GB Pilots to join BA?
Many, like memphisbelle, seem quite happy at GB, and long may that remain the case. If they can prosper in their own right then so be it and anyone would wish them well.
The problem is that they are doing this prospering in the guise of BA. The average passenger thinks that they are flying with BA.
BA mismanagement seem hell bent on handing out the flying to franchises, subsiduaries and wet leases. Any group seeing their work handed elsewhere are inevitably going to object.
If GB can thrive operating as GB, then no one can complain, but if they thrive by appearing to be BA and at the expense of those working at BA, then they should'nt be surprised to get lots of negative comment and resentment.
The problem is that they are doing this prospering in the guise of BA. The average passenger thinks that they are flying with BA.
BA mismanagement seem hell bent on handing out the flying to franchises, subsiduaries and wet leases. Any group seeing their work handed elsewhere are inevitably going to object.
If GB can thrive operating as GB, then no one can complain, but if they thrive by appearing to be BA and at the expense of those working at BA, then they should'nt be surprised to get lots of negative comment and resentment.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is quite probable, that if BA Balpa and the Scope plan is pressed too far, then GB (when the franchise expires) will decline to renew it (assuming BA does indeed offer a renewal). The present situation seems to be that every new route that GB would like to start gets refused by BA, because Balpa is leaning on BA management with scope threats.
BA will then find themselves with twenty routes being run by a new competitor called GB Airways in alliance with possibly another major airline. There will then be lots of cockpit jobs for BA pilots to fly B737/A320 on those routes, if BA has the resources to finance a dozen extra aircraft. The problem is that it has already been proved that BA cannot make money on these routes by themselves. It would be the road to further disress within BA mainline - twenty new loss-making routes, just to keep the pilots happy flying 'their own' routes in BA colours. They won't even have the slots, because the slots used are currently GB slots, won fair and square and built up over time. Remember that GB goes back to 1931, in its original form, and to 1989 in its present form at LGW.
So, for the militant pilots at BA, I suggest you think through your plan. Will it really provide you with more aircraft to fly, or are you going to cause even more finacial stress to BA, and ultimately destroy your own prospects.
GB may be small fry compared to big BA, but it is not so small (or weak) that it is going to go away.
The best plan for BA pilots would be to get on with making their own outfit successful, and leave their friends in GB alone.
BA will then find themselves with twenty routes being run by a new competitor called GB Airways in alliance with possibly another major airline. There will then be lots of cockpit jobs for BA pilots to fly B737/A320 on those routes, if BA has the resources to finance a dozen extra aircraft. The problem is that it has already been proved that BA cannot make money on these routes by themselves. It would be the road to further disress within BA mainline - twenty new loss-making routes, just to keep the pilots happy flying 'their own' routes in BA colours. They won't even have the slots, because the slots used are currently GB slots, won fair and square and built up over time. Remember that GB goes back to 1931, in its original form, and to 1989 in its present form at LGW.
So, for the militant pilots at BA, I suggest you think through your plan. Will it really provide you with more aircraft to fly, or are you going to cause even more finacial stress to BA, and ultimately destroy your own prospects.
GB may be small fry compared to big BA, but it is not so small (or weak) that it is going to go away.
The best plan for BA pilots would be to get on with making their own outfit successful, and leave their friends in GB alone.
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fiftyfour - well said!
I would go even further & suggest that this could lead to an unprecedented level of co-operation between the GB pilots & managers in an attempt to work around the issue.
I, for one, would be more than happy to see GB prosper in it's right, without having to go begging, cap in hand, to the BA CC.
Maybe it's time for GB to wash their hands of the whole, sorry mess?
I would go even further & suggest that this could lead to an unprecedented level of co-operation between the GB pilots & managers in an attempt to work around the issue.
I, for one, would be more than happy to see GB prosper in it's right, without having to go begging, cap in hand, to the BA CC.
Maybe it's time for GB to wash their hands of the whole, sorry mess?
Last edited by Miss Inform; 29th Aug 2002 at 15:49.
Join Date: Jul 2000
Posts: 20
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Snooky
You are probably aware that the first announcement made on board our aircraft makes it quite clear that the flight is operated by GB Airways, so don't bleat that we prosper in the guise of BA! It is also quite clear on the timetables (that have now disappeared due to BA cost-cutiing!) that we operate the flights we do.
If anything, it is embarassing having anything to do with BA given the complete shambles of inadequate service during the last few weeks with no gate staff, tug crews etc., and still the circus goes on.
I am sure that you are also aware that we started up your Glasgow/Edinburgh routes out of Gatwick for a year, made them profitable and then handed them back to you on a plate! What do you do?, you start making such a loss on the routes that you now have puddle jumper RJ's doing the route!
You lot are just greedy. You just want it all. How the mighty have fallen. Don't begrudge BA giving us routes that are making heavy losses and we turn them into profit. What would you rather BA do, hand the routes to easyJet/Ryanair? At least BA have a strong presence in these regions that we operate to and it costs them nothing! We pay for it. If the situation were reversed and our routes also suffered losses, what would be the response to us asking for the cost of the Franchise to be reduced? I'm sure you know the answer to that!
Let's get one thing clear, we do not get handed routes from BA that are making profits, we get loss making routes and turn them into profitable ones.
You suggest we are spongers, I say get a life and wind your neck in.
You are probably aware that the first announcement made on board our aircraft makes it quite clear that the flight is operated by GB Airways, so don't bleat that we prosper in the guise of BA! It is also quite clear on the timetables (that have now disappeared due to BA cost-cutiing!) that we operate the flights we do.
If anything, it is embarassing having anything to do with BA given the complete shambles of inadequate service during the last few weeks with no gate staff, tug crews etc., and still the circus goes on.
I am sure that you are also aware that we started up your Glasgow/Edinburgh routes out of Gatwick for a year, made them profitable and then handed them back to you on a plate! What do you do?, you start making such a loss on the routes that you now have puddle jumper RJ's doing the route!
You lot are just greedy. You just want it all. How the mighty have fallen. Don't begrudge BA giving us routes that are making heavy losses and we turn them into profit. What would you rather BA do, hand the routes to easyJet/Ryanair? At least BA have a strong presence in these regions that we operate to and it costs them nothing! We pay for it. If the situation were reversed and our routes also suffered losses, what would be the response to us asking for the cost of the Franchise to be reduced? I'm sure you know the answer to that!
Let's get one thing clear, we do not get handed routes from BA that are making profits, we get loss making routes and turn them into profitable ones.
You suggest we are spongers, I say get a life and wind your neck in.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: The Planet Earth
Age: 23
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Numba 54 - come on down !
It makes such a change to read a sensible post. With ref the whole GB/BACE deal, it seems a pity that there is so much dissension between fellow professionals.It is always a predictable flareup when one's skills are disparaged, and it is highly regrettable that it is usually a BA pilot who starts the same old ball rolling.
So, why not be constructive, and work together. Consider the following:
1. It is entirely understandable, and even praiseworthy, that BA do not want to lose work, or see their jobs farmed out to leaner and more profitable wholly owned subsidiaries or Franchisees.
2. It is also highly understandable that BA cannot, under any circumstances, make a profit on some of their routes. (Reasons are probably Waterside based overmanning and incompetence, rather than any misplaced notion of over-paid pilots.)
3. If BA pilots insist on operating the loss leading routes at their own high D.O.C. level, then BA is doomed.
HOWEVER -
1. BACEX and GB etc etc are perfectly placed to make a good return on these same routes. (Whilst we would always hope for a payrise at yearend, most of us are not actually unhappy with the current pay scales, certainly not that we see joining BA as a 'must have' option)
2. BA need pilots. The training organisations of both airlines are perfectly suited to deliver a well trained product, and there is no rational reason I can think of why BA mainline recruitment should not come through the Regions/Franchises. The SOPs will end up being identical, where they are not so already. The Regions/Franchises will arguably get a higher quality of recruit, as younger guys in particular will welcome the career progression available.
3. There is no reason, other than mainline intransigence, why there should not be a two, or even three tier pay scale. One could almost, though I hate the terminology, be considered to be working one's apprenticeship, with no obligation to take it up if one found life in the regions acceptable on a regional rate.
It is regrettable to read Hand Solo, and his militant talk of OUR aircraft and routes. It smacks of far too militant an attitude. They are not yours mate, they belong to the shareholders unfortunately, and given your current shareprice, one can see what THEY think of you. As ever, the only logical, and sensible route is via co-operation, but BA are acting like ......Luddites I think someone said. That's going a bit far, but one can see the "No Surrender" placards waving already. At the end of the day, the customer is king. He would rather fly an Embraer on a route at a reasonable price, than an Airbus at a ridiculous one - whatever the reason for such pricing. So why oh why do we not consolidate, and act together. It is not coincidence that it is always BA who who act aggressively trying to defend their position of ten years ago, rather than trying to innovate. It would be very easy to provide a position which disadvantaged no-one, but enabled the whole system to put the appropriate aircraft on the appropriate route at the appropriate cost - this is not rocket science, and operated by people from one Company, but at diffeent pay rates. Lets face it, there are not very many jobs I can think of which pay the same rate in the Northern Midlands as the same job collects in a London catchment area. Why should the Airline business be any different.
Unfortunately, again to paraphrase an earlier post, BA pilots are behaving in a manner which has been shown historically to lead to the eventual collapse of their Company and/or localised Industry. If you insist on turning lower cost Regional and Franchisees into a BA clone, or even part of BA on the same cost base, then you will have just guaranteed the rise and rise of Stelios and similar. Unfortunately, as ever, when CCs start assuming postures of attack and defence, they are very difficult to retreat from.
Gentlemen, the ball is in your court.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Militant? Moi? The reference to our aircraft and routes relates specifically to the RJ 100 and the routes from the regions. The routes in question were all operated by BAR, and the aircraft in question are the former CFE, now BA aircraft. If, as you say, the losses made on some of these routes are nothing to do with the cost of the pilots, then why can the pilots not stay on and operate the routes? Why are the ex-CFE guys not permitted to remain on their current (inexpensive) payscales and fly out of the regions if they choose to do so? Why are the current BAR pilots not retrained to fly the RJ100, which is unlikely to be more expensive than training the BACE pilots on it (excluding those 146 rated already)? The answer is because politicking is the key factor in the demise of the regions, not operational efficiency, and that is the reason we are suspiscious. To suggest that BACE will always turn a profit on marginal BA routes is pure fallacy. Do you think BACE are making a profit on the late BHX-BRU service, the one so unreliable they've lost the slot for it?
To address a couple of your points directly:
2) I can think of a very valid reason why the regions/franchises can't be used as a training ground. How happy do you think GB would be if they were paying for FO training only to find them being poached constantly by BA? The regions already get recruits from the standard BA pool, how will offering them x years in the regions/franchises attract a better class of candidate? I thought we'd already established there was no question about the calibre of franchise pilots?
3) We already have a multi tier pay scale, LHR at the top, with lower scales for LGW and the regions, with lower scales still for CEPs. The lower you go, the harder you work and for less money? Sound fair to you? Should I get fewer days off, do more sectors and still earn significantly less than my LHR colleagues, even factoring in London Weighting? What about the regional captains who live in the same street as LHR captains but earn less? Where do you draw the line - when the new starters are working a 6 month probation for free? Multi tier pay scales achieve only one thing and that is to drive pay down. I am amused but not surprised that some people have still not grasped this concept and are keen to exert downward pressure on the pay of those trying to get a foot on the ladder.
To address your final comment, nobody has any desire to turn franchises into bloated clones of Waterside, quite the opposite in fact, but we do expect to protect our job opportunities. Theres no economic reason why giving BA pilots access to franchise/regional flying should damage the company, after all Stelios and Cassini pay comparable rates to most of our crew.
To address a couple of your points directly:
2) I can think of a very valid reason why the regions/franchises can't be used as a training ground. How happy do you think GB would be if they were paying for FO training only to find them being poached constantly by BA? The regions already get recruits from the standard BA pool, how will offering them x years in the regions/franchises attract a better class of candidate? I thought we'd already established there was no question about the calibre of franchise pilots?
3) We already have a multi tier pay scale, LHR at the top, with lower scales for LGW and the regions, with lower scales still for CEPs. The lower you go, the harder you work and for less money? Sound fair to you? Should I get fewer days off, do more sectors and still earn significantly less than my LHR colleagues, even factoring in London Weighting? What about the regional captains who live in the same street as LHR captains but earn less? Where do you draw the line - when the new starters are working a 6 month probation for free? Multi tier pay scales achieve only one thing and that is to drive pay down. I am amused but not surprised that some people have still not grasped this concept and are keen to exert downward pressure on the pay of those trying to get a foot on the ladder.
To address your final comment, nobody has any desire to turn franchises into bloated clones of Waterside, quite the opposite in fact, but we do expect to protect our job opportunities. Theres no economic reason why giving BA pilots access to franchise/regional flying should damage the company, after all Stelios and Cassini pay comparable rates to most of our crew.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: SE UK
Posts: 242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What an intractible debate this has become. I have two questions to the GB pilots who have so far contributed to this thread.
As for BACX posters, please read the title of this thread.
- If your date of joining was 'merged' into our seniority list, how would you feel about the whole thing? This has happened before (BCAL), and there's nothing to stop it happening again.
- If BA S/H was merged with GB under the roof of GB management would you feel as aggrieved?
As for BACX posters, please read the title of this thread.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: The Planet Earth
Age: 23
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand Solo - Union Negotiator extraordinaire !
Nice one. I can see how the negotiations between BA and BACC are so protracted, because you can both twist meaning and content of expression so cleverly.
1. I would point out that the CFE routes, when operated by CFE were profitable. Now they ain't. Watching this forum over the last couple of years, it was clear that the 'deal' offered to CFE, did in fact, give most, (but not all, Harry) a pay rise. Conclusion, it was the Waterside addition to DOCs which primarily affected profitablity, as I suggested in my previous transmission. However, it is pretty obvious that if BACE started operating the RJs on their current route structure, under the BACE management and cost base, then these routes would instantly return to profit. You can quote politicking and operational efficiency as much as you like, but the figures relating to cost base (not PILOT costs alone) are the ones that are unarguable.
2. The current BAR guys, AS YOU WELL KNOW, are in fact already being retrained to fly the Rj. They will be collecting a massive supplement above and beyond the BACE blokes remuneration who will also fly it - not conducive to either industrial or flight deck harmony.
3. You use the term "poached" and again, instantly shoot yourself in your flying boot. If we truly all were to be one Company, then there would be no 'poaching', rather a progression - for those who wished it - through the Company's structure. If you have been with BA for a significant time as you quote, you must be aware that am initiation through Highland Division offered a far better balanced and experienced pilot profile than the chaps who transferred straight from Prestwick to the Airbus.
4. With reference recruits from the standard BA pool, you also know as well as I, this is currently a one-off due to management inability to plan properly, and is not a policy. Talk to the recruits, half of them have a weird idea they are here forever, and actually, they're correct, until the next change of mind.
5. In terms of the salary scales, and the differentials, there is a basic fact which has nothing to do with the ostensible difficulty of operating one's type. It is that a large aircraft makes a lot money, potentially than a small one, and the operator, to retain its pilots, is in a position to pay more. To suggest that an ATP pilot, or a J41 pilot is less skilled than a 7474 pilot is insulting - however to expect the same remuneration is ridiculous. This basic concept is transferable to the whole industry, and it is the attitude of BA longhaul with their route cherrypicking, and allowance structure which distorts things. If one were to define an allowance, obviously it is a compensation for missing something, be it a meal, a tea break, having to do a non-standard duty, like watching a fuel gauge during refueling etc. It would be most interesting to ask ANYONE, in any part of the airline industry, whether they actually use their allowances, or expect to turn a profit on them. As you well know, the main difference in earning potential between BA fleets is on sector length. OK, so thats a done deal, but lets not pursue the idiocy.
6. Whether you like it or not, this is a market economy. Plenty of pilots = surplus capacity = lowering of wages. Fortunately, the reverse is true, but not right now. Ignoring a basic law of economics is likely to hand a lot more routes than you like to think about both to GB and to us, it's pretty clear. Market forces dear boy, market forces. Yes, you can declaim stridently about strikes, and bringing the Company down - but........I wonder how many potential strikers and mortgage payers there REALLY are out there? You won't half do a lot for BACE and GB expansion if you go down that road!
7. And finally, protecting your job opportunities? Ah, I see. You seriously expect there to be lots of current, serving BA line guys who want to come and work in the regions? Yeh, right.
Apart from the fact that mixing two dramatically different pay and allowance scales on the same flight deck may just create a bit of an atmosphere, we know you are actually after a scope agreement which will affect BACE dramatically, in every respect. What it will NOT do is affect your BA line guys who will (they think) come and fly with us.
Reading between your lines is easy. You are basically divisive, and want an unrealistic world where everyone is on your package, even where it is unsustainable. All one needs to do is, sadly, look at what has happened to CFE. Marginal pay rises for most, a position at the bottom of your master list (which will only benefit the youngest elements) and a loss leading Company again. Well Done! Could this achievement, do you think, be responsible for the "RJ to the Regions" suggestion in the first place? I suggest BA might have been quite content to have left CFE where it was, making a positive contribution to the overall balance sheet had you not insisted on amalgamation, involving also the dead hand of BA commercial expertise.
Finally, multi tier pay rates DO NOT drive pay down. In fact, the opposite is true, as those on the lower tiers who wish to, try to move up the tiers, maybe to LHR (though why anyone should want to.......). Also, the better paid the upper tiers the better, as the lower tiers are dragged along like a jet pump, in the same way that the BA pay awards have traditionally been used as a benchmark by the rest of the industry. Nothing wrong with that either, and a lot good - but to expect that everyone in a Company gets the top rate lowers your credibility, and makes you a laughing stock with management. Never start a fight you can't win, old sport!, even if you expect a Pyrrhic victory.
The only real good points in this sad and tawdry little mess is that the actions of big BA, are, eventually, the best thing that could happen to BACX and GB and the other franchisees.
Thanks old sport, thanks a lot. I hope you enjoy your retirement watching what you have wrought!
1. I would point out that the CFE routes, when operated by CFE were profitable. Now they ain't. Watching this forum over the last couple of years, it was clear that the 'deal' offered to CFE, did in fact, give most, (but not all, Harry) a pay rise. Conclusion, it was the Waterside addition to DOCs which primarily affected profitablity, as I suggested in my previous transmission. However, it is pretty obvious that if BACE started operating the RJs on their current route structure, under the BACE management and cost base, then these routes would instantly return to profit. You can quote politicking and operational efficiency as much as you like, but the figures relating to cost base (not PILOT costs alone) are the ones that are unarguable.
2. The current BAR guys, AS YOU WELL KNOW, are in fact already being retrained to fly the Rj. They will be collecting a massive supplement above and beyond the BACE blokes remuneration who will also fly it - not conducive to either industrial or flight deck harmony.
3. You use the term "poached" and again, instantly shoot yourself in your flying boot. If we truly all were to be one Company, then there would be no 'poaching', rather a progression - for those who wished it - through the Company's structure. If you have been with BA for a significant time as you quote, you must be aware that am initiation through Highland Division offered a far better balanced and experienced pilot profile than the chaps who transferred straight from Prestwick to the Airbus.
4. With reference recruits from the standard BA pool, you also know as well as I, this is currently a one-off due to management inability to plan properly, and is not a policy. Talk to the recruits, half of them have a weird idea they are here forever, and actually, they're correct, until the next change of mind.
5. In terms of the salary scales, and the differentials, there is a basic fact which has nothing to do with the ostensible difficulty of operating one's type. It is that a large aircraft makes a lot money, potentially than a small one, and the operator, to retain its pilots, is in a position to pay more. To suggest that an ATP pilot, or a J41 pilot is less skilled than a 7474 pilot is insulting - however to expect the same remuneration is ridiculous. This basic concept is transferable to the whole industry, and it is the attitude of BA longhaul with their route cherrypicking, and allowance structure which distorts things. If one were to define an allowance, obviously it is a compensation for missing something, be it a meal, a tea break, having to do a non-standard duty, like watching a fuel gauge during refueling etc. It would be most interesting to ask ANYONE, in any part of the airline industry, whether they actually use their allowances, or expect to turn a profit on them. As you well know, the main difference in earning potential between BA fleets is on sector length. OK, so thats a done deal, but lets not pursue the idiocy.
6. Whether you like it or not, this is a market economy. Plenty of pilots = surplus capacity = lowering of wages. Fortunately, the reverse is true, but not right now. Ignoring a basic law of economics is likely to hand a lot more routes than you like to think about both to GB and to us, it's pretty clear. Market forces dear boy, market forces. Yes, you can declaim stridently about strikes, and bringing the Company down - but........I wonder how many potential strikers and mortgage payers there REALLY are out there? You won't half do a lot for BACE and GB expansion if you go down that road!
7. And finally, protecting your job opportunities? Ah, I see. You seriously expect there to be lots of current, serving BA line guys who want to come and work in the regions? Yeh, right.
Apart from the fact that mixing two dramatically different pay and allowance scales on the same flight deck may just create a bit of an atmosphere, we know you are actually after a scope agreement which will affect BACE dramatically, in every respect. What it will NOT do is affect your BA line guys who will (they think) come and fly with us.
Reading between your lines is easy. You are basically divisive, and want an unrealistic world where everyone is on your package, even where it is unsustainable. All one needs to do is, sadly, look at what has happened to CFE. Marginal pay rises for most, a position at the bottom of your master list (which will only benefit the youngest elements) and a loss leading Company again. Well Done! Could this achievement, do you think, be responsible for the "RJ to the Regions" suggestion in the first place? I suggest BA might have been quite content to have left CFE where it was, making a positive contribution to the overall balance sheet had you not insisted on amalgamation, involving also the dead hand of BA commercial expertise.
Finally, multi tier pay rates DO NOT drive pay down. In fact, the opposite is true, as those on the lower tiers who wish to, try to move up the tiers, maybe to LHR (though why anyone should want to.......). Also, the better paid the upper tiers the better, as the lower tiers are dragged along like a jet pump, in the same way that the BA pay awards have traditionally been used as a benchmark by the rest of the industry. Nothing wrong with that either, and a lot good - but to expect that everyone in a Company gets the top rate lowers your credibility, and makes you a laughing stock with management. Never start a fight you can't win, old sport!, even if you expect a Pyrrhic victory.
The only real good points in this sad and tawdry little mess is that the actions of big BA, are, eventually, the best thing that could happen to BACX and GB and the other franchisees.
Thanks old sport, thanks a lot. I hope you enjoy your retirement watching what you have wrought!
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: uk
Posts: 59
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I can't, for the life of me, understand the twisted logic applied to various arguments dealt with in this thread by certain individuals.
My only assumption is that the human nature ensures that self- preservation overides everything else and that to various individuals, the fate of others need only be addressed once 'I'm allright Jack'.
Take 'Big Airline'. They decide that they cannot continue to operate a route profitably because their overhead structure is too great. They have one of two options, give it up and let the free market sort it out or as BA have done, ask their subsiduary/franchisee company to take on the route. This ensures that they continue to maintain visible market presence and in the end profits are kept in house.
Now, of course there are employees within the subsiduary/franchisee who are looking to move on to bigger and better things. But there are many, for whom the company they work for, is their long term career, they are happy with their lot. They prefer to work for less money than company BA if it means that they get to live in the regions, enjoy their lifestyle and have a modicum of job security. An absurd concept I realise!
Of course the problem comes when employees of company BA see their jobs or lifestyle about to change because of the state of their company. They either wish to; a) prevent the subsiduary/franchisee from operating that type of aircraft or b) insist that they be sub-contracted to work for the subsiduary/ franchisee maintaining their current conditions of service. That's my route and aircraft they cry! That's my job they shout! all true, it was!! but company BA is in trouble and has to off-load these loss making routes. No doubt, if the subsiduary/franchisee found the routes loss making then they too would off-load them, with all the ensueing employee turmoil that would then create.
In a), BA could do this, but I do not see it preventing the route loss. It would only ensure that the route was lost to a company outside the group. In b) we now have subsiduary/franchisee employees working alongside ex-BA employees, on substantially better terms and conditions. This ;- a) Create's all the obvious dis-content one would expect. b) ensures that the sub./fran. has to contend with higher overheads.
Who says that only flight crew/cabin crew should be given the opportunity to jump on the leaner sub./fran. bandwagon, why not managers/staff from waterside, wheren't those their routes and aircraft as well.
Oh hell! Now the sub./fran.bandwagon is getting too cost base heavy and is loosing money. Oh well! no loss ( except for the original employees ), we are really BA, with that higher BA seniority and therefore go back to BA.
'Im alright Jack!'
or mabey my route will be given to someone else who will be forced to employ me. It is after all, my route?
Don't mis-read this post as anti-BA, it is far from it, my livelyhood depends on their continuing to succeed. Even so I'd better get to the fox-hole, I sense incoming!!
My only assumption is that the human nature ensures that self- preservation overides everything else and that to various individuals, the fate of others need only be addressed once 'I'm allright Jack'.
Take 'Big Airline'. They decide that they cannot continue to operate a route profitably because their overhead structure is too great. They have one of two options, give it up and let the free market sort it out or as BA have done, ask their subsiduary/franchisee company to take on the route. This ensures that they continue to maintain visible market presence and in the end profits are kept in house.
Now, of course there are employees within the subsiduary/franchisee who are looking to move on to bigger and better things. But there are many, for whom the company they work for, is their long term career, they are happy with their lot. They prefer to work for less money than company BA if it means that they get to live in the regions, enjoy their lifestyle and have a modicum of job security. An absurd concept I realise!
Of course the problem comes when employees of company BA see their jobs or lifestyle about to change because of the state of their company. They either wish to; a) prevent the subsiduary/franchisee from operating that type of aircraft or b) insist that they be sub-contracted to work for the subsiduary/ franchisee maintaining their current conditions of service. That's my route and aircraft they cry! That's my job they shout! all true, it was!! but company BA is in trouble and has to off-load these loss making routes. No doubt, if the subsiduary/franchisee found the routes loss making then they too would off-load them, with all the ensueing employee turmoil that would then create.
In a), BA could do this, but I do not see it preventing the route loss. It would only ensure that the route was lost to a company outside the group. In b) we now have subsiduary/franchisee employees working alongside ex-BA employees, on substantially better terms and conditions. This ;- a) Create's all the obvious dis-content one would expect. b) ensures that the sub./fran. has to contend with higher overheads.
Who says that only flight crew/cabin crew should be given the opportunity to jump on the leaner sub./fran. bandwagon, why not managers/staff from waterside, wheren't those their routes and aircraft as well.
Oh hell! Now the sub./fran.bandwagon is getting too cost base heavy and is loosing money. Oh well! no loss ( except for the original employees ), we are really BA, with that higher BA seniority and therefore go back to BA.
'Im alright Jack!'
or mabey my route will be given to someone else who will be forced to employ me. It is after all, my route?
Don't mis-read this post as anti-BA, it is far from it, my livelyhood depends on their continuing to succeed. Even so I'd better get to the fox-hole, I sense incoming!!
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Memphisbelle
Made the LGW-EDI route profitable? All by yourselves?
That must have been difficult, considering the considerable seat demand on the domestic sectors.
What's your next challenge?
Mike Mercury
From your distant planet you will note that share price is largely irrelevant unless you are a daytrader.
The opinions of a few market makers clad in red braces affect the short term share price. It is the long term trend that is of import.
Revenue (bookings) is what drives an airline, not share price.
Furthermore, you say <To suggest that an ATP pilot, or a J41 pilot is less skilled than a 7474 pilot is insulting - however to expect the same remuneration is ridiculous. >
Why ridiculous? It could be argued that an ultra short-haul pilot is exposed to take-off & landing far more frequently than his long-haul cousin, and should be remunerated more. You sound as if you are falling into the trap of thinking that pilot pay has very much to do with airline running costs. In a one-horse outfit maybe, but not in an airline of any size.
Our pay is a drop in the ocean of costs of a substantial airline. Our collective aim here should be to drive UP everyone's T&C's - not to drag it all down where management want it.
Thought: - perhaps you are management?
Finally: you appear to contradict your own argument - a bit steamed up maybe?
<Ah, I see. You seriously expect there to be lots of current, serving BA line guys who want to come and work in the regions? Yeh, right.>
then in the next para:
<those on the lower tiers who wish to, try to move up the tiers, maybe to LHR (though why anyone should want to.......>
So only non-BA pilots wish to work in the regions?
FYI current LHR BA pilots cannot now come to the regions. Only current BAR pilots could bid to stay and fly the RJ. Some did, plenty more didn't.
For those bleating about differentials. It's a fact of life, bills have to be paid and if it is offered then you cannot blame individuals for at least considering it.
There is a peculiar airborne disease evident on this thread. Closely linked to envy, it sits uneasily in a website designed to be for the benefit of all professional pilots.
Those of you here who are running down the good fortune of others whom you perceive to have better terms & conditions than yourselves should maybe re-examine your postings. Ask yourselves how management will feel when they read your willingness to give so much hard-fought territory away due to this peculiarly British disease.
I bet they're splitting their sides.
Made the LGW-EDI route profitable? All by yourselves?
That must have been difficult, considering the considerable seat demand on the domestic sectors.
What's your next challenge?
Mike Mercury
From your distant planet you will note that share price is largely irrelevant unless you are a daytrader.
The opinions of a few market makers clad in red braces affect the short term share price. It is the long term trend that is of import.
Revenue (bookings) is what drives an airline, not share price.
Furthermore, you say <To suggest that an ATP pilot, or a J41 pilot is less skilled than a 7474 pilot is insulting - however to expect the same remuneration is ridiculous. >
Why ridiculous? It could be argued that an ultra short-haul pilot is exposed to take-off & landing far more frequently than his long-haul cousin, and should be remunerated more. You sound as if you are falling into the trap of thinking that pilot pay has very much to do with airline running costs. In a one-horse outfit maybe, but not in an airline of any size.
Our pay is a drop in the ocean of costs of a substantial airline. Our collective aim here should be to drive UP everyone's T&C's - not to drag it all down where management want it.
Thought: - perhaps you are management?
Finally: you appear to contradict your own argument - a bit steamed up maybe?
<Ah, I see. You seriously expect there to be lots of current, serving BA line guys who want to come and work in the regions? Yeh, right.>
then in the next para:
<those on the lower tiers who wish to, try to move up the tiers, maybe to LHR (though why anyone should want to.......>
So only non-BA pilots wish to work in the regions?
FYI current LHR BA pilots cannot now come to the regions. Only current BAR pilots could bid to stay and fly the RJ. Some did, plenty more didn't.
For those bleating about differentials. It's a fact of life, bills have to be paid and if it is offered then you cannot blame individuals for at least considering it.
There is a peculiar airborne disease evident on this thread. Closely linked to envy, it sits uneasily in a website designed to be for the benefit of all professional pilots.
Those of you here who are running down the good fortune of others whom you perceive to have better terms & conditions than yourselves should maybe re-examine your postings. Ask yourselves how management will feel when they read your willingness to give so much hard-fought territory away due to this peculiarly British disease.
I bet they're splitting their sides.
Last edited by overstress; 29th Aug 2002 at 22:58.
Cor.
Firstly, can I correct a factual inaccuracy above. GB's operations on the Gatwick-Edinburgh route (a nightstop, if I remember rightly) were undertaken on a wet-lease basis for BA Gatwick, i.e. at BA Gatwick's commercial risk. Without wishing to detract in any way from the validity of a number of the points of view expressed here, Memphisbelle, I'm afraid that this one simply cannot stand! BA's presence on the Gatwick-Edinburgh route stands or falls, and always has, on the basis of commercial decisions and cost bases determined by EOG.
I think we are getting a little too tied up in one particular aspect of the debate here. I know the topic title is about GB pilots but the aircrew remuneration and working practices at BA (by which I mean both flight and cabin crew) are part of a wider problem - not the sole decisive factor - which enable GB to make profits on routes where BA cannot. I fully subscribe to fiftyfour's fine logic earlier in that ceasing the current franchise arrangement cannot be in anyone's interests, least of all the customers who keep all of us in a job in case some of you hadn't noticed.
Instead of a lengthy-running internecine feud between pilots who all fly aircraft with British Airways down the side, has anyone actually bothered to consider (let alone tackle) the problem at the root of all of this - BA's costbase? It will take a concerted effort from everyone in the company (including the pilots) to sort the tangled web of arrangements, agreements, contracts and problems built up over years of relationships with employees, suppliers and customers alike to get that business onto a sound footing. There ain't no sign of that effort starting either at the top or bottom of the ladder right now and that's where I think you ought to be concentrating the venom.
Firstly, can I correct a factual inaccuracy above. GB's operations on the Gatwick-Edinburgh route (a nightstop, if I remember rightly) were undertaken on a wet-lease basis for BA Gatwick, i.e. at BA Gatwick's commercial risk. Without wishing to detract in any way from the validity of a number of the points of view expressed here, Memphisbelle, I'm afraid that this one simply cannot stand! BA's presence on the Gatwick-Edinburgh route stands or falls, and always has, on the basis of commercial decisions and cost bases determined by EOG.
I think we are getting a little too tied up in one particular aspect of the debate here. I know the topic title is about GB pilots but the aircrew remuneration and working practices at BA (by which I mean both flight and cabin crew) are part of a wider problem - not the sole decisive factor - which enable GB to make profits on routes where BA cannot. I fully subscribe to fiftyfour's fine logic earlier in that ceasing the current franchise arrangement cannot be in anyone's interests, least of all the customers who keep all of us in a job in case some of you hadn't noticed.
Instead of a lengthy-running internecine feud between pilots who all fly aircraft with British Airways down the side, has anyone actually bothered to consider (let alone tackle) the problem at the root of all of this - BA's costbase? It will take a concerted effort from everyone in the company (including the pilots) to sort the tangled web of arrangements, agreements, contracts and problems built up over years of relationships with employees, suppliers and customers alike to get that business onto a sound footing. There ain't no sign of that effort starting either at the top or bottom of the ladder right now and that's where I think you ought to be concentrating the venom.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mike Mercury - my genuine congratulations! Firstly because you have managed to break airrage's record for most verbose posting on PPRuNe, and secondly because in my five years of PPRuNeing yours is the first post I've had to print out in order to digest and respond to. I'll spare all other readers the misery of scrolling up and down reading yourpost, but here's a response to your points:
1) CFE were profitable before the merger, but that was also before the economic downturn hit and before 911. BACE are not going to pick up any route previously operated by CFE so your point is irrelevant, nor are BACE currently profitable.
2) Currently nobody in BAR is being retrained to fly the RJ. Yes they will get a supplement, its the price BA pay for our agreement to allow you to fly BA RJs. If we hadn't agreed you wouldn't get the RJs, end of story. Deal with it.
3) In whose opinion did Highland Division produce a better and more experiencedpilot? Yes, the HD guys kne how to operate an ATP outside of controlled airspace but we dont really need that in a jet environment. I fly with many capable and respected colleagues, some flew ATPs, some have flown nothing smaller than a 757. All equally professional and capable. Its not the aircraft, its what you do with it.
4) When I said 'Regional recruitment' I referred to the BA regional bases of MAN and BHX. No reference was inferred to any BACE base. Current recruitment to BACE is indeed a one-off event.
5) You refer to 'BA longhaul with their route cherrypicking'. Would you care to elaborate on this in any way which provides meaning? Long haul isn't franchised, what cherrypicking? As for 'allowances', it has been stated previously (on this thread or the BA pay offer thread) that allowances exist as part of a historical throwback to the nationalised days when it was a convenient means to increase pay without triggering a rash of claims by other workers for an identical pay rise. Historically allowances have been accepted as part of our pay, but I would be happy to renounce allowances for an equivalent basic pay rise.
6) What pilot surplus? As for the the number of potential strikers within BA, you have NO IDEA WHATSOEVER of the current level of anger amongst BA flight crew. If we go out on strike, we will win, no ifs, no buts, and there'll be no benefit for anyone but BA flight crew if were forced down that route.
7)Well at least you've displayed your total ignorance of BA. The vast majority of BAR Captains wish to remain in the regions and seniority for regional commands has gone through the roof. Clearly there is significant demand to work in the regions. Frankly I don't care what you think about the pay differential for the seconded BA mainline crews. If you don't like it then don't fly the RJ.
As to your final comment on multi tier pay rates, well you've really excelled yourself here. I quote directly:
the better paid the upper tiers the better, as the lower tiers are dragged along like a jet pump, in the same way that the BA pay awards have traditionally been used as a benchmark by the rest of the industry
Yet there you are proposing the introduction of lower tier pay just so it can be dragged up to higher tier rates. BA used to have perfectly reasonable, seperate rates of Prop pay and Jet pay, but now you'd like to create lots of lower tiers so that even more people can be shafted. Great idea. Rest assured if it all goes tits up then it certainly will not be the best thing that could happen to BACX, no more than Swissairs bankruptcy helped Crossair.
Thanks to anyone who could actually be bothered to read this post, I know I gve up on this thread a long time ago.
1) CFE were profitable before the merger, but that was also before the economic downturn hit and before 911. BACE are not going to pick up any route previously operated by CFE so your point is irrelevant, nor are BACE currently profitable.
2) Currently nobody in BAR is being retrained to fly the RJ. Yes they will get a supplement, its the price BA pay for our agreement to allow you to fly BA RJs. If we hadn't agreed you wouldn't get the RJs, end of story. Deal with it.
3) In whose opinion did Highland Division produce a better and more experiencedpilot? Yes, the HD guys kne how to operate an ATP outside of controlled airspace but we dont really need that in a jet environment. I fly with many capable and respected colleagues, some flew ATPs, some have flown nothing smaller than a 757. All equally professional and capable. Its not the aircraft, its what you do with it.
4) When I said 'Regional recruitment' I referred to the BA regional bases of MAN and BHX. No reference was inferred to any BACE base. Current recruitment to BACE is indeed a one-off event.
5) You refer to 'BA longhaul with their route cherrypicking'. Would you care to elaborate on this in any way which provides meaning? Long haul isn't franchised, what cherrypicking? As for 'allowances', it has been stated previously (on this thread or the BA pay offer thread) that allowances exist as part of a historical throwback to the nationalised days when it was a convenient means to increase pay without triggering a rash of claims by other workers for an identical pay rise. Historically allowances have been accepted as part of our pay, but I would be happy to renounce allowances for an equivalent basic pay rise.
6) What pilot surplus? As for the the number of potential strikers within BA, you have NO IDEA WHATSOEVER of the current level of anger amongst BA flight crew. If we go out on strike, we will win, no ifs, no buts, and there'll be no benefit for anyone but BA flight crew if were forced down that route.
7)Well at least you've displayed your total ignorance of BA. The vast majority of BAR Captains wish to remain in the regions and seniority for regional commands has gone through the roof. Clearly there is significant demand to work in the regions. Frankly I don't care what you think about the pay differential for the seconded BA mainline crews. If you don't like it then don't fly the RJ.
As to your final comment on multi tier pay rates, well you've really excelled yourself here. I quote directly:
the better paid the upper tiers the better, as the lower tiers are dragged along like a jet pump, in the same way that the BA pay awards have traditionally been used as a benchmark by the rest of the industry
Yet there you are proposing the introduction of lower tier pay just so it can be dragged up to higher tier rates. BA used to have perfectly reasonable, seperate rates of Prop pay and Jet pay, but now you'd like to create lots of lower tiers so that even more people can be shafted. Great idea. Rest assured if it all goes tits up then it certainly will not be the best thing that could happen to BACX, no more than Swissairs bankruptcy helped Crossair.
Thanks to anyone who could actually be bothered to read this post, I know I gve up on this thread a long time ago.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Ireland
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
More BA wallys.
It would make me laugh if it weren't so sad, and if I weren't a part of your Company now.
I think the guy may have been referring to the seniority route cherrypicking which goes on in BA longhaul.
However, what does come to mind, and is more to do with us than GB is Scope. Since this thread has become the usual slanging match between those divinely qualified BA chappies, I shall start another one.
Congrats to the dude, one of the few who make sense, well said mate, but I do wish you were wrong!
It would make me laugh if it weren't so sad, and if I weren't a part of your Company now.
I think the guy may have been referring to the seniority route cherrypicking which goes on in BA longhaul.
However, what does come to mind, and is more to do with us than GB is Scope. Since this thread has become the usual slanging match between those divinely qualified BA chappies, I shall start another one.
Congrats to the dude, one of the few who make sense, well said mate, but I do wish you were wrong!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wow, I havent visited the RP thread for a while, mainly since the New In-house Forums provide a Platform free of wind-up merchants and managers attempting divide and rule tactics(no surely not). It is funny how this division has conveniently reared it's ugly head at a time when BALPA are getting increasingly militant and finally getting their act together with regard BA Pay Negotiations, coincedence ?
How pathetic to boast that you can do a job an get paid less for it, are you serious ? Hell I could work for free but I wouldn't want to and I certainly would hold it as an aspiration.
Scope is not about just protecting BA jobs. The future of every Pilot world-wide is under thraeat. A long-term solution stable solution is not ever going to be acheived if we start underbidding each other for jobs. There will always be someone junior/less experieneced willing to do it for less, including future autopilots. It doesn't mean it's safe however and Airline Management in their efforts to preserve their own expensive and non-productive jobs will push things down to the lowest common denominator. They would replace us all with monkeys if they thought they could get away with it.
For those who benefit this time, beware because if the line breaks down now, your turn will be next. They will either force you to take even less pay/work harder or they will find someone else in the world who will. Do not laugh at the struggles of BA Pilots just because they have been the first to feel these Global Tremours over the last decade and certainly don't wish that they fail at securing a Scope deal because that will leave you all WIDE OPEN in the future. BALPA are fighting the corner the best they can by focussing on the areas where they have the most resources to do so. If the center of the front falls what happens to the weaker flanks ???
BA's strife has had little to do with the current Pilot workforce(over 1/3rd of which on B-Scales, and the other 2/3rds earning the same in BA after decades of loyalty, as low-cost Pilot's after just a couple of years). The agressive response some here receive from implying otherwise is out of frustration that this Reality BA Pilots have had to endure being first in the firing line. Do not believe this is a BA Company Problem, all Airline's management will not stop their attack on Pilots T&C's at the collapse of BA pilots. Try to look from beyond your current uniform Colour and try to see that BA Pilots are the first to raise a stink not because we are all Inefficient Spoilt Crybabies but because we have been under threat from these issues for much longer, the very same issues that will soon work against all Pilots if we don't unite now.
We all have more in Common as Professional Flying Comrades than with any management structure no matter how caring or efficient they may be compared to BA's. BA Pilots are no less Professional or Inefficient than any other outfit's Pilots but are bearing the full force of taking off OVERWEIGHT down the back for years. Don't let them divide us Pilots. who really are the only ones who fully understand the job we do.
This is not a "BA ISOLATED PROBLEM" caused by "EXPENSIVE INEFFICIENT" Pilots(just ask any recent BA DEP's you might know personally if their Pre-conceived Pre-joining Nirvana-image about being an Overpaid Underworked BA Pilots match the Reality once in) but we are first to be attacked. Be careful what you wish for, you might get it sooner than you had wished and miss the days when BA Pilots were around to take all the FLAK !!!!!!
How pathetic to boast that you can do a job an get paid less for it, are you serious ? Hell I could work for free but I wouldn't want to and I certainly would hold it as an aspiration.
Scope is not about just protecting BA jobs. The future of every Pilot world-wide is under thraeat. A long-term solution stable solution is not ever going to be acheived if we start underbidding each other for jobs. There will always be someone junior/less experieneced willing to do it for less, including future autopilots. It doesn't mean it's safe however and Airline Management in their efforts to preserve their own expensive and non-productive jobs will push things down to the lowest common denominator. They would replace us all with monkeys if they thought they could get away with it.
For those who benefit this time, beware because if the line breaks down now, your turn will be next. They will either force you to take even less pay/work harder or they will find someone else in the world who will. Do not laugh at the struggles of BA Pilots just because they have been the first to feel these Global Tremours over the last decade and certainly don't wish that they fail at securing a Scope deal because that will leave you all WIDE OPEN in the future. BALPA are fighting the corner the best they can by focussing on the areas where they have the most resources to do so. If the center of the front falls what happens to the weaker flanks ???
BA's strife has had little to do with the current Pilot workforce(over 1/3rd of which on B-Scales, and the other 2/3rds earning the same in BA after decades of loyalty, as low-cost Pilot's after just a couple of years). The agressive response some here receive from implying otherwise is out of frustration that this Reality BA Pilots have had to endure being first in the firing line. Do not believe this is a BA Company Problem, all Airline's management will not stop their attack on Pilots T&C's at the collapse of BA pilots. Try to look from beyond your current uniform Colour and try to see that BA Pilots are the first to raise a stink not because we are all Inefficient Spoilt Crybabies but because we have been under threat from these issues for much longer, the very same issues that will soon work against all Pilots if we don't unite now.
We all have more in Common as Professional Flying Comrades than with any management structure no matter how caring or efficient they may be compared to BA's. BA Pilots are no less Professional or Inefficient than any other outfit's Pilots but are bearing the full force of taking off OVERWEIGHT down the back for years. Don't let them divide us Pilots. who really are the only ones who fully understand the job we do.
This is not a "BA ISOLATED PROBLEM" caused by "EXPENSIVE INEFFICIENT" Pilots(just ask any recent BA DEP's you might know personally if their Pre-conceived Pre-joining Nirvana-image about being an Overpaid Underworked BA Pilots match the Reality once in) but we are first to be attacked. Be careful what you wish for, you might get it sooner than you had wished and miss the days when BA Pilots were around to take all the FLAK !!!!!!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
thedude,
Your whole arguement is based on the following false initial premise;
"Take 'Big Airline'. They decide that they cannot continue to operate a route profitably because their overhead structure is too great. They have one of two options, give it up and let the free market sort it out or as BA have done, ask their subsiduary/franchisee company to take on the route. This ensures that they continue to maintain visible market presence and in the end profits are kept in house."
You mention BA have only 2options available and are missing the only Option for BA that will really turn things around, even though it stares you in the face in your own paragraph quoted above. If BA;
"cannot continue to operate a route profitably because their overhead structure is too great"
........ then they need to confront the costs of their overhead structure. Cancelling routes and outsourcing will not solve BA's problems but only delay making the necessary "Overhead" Structural changes. Of course your options would save a few expensive BA management Positions for a little Longer but it won't make BA any more efficient or improve BA's long-term viability.
PS. Apologies to the moderators for the "double-Post" however it does represent a vastly different chain of thought than that above.
Your whole arguement is based on the following false initial premise;
"Take 'Big Airline'. They decide that they cannot continue to operate a route profitably because their overhead structure is too great. They have one of two options, give it up and let the free market sort it out or as BA have done, ask their subsiduary/franchisee company to take on the route. This ensures that they continue to maintain visible market presence and in the end profits are kept in house."
You mention BA have only 2options available and are missing the only Option for BA that will really turn things around, even though it stares you in the face in your own paragraph quoted above. If BA;
"cannot continue to operate a route profitably because their overhead structure is too great"
........ then they need to confront the costs of their overhead structure. Cancelling routes and outsourcing will not solve BA's problems but only delay making the necessary "Overhead" Structural changes. Of course your options would save a few expensive BA management Positions for a little Longer but it won't make BA any more efficient or improve BA's long-term viability.
PS. Apologies to the moderators for the "double-Post" however it does represent a vastly different chain of thought than that above.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Western Europe
Posts: 151
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For a while I thought maybe airrage had perhaps developed some common sense - some hope. 
I've never thought of BA pilots as being expensive and inefficient - however, the point you have demonstrated so well on this and other threads is that you clearly place yourselves above the market. Granted, you may have fallen behind in real terms. Granted, BA is a monolithic, overmanagement-manned, inneficient and incompetent edifice. However, YOU CAN'T BUCK THE MARKET.
Eventually, BA will have to sort out its act, and become viable. THEN, would be the time to demand a slice of the pie. Currently, the above mentioned market is being demonstrated to great effect by Ryanair, Easy, and everybody is falling over themselves trying to copy their business model. BA would be far better redefining what they do best. This low cost thing will not take everything over, the savings of merging are already proving false, it is simply impossible to grow organically at the current rate. They will fall over - in fact, the cracks are already appearing.
So, Kevin old sport, timing is all. The time at the moment is all wrong. Mind you, I think you may find that Rod will be only too pleased to give us (BACE) and GB even more of your work even faster when you try it on industrially. Don't expect me to do more than smile at your picket lines, 'cos with your attitude to scope, you have shown clearly where your thoughts lie - in your collective back pocket.
Now, what about that Airbus course!
I've never thought of BA pilots as being expensive and inefficient - however, the point you have demonstrated so well on this and other threads is that you clearly place yourselves above the market. Granted, you may have fallen behind in real terms. Granted, BA is a monolithic, overmanagement-manned, inneficient and incompetent edifice. However, YOU CAN'T BUCK THE MARKET.
Eventually, BA will have to sort out its act, and become viable. THEN, would be the time to demand a slice of the pie. Currently, the above mentioned market is being demonstrated to great effect by Ryanair, Easy, and everybody is falling over themselves trying to copy their business model. BA would be far better redefining what they do best. This low cost thing will not take everything over, the savings of merging are already proving false, it is simply impossible to grow organically at the current rate. They will fall over - in fact, the cracks are already appearing.
So, Kevin old sport, timing is all. The time at the moment is all wrong. Mind you, I think you may find that Rod will be only too pleased to give us (BACE) and GB even more of your work even faster when you try it on industrially. Don't expect me to do more than smile at your picket lines, 'cos with your attitude to scope, you have shown clearly where your thoughts lie - in your collective back pocket.
Now, what about that Airbus course!
Last edited by The Little Prince; 3rd Sep 2002 at 22:08.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Which all assumes that the subsidiary can operate a profitable, reliable , high quality service that our customers will pay a premium for. Of course currently the BACE group is unprofitable, highly unreliable and operates aircraft less comfortable than our competitors (even the low cost ones) on many routes. If you had a successful model we'd buy that argument, but you don't. Now whens my Embraer course, 'cos i think scope should take all your jets away (if you can call a 145 that).