much? I think not, but if it were to come from somewhere then it would come from pax swapping to easy from other carriers, such as BA and BMI for example. However, as I have already mentioned, they are cutting their costs dramatically to come into line with low-cost carriers. Therefore, I don't think that the low-cost carriers will have as easy a time as some may think... (no pun intended
)Food for thought anyway....
Last edited by FL390; 2nd Aug 2002 at 19:20.
Guest
Posts: n/a
So only pilots are responsible for the ultimate success of BA. Other staff are pretty much non existant at LGW. Not enough baggage handlers (pilots going to do it?) not enough checkin staff, not enough gate staff, not enough ramp staff, not enough pax bus drivers and those that are there are working their @rses off so you can do the flying, so unless you pilot folk plan on doing it all yourselves you'd better believe that someone else is going to have to do it and would like to be paid properly.
Admittedly nobody goes anywhere unless the pilot goes too but you don't do all this yourselves.
To imply that the rest of BA are all hangers on is pretty mean.
If you say your pay and conditions are not as good as any other pilots then I can accept that and believe you all should really be pushing for an improvement but don't start ripping into your fellow workers and imagine that it doesn't offend us.
All staff shouldn't be treated the same because we all have different jobs and different unions to represent us and each union goes to the company with a different agenda for it's members. If pilots haven't got a union with the balls to stand up for their rights then thats their problem.
To the best of my knowledge I haven't worked on a delayed flight at Gatwick because of a lack of pilots or cabin crew. I have had delayed flights because there are no bus drivers, tug drivers, baggage loaders, gate staff, checkin staff, dispatchers, engineers.
...and before anyone starts I never have had nor will have the desire to pilot an aeroplane (much prefer the helicopter idea but can't afford). I have never been rejected by any companies that any of you work for, I enjoy my job (still), I have no sour feelings towards anybody I just don't like it when other peoples contributions are treated with such derision. I work as a purser for BA my salary is approx 13K plus allowances, I get approx 9-11 days off a month...I'm not twenty one and just out of college, this is so that when you all start flaming me you won't have to guess what I do.
Finally I have to agree with zoru.
Admittedly nobody goes anywhere unless the pilot goes too but you don't do all this yourselves.
To imply that the rest of BA are all hangers on is pretty mean.
If you say your pay and conditions are not as good as any other pilots then I can accept that and believe you all should really be pushing for an improvement but don't start ripping into your fellow workers and imagine that it doesn't offend us.
All staff shouldn't be treated the same because we all have different jobs and different unions to represent us and each union goes to the company with a different agenda for it's members. If pilots haven't got a union with the balls to stand up for their rights then thats their problem.
To the best of my knowledge I haven't worked on a delayed flight at Gatwick because of a lack of pilots or cabin crew. I have had delayed flights because there are no bus drivers, tug drivers, baggage loaders, gate staff, checkin staff, dispatchers, engineers.
...and before anyone starts I never have had nor will have the desire to pilot an aeroplane (much prefer the helicopter idea but can't afford). I have never been rejected by any companies that any of you work for, I enjoy my job (still), I have no sour feelings towards anybody I just don't like it when other peoples contributions are treated with such derision. I work as a purser for BA my salary is approx 13K plus allowances, I get approx 9-11 days off a month...I'm not twenty one and just out of college, this is so that when you all start flaming me you won't have to guess what I do.
Finally I have to agree with zoru.
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet II
Your posting displays a TOTAL lack of understanding of any of this issues involved in this debate - I am glad you are on the ground and NO I don't work for BA!
Please don't rise to this sort of junk !
Your posting displays a TOTAL lack of understanding of any of this issues involved in this debate - I am glad you are on the ground and NO I don't work for BA!
Please don't rise to this sort of junk !
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: SE UK
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Someone explain why "Profits exceeded City expert forecasts" yet the share price went down 7%?
In response to what Notso said, we're ALL to blame for our own supposed Archaic agreements, its just that no-one in BA but the pilots can claim to have achieved a 25% improvement in productivity, whilst at the same time shaving millions off their budget.
There may be a number of 'front line' departments who have had their numbers whittled down to unmanageable levels, but their agreements are still cast in the stone that they were carved in 20 years ago. Particularly the Mainline Cabin Crew. Worldwide agreements are an embarrasment to the company.
For the media - A British Airways Stewardess with no title such as Purser or Cabin Service Director, will earn over £600 to operate to Tel Aviv and back on one day. They will then be guaranteed 3 days off for their troubles. Now that's Archaic! Your response, MainFrog2?
In response to what Notso said, we're ALL to blame for our own supposed Archaic agreements, its just that no-one in BA but the pilots can claim to have achieved a 25% improvement in productivity, whilst at the same time shaving millions off their budget.
There may be a number of 'front line' departments who have had their numbers whittled down to unmanageable levels, but their agreements are still cast in the stone that they were carved in 20 years ago. Particularly the Mainline Cabin Crew. Worldwide agreements are an embarrasment to the company.
For the media - A British Airways Stewardess with no title such as Purser or Cabin Service Director, will earn over £600 to operate to Tel Aviv and back on one day. They will then be guaranteed 3 days off for their troubles. Now that's Archaic! Your response, MainFrog2?
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: on the edge
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I imagine BA's management would be rubbing their hands with glee if they happen to read this thread. Pilots slagging off all other staff, groundstaff complaining about their lot. The truth is all BA staff have seen pay and conditions eroded - and having a pop at each other doesn't help anyone. FSAS has hurt some areas more than others, the Waterworld community have suffered cuts of 30 per cent and even 'frontline' sections have lost around 20 per cent of staff, to be honest I don't know the figures for Crew. I work in a 'frontline' Operational area and it has to be said that there are still glaring cases of the 'haves' and the 'have nots'. Our 'Management' have tabled a 'FSAS roster' where its possible to work 42 days with only 7 days off in that time!!! Naturally, its being resisted but this roster could be imposed - How many other areas face this type of work pattern??? At the moment, when people have gone sick, their desks go uncovered or are only covered by 'time off in lieu' - getting overtime is like gold dust and yet we many other allied areas being offered O/T. LGW groudstaff are really suffering, there simply isn't enough staff to cope, the RJ/ATR fleet cannot seemingly operate for more than 10 mins without going Tech and the LGW Engineers are demoralised, are short in number and spares. Working for BA, you will always see, meet or hear people who are better off and worse off than yourself - lets not play into the Mgmt hands and have a totally divided workforce, its depressing enough as it is! Yes, BA needs its pilots but without ground staff support there would be no operation or passengers.
The fairest pay option is an 'across the board' pay settlement, ALL staff deserve it.
The fairest pay option is an 'across the board' pay settlement, ALL staff deserve it.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The 51st State
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA is very much like communist Russia, some people are doing very well but the majority are only just getting by. It is large, system led, archaic, overmanned, undermanned, with too many passengers in the company and not enough on the aircraft.
Nice to know that the Stasi have fostered paranoia and unrest. On the bright side, if and when it goes the gap will be filled by others, who knows, they may even pay more!!
Harry
Nice to know that the Stasi have fostered paranoia and unrest. On the bright side, if and when it goes the gap will be filled by others, who knows, they may even pay more!!
Harry
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: West Country
Posts: 1,271
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand Solo
Good to see that you are back with all your old misconceptions again. I see that you are still trying to say that you should have the same pay and conditions as American flight crew - this does not happen to any other worker so why should it be the case with you - you should compare your T & C's with other BRITISH flight crew.
As for nights in hotels I was talking about the crews who have a 07.00 flight from LHR on a Sunday morning and are bussed up from LGW on the FRIDAY for 2 nights in a hotel (on expenses of course!)
Ecessive stopovers? I returned from IAH last year with a crew that had done a 5 day stopover - most US carries that you like to model yourself on tend to arrive in UK one day and go back the next.
Overmanned departments - as Mainfrog2 has said, there are flights cancelled or delayed regularly for lack of serviceable A/C due to not enough engineers, loaders, check-in etc. etc. but never for lack of flight crew.
As I said before, I do not begrudge the flight crew community any sort of pay rise. I do not even believe that everyone should have the same pay increase but I do believe that if there is money available, other hardworking departments deserve a share - flight crew are not the only people who do any work in BA.
As for Flight crews supposed massive increase in productivity I can tell you that all the senior managers say the same things about their own departments and produce reams of statistics to support their case - it seems that the pilots are the only ones who believe this bull****. Remember statistics can be made to prove anything - especially in BA.
Good to see that you are back with all your old misconceptions again. I see that you are still trying to say that you should have the same pay and conditions as American flight crew - this does not happen to any other worker so why should it be the case with you - you should compare your T & C's with other BRITISH flight crew.
As for nights in hotels I was talking about the crews who have a 07.00 flight from LHR on a Sunday morning and are bussed up from LGW on the FRIDAY for 2 nights in a hotel (on expenses of course!)
Ecessive stopovers? I returned from IAH last year with a crew that had done a 5 day stopover - most US carries that you like to model yourself on tend to arrive in UK one day and go back the next.
Overmanned departments - as Mainfrog2 has said, there are flights cancelled or delayed regularly for lack of serviceable A/C due to not enough engineers, loaders, check-in etc. etc. but never for lack of flight crew.
As I said before, I do not begrudge the flight crew community any sort of pay rise. I do not even believe that everyone should have the same pay increase but I do believe that if there is money available, other hardworking departments deserve a share - flight crew are not the only people who do any work in BA.
As for Flight crews supposed massive increase in productivity I can tell you that all the senior managers say the same things about their own departments and produce reams of statistics to support their case - it seems that the pilots are the only ones who believe this bull****. Remember statistics can be made to prove anything - especially in BA.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Surrey
Posts: 51
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Jet 11,
Flts are not cx due to a lack of flt crew because we are efficient AND flexible. I know the former because I have flown for both mil and other civ companies and can compare.
In terms of flexibility you should watch aircrew running from one a/c to another on LHR T/Rs in order to make schedule.
If we, as an entity, displayed the same amount of inefficiency and apathy as some (note: some!) elements of the Company, you will, indeed, see flts cx due flt crew!
B Clam
Flts are not cx due to a lack of flt crew because we are efficient AND flexible. I know the former because I have flown for both mil and other civ companies and can compare.
In terms of flexibility you should watch aircrew running from one a/c to another on LHR T/Rs in order to make schedule.
If we, as an entity, displayed the same amount of inefficiency and apathy as some (note: some!) elements of the Company, you will, indeed, see flts cx due flt crew!
B Clam