PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Rumours & News (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news-13/)
-   -   bmi Redundancies (https://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/1939-bmi-redundancies.html)

2S3 24th Oct 2001 23:32

Lets just clear up a few facts in the bmi/bmir debate:
1. Although both groups may be administered by the same team they are still different companies in their own right (otherwise why would they have different names?)
2. The seniority list for bmi in LHR makes no mention of anyone in bmir, in fact I am led to believe that they have their own list.
3. I know that there are people who joined bmir after some who joined bmi main and yet have not been sent 'the letter', so further proving a difference in companies!
4. When those who came from bmir joined bmi they were given a seniority number and placed on a list reflecting the day they started at bmi main.
5. Until 3 weeks ago the above mentioned list made no reference to a bmir joining date.
6. (And finally!) It states nowhere in the AFS or my contract that people joining from bmir, or any other company for that matter, can jump up the list!
Sorry for the rant and, yes it may sound like sour grapes, but it could mean the difference between having and not having a job! Surely we have an agreement to ensure situations like this don't arise and I can't think of a better or more straight forward system than LIFO!
:confused: :confused: :confused:

Cripple 24th Oct 2001 23:37

IMHO, Several things need to be pointed out since everyone is getting so agitated.

BUDVAR is trying to point out that if LIFO is being implemented, it should be done as fairly as possible. He has clearly stated that he is not trying to start a ‘them vs us’ argument or suggest that some individuals should be made redundant over others. The situation as to whether or not bmi and bmir are the same company is the point in question. Moleslayer has mentioned that the precedent was set when LCA was integrated into BMA, which is not what has happened with bmi and bmir/BMC.

EFF-OH says that bmir pilots had to apply for a job, then sit an interview and pass a sim check in order to “change fleets”. This sounds rather like the process all other applicants to bmi had to go through to get the job. Hardly a simple fleet change. Should the bmir pilots then be treated like all the other people who went through the same process, regardless of background?

If bmi and bmir are the same company, then why haven’t the two seniority lists been merged, as would be the case if there had been a takeover. Surely according to EFF-OH and BASH.D.BISHOP, the bmir SAAB/EMB pilots should only be made redundant after those with less service in mainline have gone. Not very fair in my opinion. Also, why do the two companies have separate HQ’s if they are indeed one business. There are many other points that I am sure could be found if necessary, and I don’t think that a BRAL pilot joining BA would be able claim his/her BRAL start date in similar circumstances.

In general, any redundancies are VERY unfortunate and distressing for those affected (I am not too far off the bottom myself) but BUDVAR has a point that must be addressed to ensure that the redundancies are dealt with fairly. I know many of those affected (both ex bmir and not) and have no desire to see anyone have to face redundancy. Lets hope things turn around sooner rather than later. All the best to anyone affected by the present climate.

Cripple

PS BASH.D.BISHOP – You mentioned that the cadets that do get taken on in future will be going to bmir on the 145. I feel very sorry for them if they end up flying with a narrow minded individual such as yourself. Obviously, you are such an ace that you have been on jets since day one and were born with vast amounts of airmanship and experience. Everyone has to start somewhere and describing cadets as “Seneca driving wieners” (spelt correctly, of course!) is pathetic. I have never found there to be a rift between bmi and bmir crews, but you seem hell bent on creating one. :mad:

PPS Will bmir 145s really be operating MAN-LHR route? Maybe a separate thread is required to discuss that one re SCOPE etc.

Cripple 25th Oct 2001 00:01

So much for offline editing. A few of you beat me to it. :p

2S3 has a point. Whilst not starting a bmi vs bmir argument, this needs to be sorted ASAP as it hasn't been mentioned until 3 weeks ago and we are talking about peoples lives, however they are affected. LIFO is the only fair system but it has to be applied on a level playing field.

Methinks we're all too close for comfort :eek:

thewwIIace 25th Oct 2001 01:32

same thing happening at BA/CFE for doj into seniority. it works both ways, if continued seniority etc, then take it from both lists, 118 from bottom - full stop!!

Budvar 25th Oct 2001 02:08

Ladies and Gents ( and Bash the Bishop, obviously been bashing that bishop a bit too much lately its clouded your thinking judging by your comments in reference to cadets.) I will reitterate that this not a question of BMI/BMIR, it is a question of pilots which are going to made redundant due to a method which is against our AFS.
This is also not a argument against those pilots concerned or a way of instilling hatred between the groups of pilots from the two companies.
That is what we have at the end of the day two separate companies with a group of pilots which have left on to join the other!
If the boot was on the other foot
i.e> I left bmi and joined bmir (of my own free will!!) and then 2 months later 50 redundancies were announced. However because I'd done 4 years in mailine I've leapt 100 in the seniorty and escaped the chop with 10 others from mainline forcing bmir guys out who've done 3 years with bmir. Would you be happy I THINK NOT!!! You take chances when ever you move from one company to another!!
THAT IS THE ISSUE!!! :(

Captain Speeking 25th Oct 2001 11:12

Cripple

To answer your question:
"PPS Will bmir 145s really be operating MAN-LHR route? Maybe a separate thread is required to discuss that one re SCOPE etc."

No - it will be changed (along with some other changes) before the final issue. The one you find in your pigeon hole is not the final one!

Eff Oh 25th Oct 2001 16:32

Fokker......No I didnt go for the interview as I dont work for BMI! The way that some of my friends were treated at interview was appaling! (Interview for the transfer that is!) However I think the person resonsible for that has been "relieved of his position."

Thanks all for your comments, all taken on board. However I do think that there is no easy way to sort this out. Lets face it this nonsense is not going to help!
Eff Oh

PaulDeGearup 25th Oct 2001 22:16

May I give you the definitive word on the matter; the BMIR pilots who applied for, interviewed and simmed for, posts with bmi mainline were, on joining bmi mainline issued with a letter of appointment.

Amongst other items that letter of appointment may say something along the lines of " your previous employment with BMIR shall count as continuous employment and all other terms are in accordance with the AFS".

What that means is simple; the bmi AFS probably insists that all pilots join the seniority list at the bottom, regardless of whether they enter as a DE Captain, DFO, or F/O. That gives them a seniority date for promotion etc as a pilot. As an employee,however, certain broader terms apply; one of those is that they have given X yrs continuous service to the entire group of companies and thus, when redundancy is considered, this must also be taken into account. Who pays them or has paid is irrelevant so long as the company they worked for was owned and controlled by the same people who own and control the company they now work for.

Hence, those who had X yrs with BMIR and transferred have employee rights in law which over ride the AFS seniority list.

[ 25 October 2001: Message edited by: PaulDeGearup ]

Rob Brown 26th Oct 2001 02:09

I'm rather new to this forum business and I'm only browsing over this because as I'm not far from the bottom of the list I am trying to find a job...

3 days ago I received notice that due to some rag head I will be evicted from my dream job in 3 months time.

As an ex-cadet I find it quite unpleasant to be described as an ex Callow, seneca Driving Wiener! Its difficult enough hunting for a job with 500 jet hrs, let alone none. It was hard enough trying to pass those exams knowing you had a job waiting, imagine what it is like being in their shoes now. Shelfstacking is probably about as good as their prospects get.

I would be interested to discover Bash's background, do I detect some jeolousy about previous Cadets going main line? I hope one day that one of those aforementioned puddle jumper drivers will be your skipper at bmi, and makes you eat those words..

Perhaps you were not good enough to be a cadet, mmm interesting!!! :mad: :mad: :mad:

JT8 26th Oct 2001 03:54

Bumps,

'Rag head'? :mad: :mad: :mad:
All I can say is tough sh*t about your dreamjob. Your not the only one effected.

WA**ER!


Best of luck to those effected at bmi.

[ 25 October 2001: Message edited by: JT8 ]

Arkroyal 26th Oct 2001 04:15

Budvar,

You speak utter sense. Employment law requires that the bmi group retain the magnificent 7 who previously worked for bmi regional.

It does not say, however, that they must be retained as bmi mainline pilots. The fairest thing would be, IMHO, to return them to bmir, thus displacing 7 from the bottom of THAT seniority list.

Again, nothing personal, just a quest for fairness in troubled times.

I would ask all in this debate to be objective, and refrain from inflamatory, childish (and racist) remarks.

fast cruiser 26th Oct 2001 12:08

totally agree with arkroyal

IF they have to remain within the bmi group then they should be sent back to bmir and let 7 MORE SENIOR MAINLINE pilots retain there jobs.

Gaza 26th Oct 2001 12:39

Unless you are an expert in Employment law and TUPE (Transfer, Undertakings and Protection of Empoyment) regs, it is difficult to say who is right and who is wrong. In this case there is probably a "Moral" right and a "Legal" right. I would imagine that bmi have taken legal advice and used that advice in decideding the selection criteria.

While waiting in the lounge at LHR last night for the 18:40 to EDI (which incidently was full and then switched from A320 to A321)I read in the Evening Standard that bmi and BALPA had agree a "job share" scheme to reduce redundancies. Any more word on this?

thewwIIace 26th Oct 2001 12:48

on the news it said 50% pay and 50% work would compensate no job losses

moleslayer 26th Oct 2001 13:08

Re....."job-share" quote in Evening Standard.This was first reported in yesterdays Telegraph.

I imagine a journo'has got hold of(or been leaked)the BALPA company re-organisation document.

I doubt very much that the company intend to'impose'these measures.

But you never know :eek: ;)

Gaza 26th Oct 2001 15:37

Moleslayer

Article from Evening Standard


Pilots go part-time in bid to save jobs


PILOTS at Britain's second largest airline, BMI, are being asked to halve their hours and pay in a bid to save jobs in the wake of the crisis hitting the airline industry. The work-share arrangement was secured by the pilots' union, the British Air Line Pilots Association said.

The airline industry is reeling from the global economic slowdown exacerbated by the 11 September hijacked plane attacks on the US. Passenger traffic has slumped, forcing airlines to slash thousands of jobs, ground aircraft, cut routes and seek delays in new aircraft orders in an attempt to remain in the skies.

Christopher Darke, the general secretary of Balpa, said BMI agreed that the job-sharing scheme would limit pilot cutbacks. BMI had announced it would slash 109 pilots, one fifth of its pilot workforce, part of a move to cut 600 jobs from its 5,500-strong workforce.

'Under the part-time working scheme, for every two pilots that opt for reduced hours, one more job is saved,' said Darke. 'When good times return to the industry, it will also be easier for BMI to expand by asking pilots to switch back from part-time to full-time working.'

© Associated Newspapers Ltd., 24 October 2001
My reading of the article is that bmi are looking for volunteers and not to impose this.

I suppose for some who may be at the end of their careers going part-time may be of interest, assuming pension rights and other benefits remained intact.

[ Edited to include article]

[ 26 October 2001: Message edited by: Gaza ]

Capt Chambo 26th Oct 2001 20:24

The article also appeared in yesterdays FT. http://tm0.com/sbct.cgi?s=96183290&i=410244&d=1935920

The article needs to be read carefully otherwise the fare paying public might be lead to believe that bmi Pilots are earning £180,000 pa!

PaulDeGearup 26th Oct 2001 21:08

Why not start by making redundant those who had a retirement date on their 55th birthday but elected to stay to 60. Surely they can be eased out first before the newbies at the bottom ?

But always look on the bright side; if any company can totally f**k anything up, bmi will f**k it up and leave the door wide open for the troops to take legal action for breach of contract,unfair dismissal etc.

And bear in mind, they never win in court :) :) :) :cool:

Batfink 26th Oct 2001 21:13

Interesting idea Arkroyal.

Unfortunately we don't want them back. :eek: :eek: They have moved onto bigger and better things :D and have about as much relevance back in bmir as you do in the navy! :o :o

Why should they come back to us and displace 8 hard working people from our list when they are bmi mainline contracted!? :mad: :mad: :mad:

le loup garou 26th Oct 2001 22:03

Does anyone know what the response from the workers as far as 50%, or voluntary retirements is?

actjag 26th Oct 2001 22:57

Arkroyal,

Good point, which does make a lot of sense. Of course it would all depend on what their contract stipulates.

Here's an idea. What about having a group seniority list, for the purpose of redundancies? Everyone is added as per their date of joining the group, and if the axe starts to swing, those at the bottom get 'chopped'.

Thoughts anyone?

le loup garou 26th Oct 2001 23:12

Actjag, Forgive me if I am wrong but doesn,t the fact that the guys from bmir that have jumped up the bmi seniority list with regards to the redundancies already suggest that this is already in force to some degree.

This does not mean that I am complaining about recent events, its every man/woman for themselves. Good luck to them.

BASH D. BISHOP 26th Oct 2001 23:45

Golly, I do seem to have rattled some cots!

My original message on this thread was to offer my sympathy and wish good luck to those made redundant. However, I felt I had to support the magnificent seven(?) and explain why they had not been made redundant at this time. Pauldegearup has explained it much better than I could. (understandable given his position).

We all started on senecas or the equivalent and I didn't mean to make anyone cry, when I highlighted the recent cadets relative experience levels in the group. While success in winning a cadetship is something to be very proud of, you boys and girls really must learn to control your egos.

I understand that you want to explore every avenue to safeguard your jobs, but we are talking about seven(?) people out of one hundred and nine. It may be better to take it on the chin than go out fighting and make a dubious name for yourself. When the time comes for recruitment,you may be remembered for the wrong reasons. Moreover, many of you may find that the offer of re-employment will come from bmir. :eek:

Perhaps we can share a friendly beer on my next LHR nightstop? ;)

STAN DEASY 27th Oct 2001 02:28

Regarding bmir pilts transferring to bmi being merely a 'change of fleet'.

Were I to transfer from another base to LHR I would under the bmi AFS be entitled to a relocation package.

It is my understanding that such a package was denied to those transfering from bmir as bmi said they were NEW JOINERS.

The company is playing a clever game here. Sadly the losers are the bmir guys who are being villified by some mainline guys whilst being shafted in the wallet by the company.

PaulDeGearup 27th Oct 2001 15:14

How about taking another look at the problem from a slightly different perspective ?

Most pilots will work 20 days in each 28 day period;that's 20 x 13 periods in a year = 260 days. If you then add in recurrent training and leave you probably reduce that by 5 days for recurrent and 28 for leave, so each person works 260 - 33= 227 days per year. Which is roughly 33 wks per 52.

If the company has 600 pilots the total work available is 600 x 33 wks = 19800 wks per year.If you need to shed 117 pilots that leaves 483 to do the work; which means each person now has to do 40 weeks per year.

If every pilot took the equivalent of 7 weeks unpaid leave spread out over the year,( that would work out at about 4 days unpaid in every 28 ) or took a pay cut of about 20 % you could keep everyone in a job, keep them current and the capacity to expand the network instantly when times get better !

Is something along those lines worth considering ?

Arkroyal 27th Oct 2001 15:35

Batfink


Not surprised that you 'don't want them back'. However, that would be the fairest option UMHO.

Stan deasy makes a good point that the company are indeed using both sides of the argument to its own advantage, BTW I have not spotted any 'villification' of the 7 from mainline pilots. Budvar and others are being most polite. This is not a personal attack, merely an attempt to discuss the problem and come up with the fairest solution.

Paul de gear. Quite. an across the board short time working of, say, 80% would tide the company over in the short term, save jobs, and keep all but the 'I'm all right Jacks' happy.

Now, Batfink, you've given me an idea! If I can just persuade the company to recognise my time in the navy I should be able to progress my seniority into single figures. To me that's about as sensible as joining a new company and leapfrogging the peeps already there

:eek: :eek: :D

straight&level 27th Oct 2001 16:48

PaulDeGearup
Great idea-sounds very like the proposed 80% scheme proposed to the company-unfortunately they havn't given that as one of the accepted options yet

Max Continuous 27th Oct 2001 17:17

PaulDeGearup,

A nice idea, but it wouldn't work in practice because of a problem with human psychology. It's akin to asking people in the street whether they'd be prepared to pay more income tax in return for a better health service. Most say "Oh yes, most definitely" but when it comes to the secrecy of the ballot box a very different result emerges, as political parties will attest to.

Nobody's going to appear mean and selfish publicly when their colleagues are being made redundant, especially as the plan appears fair to everybody, but if implemented there's little doubt it would cause a great deal of secret, unadmitted resentment across vast swathes of the company. All at a time when you need everyone giving as much extra effort and flexibility as possible.

STAN DEASY 27th Oct 2001 17:50

Cant help but think that we are starting to air our dirty laundry in an inapprpriate forum.

Should this topic not be transferred to our own little piece of heaven or at least lets continue there. After all this is the most action the site has seen in years!!

MaximumPete 27th Oct 2001 18:52

My sympathies are with all you guys out there, both bmi and bmir, who have received the letter.

I'm looking at the Voluntary Early Retirement (ER) scheme and hope to make a decision when the necessary info has been supplied by the company for me to pass on to the pension people.

Hopefully that will save at least one job.

Good luck guys

MP

calltheball 27th Oct 2001 19:19

Bash,
You are a card.....I could laugh all the way to the unemployment office...
I'm not one to refuse beer from anyone Bash so I look forward to it on your next LHR N/stop. Sadly, beer will probably be about £300 a pint by then (expensive even by London standards)...
For my two pence worth, if the 7 guys were taken on in mainline were led to believe it was a job transfer then thats it..no argument -they should be kept on.
If it wasn't under this system, and the job was applied for like any external candidate (ie interview/sim ride) then the question needs to be asked in the future where do people in a similar situation stand?
The transferral system needs to be formalised to make the position transparent to all parties. That way issues like this shouldn't reoccur.
Finally, let me re-iterate once more, this is a thought for the future -not something that should be applied retrospectively.
Best of luck to all affected...

-Goes back to cot to polish ego...........

PaulDeGearup 28th Oct 2001 19:50

Pauldegearup has explained it much better than I could. (understandable given his position).

Bash me old, do I know you ?

More importantly, do you know me ?
Do you take the Mail On Sunday ?
From the end of Nov it will make extremely fun reading !

Stagnation Point 28th Oct 2001 22:25

I believe the way from bmir to bmi is by way of a tranfer , it is certain advertised that way in bmi. The interview is called a transfer interview, and the sim ride is the same for all that join bmi. The sad thing is that the transfer agreement only goes one way, we can join you but you can't join us.

When I was interviewed for bmir or Bizzy Air, as it was then, I was told that if I transferred to mainline then the start date with Biz Air would continue to be my seniority date. I believe there is a law which covers this situation but check that one out with yur own bush lawyer.

As far as villification of the seven go, it will only be from those narrow minded enough to think that like that and its unfortunate because it distances the two working groups of pilots. Wouldn't it be more advantageous if we all worked together like friends rather than exersise some moronic form of sibling rivalry.

Capt Homesick 29th Oct 2001 22:31

And there are some bmir jet pilots who've never done any jet assessment at all!

BmPilot21 29th Oct 2001 23:18

If the 7 BMIR guys/girls have their BMIR date as their joining date, then anyone who joined BMIR after I joined bmi should be made reundant BEFORE ME!

You can't have it going one way only.

pjumbo 29th Oct 2001 23:22

I feel for all you guys (and gals) who are having to leave the Company. I am in a similar situation but not with BMI.

Having seen the mention of LIFO and how it is being applied within your Company, I would like to ask the following question.

Background......My Company joining date does not coincide with my relative position on the pilot seniority list because I transferred within the Company from another job. I've been with the Company for nearly 6 years but only on the pilot seniority list for 20 months. Unfortunately, this places me below the 'cut-off' line when considering only the pilot seniority list and not literally LIFO.

My question is(finally!)....How should someone in those circumstances be treated when redundancies are being considered? (Both with and without the European Law consideration.)

Sorry it was so long!....thanks for your help..........pjumbo :rolleyes:

Bash 30th Oct 2001 01:21

pjumbo

I think the matter of transfers from bmir rests with the terms of the transfer agreement signed by the management of both companies and the contract of employment of the people in question. That is why this arguement is a bit pointless. Everyone's entitled to an emotional opinion but it's the legal opinion that counts.

skyscraper 30th Oct 2001 02:46

The unlucky ones at Toad Hall are being told by individual meeting with management whether they still have a job or not. On the surface this would seem a slightly less painful way than the usual 'letter in the post' scenario. However when you have been waiting almost a week for your 'chat', then a letter puts you out of(or in!) your misery a lot quicker. The process is kinder in theory but waiting your turn is torture when all you want to know is, do I have a job or not?

Vortillion 30th Oct 2001 10:31

BMPilot21 - You do have a point. I heard that Virgin originally planned to make its Classic drivers redundant when they parked the fleet. As the most senior pilots, they successfully argued that they should be type converted onto the airbus at the expense of current but less senior airbus crews.

Its not quite the same with us as we have two separate AOCs and two separate seniority lists. If you have nothing to lose try it!
Of course the logical consequence is that you may end up flying a 145 out of ABZ. Is that what you want??

Good luck anyway.

Arkroyal 30th Oct 2001 15:16

Bmpilot21,

You have avery good point there. The rule would appear to be very much a one way street.

Vortillion. You say 'Its not quite the same with us as we have two separate AOCs and two separate seniority lists'. Quite. In fact two separate companies.

Now let me see, 145 out of ABZ, or flipping burgers. Might take a while to make up my mind :confused:


All times are GMT. The time now is 14:07.


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