Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Terms and Endearment
Reload this Page >

IAG: BA restructuring may cost 12,000 jobs

Terms and Endearment The forum the bean counters hoped would never happen. Your news on pay, rostering, allowances, extras and negotiations where you work - scheduled, charter or contract.

IAG: BA restructuring may cost 12,000 jobs

Old 29th Jun 2020, 10:43
  #1101 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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 online now  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 10:50
  #1102 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by thetimesreader84
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 online now  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 11:00
  #1103 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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 online now  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 11:21
  #1104 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by thetimesreader84
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
  #1105 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: sussex
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by thetimesreader84
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
  #1106 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 728
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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 online now  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 12:03
  #1107 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
“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
  #1108 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 253
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by The Foss
... 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
  #1109 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Location: London
Posts: 150
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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
  #1110 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: england
Posts: 851
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
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
  #1111 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Location: Shoreham
Age: 72
Posts: 35
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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
  #1112 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2019
Location: Brexland
Posts: 212
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by hunterboy
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
  #1113 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, UK
Posts: 105
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
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
  #1114 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by NoelEvans
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  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 14:37
  #1115 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by GS-Alpha
It was, and it is.
Then what’s the point of this discussion? Then the only objective should be about preventing as many redundancies as possible, as the criteria is already set out in your MOA.
Vokes55 is online now  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 15:06
  #1116 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 190
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I believe that’s why talks have been ongoing for 2 months now..
3Greens is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 15:17
  #1117 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2020
Location: UK
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
Originally Posted by B744IRE
Their money-purchase pension fund will have dropped 35% (like mine) and the pension will be £25K a year.
Haha I have joined BA in my 30s, and £25k/yr pension was what I was expecting if everything went to plan, working full time till 65. (Total BARP fund around £500k @5%). Covid And any other major upsets will reduce it from this figure!
Looking forward, if I am looking at £30k for a new set of pearly whites in retirement, I honestly think I'll be looking at dentures instead. That's after a full career in aviation, 25-30yrs in BA.
No ill feeling B744IRE, it just goes to show how far the industry has already fallen.

Originally Posted by Whitemonk Returns
If you go after the guys at the top, guess what, by the time you get there it won't look very pretty.
I completely agree. I am squarely in the firing line at the bottom of the list. But I could not support going after the senior guys because they are more expensive because hopefully one day I will be in that position! Seniority is hard earned in this company.

To round off, I wouldn't hold a grudge against any senior pilot deciding to keep their position at the expense of a junior. All individual circumstances are different and we need to respect that. But if one decides to step aside as they are already financially secure and maybe not as enthralled with the job/company as they once were, then I am very thankful for the knock on effect down at my end of the list.
White Van Driver is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 15:47
  #1118 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 29
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Originally Posted by Vokes55
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.
Job roles are made redundant so if a fleet is retired e.g. 747, then BA can legally argue that the roles of the people who flew that fleet no longer exist. Barring contractual issues / collective agreements it is the most straightforward type of redundancy to carry out.

Where a fleet stays but a reduced number of roles is need then BA need to prove that the mechanism they used to choose who keeps or loses their job is fair.

Retraining from one fleet to another is where the situation gets more complicated. If BA made a A350 pilot redundant, and retrained a 747 pilot to fill the roll then the A350 pilot may have a case for unfair dismissal. And BA would need to prove that 747 pilot was better qualified for the role despite needing retraining.
Andy D is offline  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 16:14
  #1119 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2016
Location: The EU
Posts: 636
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I would've thought the person who gets made redundant in a way contrary to a signed part of their MOA (assuming, as I've been told above, that BA have a criteria that was renegotiated to be legal and compliant) would have a better case for unfair dismissal.
Vokes55 is online now  
Old 29th Jun 2020, 16:25
  #1120 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Botswana
Posts: 887
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Not only that but can anyone legitimately make a case for fleet as being contractual? It’s mentioned nowhere in my employment contract and, I would imagine, that of every other pilot in BA.
RexBanner is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.