Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Rumours & News
Reload this Page >

IAG: BA restructuring may cost 12,000 jobs

Rumours & News Reporting Points that may affect our jobs or lives as professional pilots. Also, items that may be of interest to professional pilots.

IAG: BA restructuring may cost 12,000 jobs

Old 29th Jun 2020, 09:11
  #1101 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2011
Location: England
Posts: 8
M. Mouse, as you're bringing it up, when PP34 was first discussed, was there an option for all pilots to go to 28 paypoints? I'm pretty sure it was discussed and vetoed!
Icarus1981 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 09:35
  #1102 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: somewhere in the middle
Posts: 249
Like I said, these things don’t come around in a vacuum, but when BA come knocking it does seem that solutions are found that preserve lifestyles of those at the top. When retirement age was increased, there was no “PP29” compromise - those at the top kept the A scale, and everyone that came next was on a B scale. Same with JSS - when it was “discovered” that bidline was broken (debatable), the solution that was pushed (JSS) allowed those at the top to hoover up the “cream” trips, leaving those at the bottom to pick up the dross that’s left (and more of it, as it’s usually low credit stuff too). Vague promises of “you’ll be senior one day” ring hollow for many when you’re burning yourself out working 20% harder at the bottom, and the goalposts keep getting moved anyway.
thetimesreader84 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 10:07
  #1103 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 334
If you signed up to a seniority based airline knowing that you'll be shafted until you work your way up the ladder, you have no right to complain that an airline is enforcing the principles that you agreed to when you joined. The fairest outcome is the MOA being adhered to, to the letter. Otherwise you're essentially agreeing to having your agreements torn up to suit the company whenever they see fit, especially if it's proven to divide the workforce.

Whether or not some of those at the top of the tree should be considering if they really need to bankroll their grandchildren through private school or if buying that second boat in the coming years is absolutely necessary is another matter. I'm sure there's plenty at the top of the seniority list in BA who wouldn't be missed by the company or those who sit to the right hand side of them.
Vokes55 is online now  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 10:25
  #1104 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 20
“The fairest outcome is the MOA being adhered to, to the letter”

The trouble is that the MOA statement referred to is out of date with the law.....
Survival Cot is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 10:37
  #1105 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: somewhere in the middle
Posts: 249
Our MOA says “due regard shall be made to the principle of LIFO”. It doesn’t specify chopping the bottom 350/800/1200 to make room for people to be retrained off dead fleets.

Theres also the redeployment agreement that guarantees us 12 months salary, but BALPA & BA have gone very quiet on that. Seems that some parts of the MOA (like some pilots) may be more easily disposed of than others.
thetimesreader84 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 10:42
  #1106 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2017
Location: Dublin
Posts: 78
Originally Posted by Survival Cot View Post
“The fairest outcome is the MOA being adhered to, to the letter”

The trouble is that the MOA statement referred to is out of date with the law.....
The MOA is loosely worded (something like consideration will be given to the general principle of LIFO).
Anything like Virgin, which was effectively LIFO by fleet, would be easy to defend as in compliance with the MOA wording as that has given some consideration to the LIFO principle. If BA does go with LIFO+ (which as I have said previously I do not have a fairer suggestion) it will be BALPA that have brought them to that position. There seems something morbid in that those at the bottom could end up effectively paying BALPA to have their jobs negotiated away. Let’s hope it doesn’t come to that, and we somehow reach a fair solution of everyone taking a proportionate cut.
The Foss is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 10:43
  #1107 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 680
thetimesreader84, just out of curiosity, how would you have expected this 29 pay point scheme to be implemented? Would it have been immediate pay cuts for everyone, or would it have been pay freezes? Would BA even have been happy with a 29 pay point scale? Do you even know what options were considered? Do you know what the cost to BA of each of the options would have been? The answer to every one of these questions and more, is that you do not have the faintest idea, and therefore you cannot possibly conclude that the selfish pilots made it happen. The pilots were simply presented with a vote, “Do you accept a 34pp scale for new entrants? We as your elected BALPA reps recommend you vote yes.” We all know ballots pretty much always go the way the union recommends, but that does not mean the pilot community is selfish and out to get you.
GS-Alpha is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 10:50
  #1108 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 680
Originally Posted by thetimesreader84 View Post
Our MOA says “due regard shall be made to the principle of LIFO”. It doesn’t specify chopping the bottom 350/800/1200 to make room for people to be retrained off dead fleets.

Theres also the redeployment agreement that guarantees us 12 months salary, but BALPA & BA have gone very quiet on that. Seems that some parts of the MOA (like some pilots) may be more easily disposed of than others.
Will you please share the details of the final agreement with us too, because I have no idea other than a load of rumours which are almost certainly total garbage?
GS-Alpha is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 11:00
  #1109 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 680
These are stressful times for all. I have expected to kiss my career goodbye since the very start of all this, but it is not over until the fat lady sings so to speak. We need to keep calm and carry on. The rumours are just that. It is best to not even read them if they only result in increased anxiety and hatred towards our fellow colleagues. Everyone’s job is precious to them for whatever reason, and each individual’s reason for wanting to hang on to their job is no less equal to everyone else’s. BA and BALPA’s stated position is to save as many jobs as they possibly can, and rightly so! Let’s give them that chance.
GS-Alpha is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 11:21
  #1110 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 334
Originally Posted by thetimesreader84 View Post
Our MOA says “due regard shall be made to the principle of LIFO”. It doesn’t specify chopping the bottom 350/800/1200 to make room for people to be retrained off dead fleets.

Theres also the redeployment agreement that guarantees us 12 months salary, but BALPA & BA have gone very quiet on that. Seems that some parts of the MOA (like some pilots) may be more easily disposed of than others.
But why should people not be retrained off "dead fleets"? I understand BA owns their own simulators, so the retraining cost is being vastly over-exaggerated in some people's minds. Your job title is "first officer" or "captain", not "747 first officer". The argument about making one person redundant and retraining somebody else to fulfill their role won't stand up here.

If you're going to make people redundant by fleet, it just sets another precedent for the future. The cost of retraining every pilot in the future who is bidding off 'dying' fleets to potentially secure their futures, and then having to recruit to fill those vacancies, will far outweigh the cost of retraining a few people now. Or they'll just take away the ability to bid for a new fleet in future. Either way, nobody wins long term.

It sounds like the redundancy criteria is something that should've been addressed by BALPA at an earlier stage, to ensure its fully 'legal' and compliant in the event that something like this happens. I appreciate that nobody saw this crisis coming and BA was meant to be a secure career airline, but it's in the company's interest to keep this as flexible as possible, and BALPA should've dealt with this as soon as it was clear that LIFO alone could face legal challenges.
Vokes55 is online now  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 11:30
  #1111 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: sussex
Posts: 601
Originally Posted by thetimesreader84 View Post
Our MOA says “due regard shall be made to the principle of LIFO”. It doesn’t specify chopping the bottom 350/800/1200 to make room for people to be retrained off dead fleets.

Theres also the redeployment agreement that guarantees us 12 months salary, but BALPA & BA have gone very quiet on that. Seems that some parts of the MOA (like some pilots) may be more easily disposed of than others.
Redeployment agreements are good in the good Times but just where would anyone be redeployed to ?

Better having a target pay Budget where everyone buys in with a pay reduction till the industry picks up.


stormin norman is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 11:31
  #1112 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 680
It sounds like the redundancy criteria is something that should've been addressed by BALPA at an earlier stage, to ensure its fully 'legal' and compliant in the event that something like this happens.
It was, and it is.
GS-Alpha is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 12:03
  #1113 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 20
“it was & it is”

If it is so clear, why is there so much confusion after 59 days of consultation???

“The argument about making one person redundant and retraining somebody else to fulfill their role won't stand up here”

Perhaps not, but will probably be a very different matter in a courtroom.....
Survival Cot is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 12:16
  #1114 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 130
Originally Posted by The Foss View Post
... you now also see “I’ll have to check with the wife” “I’m not sure I can afford to” “I’ll only consider it if it’s fixed at 12 months” etc.
What a horrible mob.
NoelEvans is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 12:39
  #1115 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: London
Posts: 77
3greens,

It is about fairness, and I could say the same about having a bias, so let’s leave it at that and once again best of luck.

Thetimesreader84,

The nail in the head, I agree wholeheartedly. Juniors being used as collateral for the benefit of the few, hence I used the term elitism.

Trying to gaslight their colleagues to believe that this is the best for everyone, but there are people with children and mortgages to pay, whose positions could have been preserved if the guys at the top were willing to take a larger share of the pain.

I honestly feel for you as I can see the emotional distress it causes on my partner, on top of having to keep cool about my own situation.

No longer the best gig in the country, I’m wondering what the UK pilot market will look like in 6 month’s...
Raph737 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 12:47
  #1116 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: england
Posts: 733
What a horrible mob
Noel....I think it is one or two individuals. It is difficult to know on here as we know the type of people that post on forums tend to be a vocal minority.
ralph737 It hasn’t been the best gig in this country for many years. Sadly, if there is one thing that is constant in this industry, it is change. I don’t doubt that new entrants to BA in 10/20 years time will be still complaining about the unfairness of it all. I’m not really sure what they expect when they join?
hunterboy is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 13:12
  #1117 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Shoreham
Age: 68
Posts: 34
I retired in 2016 at 65 without reaching any of my retirement targets and was then informed I needed dental implants to replace the botched dental implants at a cost of £30,000...so I have been working ever since. Younger readers might consider where they will be placed in 30 years when the next crisis will make them redundant at an age when they will never work again. Their money-purchase pension fund will have dropped 35% (like mine) and the pension will be £25K a year. At least the younger guys may be able to work again in the Far/Middle East in the future (I spent 6 years in Saudi Arabia during a previous recession). Add to the equation the usual occupational hazards...divorce, school/university fees, airlines folding. Rather than ASSUMING that the older guys should go quietly because they can afford to you should CONSIDER that they are just as terrified as you about the future. ASSUME makes an ASS out of U & ME. This too will pass...be kinder to each other.
B744IRE is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 13:17
  #1118 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Brexland
Posts: 84
Originally Posted by hunterboy View Post
ralph737 It hasn’t been the best gig in this country for many years. Sadly, if there is one thing that is constant in this industry, it is change. I don’t doubt that new entrants to BA in 10/20 years time will be still complaining about the unfairness of it all. I’m not really sure what they expect when they join?
Nail on the head. Looking from the outside but BA hasn't been a career airline for 10 years at least.

Also I find it hard to justify the junior A320 FOs on here lambasting their senior colleagues about the lunacy of them potentially losing their jobs to more senior LH colleagues. Yes it's retarded, thats why many of us chose not to go to BA, because we knew that was a risk, as did you. If you go after the guys at the top, guess what, by the time you get there it won't look very pretty.
Whitemonk Returns is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 13:20
  #1119 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 95
Better having a target pay Budget where everyone buys in with a pay reduction till the industry picks up.
The buy in is the new part time option- 87.5%. A number of people will happily sacrifice this in order to both save jobs, and have a life outside of work. What people will not do is stomach both a pay cut and part time. I hope BALPA are sensible and understand this, else the new part time options will become a moot point.


Just to put the other side of the LIFO argument, I’ve never quite understood how it would be fair (to use a BA example) why I as a A320 FO should be forced out of the business to make way for a 747 FO who quite clearly in normal times wouldn’t dream of taking up a SH role, who would incur a retraining cost as well as having to pay (stat redundancy) for me to exit. LIFO within a fleet, absolutely, but as soon as you have to start shunting people into training courses, it becomes a lot harder to justify in my opinion (and is borderline illegal anyway - see redundancy bumping).
I do not personally believe BA will use anything other than LIFO+. They can surely sense the destruction it would create long term if they were to go against this agreement. Rightly, or wrongly, it is an agreement we all signed upto on the day we joined. However, I do think there is potential legal recourse in being made redundant, to then have someone else ‘retrained’ to carry out ‘your’ job. Is the job title of ‘pilot’ enough to cover any challenge?

In addition, there are also rumblings of the fact that the CC chairman would be directly in the firing line if BA was to make cuts by fleets. Whether this is having any bearing on proceedings I can only hazard a guess, but it would certainly change most people attitudes if they were negotiating away their own job 🤔

No matter what happens, all that I can hope is that whatever is presented will allow for any pilots made CR to have an automatic RTR.
SkyRocket10 is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 13:30
  #1120 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 72
Originally Posted by NoelEvans View Post
What a horrible mob.
quite a sweeping statement to tar 4500 pilots with that brush, and yet on another thread you bang the drum about wanting to work past 65 and thus denying these junior pilots in distress a much needed employment opportunity. What a horrible thing to do eh!
There seems to be an assumption that all BA 747 captains are 60plus and loaded, well I’m bloody neither. I’ve given 22years to BA and I get a little bit miffed when I get accused of some of the things above. I’ve had numerous changes to contracts, taken pay cuts, been on strike to try and better the pay for all, and yet I’m suppose to say “ oh well, time for me to take one for the team, please make me redundant”. As a collective we will do everything we can, paycuts, part time, etc to keep everyone employed. But if, and it’s still and if, I expect BA to honour our MOA. Otherwise, and I guarantee it will happen, is that they’ll do the same to you when you become “too expensive”.
We all knew it’s a seniority based airline, I knew it back in September 2001, when I was junior and again in 2008 during the GFC. Both times I thought I’d lose my job due to the principle of LIFO, so I know ow exactly how it feels. I was grateful my colleagues took paycuts and productivity increases back then to keep me in a job, and I’m a firm believer in what goes around etc, and this time it’s my turn to take that cut to keep you employed. We haven’t left anyone behind yet, and I hope we won’t this time.
3Greens is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.