One rule for US another for the rest
 

NEWS from BALPA
British Airline Pilots’ Association
Thursday 11th October 2007
BRITISH PILOTS PROTEST AT FALKLANDS CONTRACT SCANDAL
The British Airline Pilots’ Association (BALPA) today strongly protested to the Government that a contract for flying British troops and their families and provisions between Brize Norton in Oxfordshire and Stanley in the Falklands has been given by the Ministry of Defence to an American airline and not to a British one.
The contract has been given to Omni Air International who will use United States registered aircraft with American crews.
‘This is a scandal which must be rectified’ said Captain Dave Boys, Vice Chairman of BALPA. ‘The Ministry of Defence has proved itself inept and insensitive. The contract started on October 4th and must be cancelled. No British or EU carrier would ever be permitted to run such a service to and from the USA. There is no reciprocity at all.’
BALPA is demanding an explanation in letters sent to the Secretary of State for Defence Des Browne, and Secretary of State for Transport Ruth Kelly.
Dave Boys declared ‘Our pilots are particularly upset about the fact that many British airline pilots fought in the Falklands war when they were in the Forces yet are being denied this flying which is being given to Americans who played no part.The service must be returned to the previous provider – XL Airways or an alternative UK or EU Carrier and Associated Crews. '

This just reaffirms my choice not to pay a penny to an organisation that produces navel-gazing and this chest-beating invective crap.

what? at least someone's standing up for uk pilots. Do you really think the US government would let a British Airline do a government contract? I guess it went to the lowest bidder which saves tax payers money but sometimes it's worth paying a bit more!

Would your terms and conditions be better if there was no BALPA?

Yours is a good idea though because you are 1% of your salary better off than your colleagues AND get the benefits they pay for. Perhaps we all ought to follow your example.

bmi did it for a while!

Sorry chaps, I expect that Omni can do the flying far cheaper than any UK airline.
Now, if this does not please some folks, why not write to the MoD, and ask that a surcharge be applied to all BALPA members taxes...then perhaps the flying can 'come home'....:E

Well I think this is outrageous and I am glad to see that BALPA is protesting!

Surely charity begins at home?

didn't I read that US vehicles bound for Iraq were being transported on russian built planes on some overseas charter?

sad isn't it? its money and not the Flag anymore.

I'm one US taxpayer who certainly wishes our DOD would take a UK or EU appropriately qualified low bidder for corresponding work.

I'd guess that if our rules forbid it, that those rules were set by our Congressfolk, not by DOD.

Falkland Islands flying
 

To All,
About 1990/91 I worked for a US carrier, Buffalo Airways. We went to Norton and flew a jet engine plus a few other things to the Falklands. I was curious at the time that we and not a British carrier were doing the flight.
I have also flown into Dover AFB in the USA with L1011 and was amazed to see 6 C-5's sitting there. I knew that our company charged the US government 3 times the normal charter rate. I was told it was still much less than what a C-5 would cost.
I live in Denver. A russian carrier flies the Atlas-5 rocket engines into Denver. It maybe because the engines are bought from Russia.
I lean to agreeing with 411A that it may be because of cost that some of these things happen.

Do you really want our troops on the lowest bidder? :bored:

BALPA neurotic?
 

these trooping flights cost pennies when compared to the many BILLIONS which the US DOD and various US companies and corporations spend with BAe Systems! C'mon BALPA, find something worthwhile to campaign :ugh:.... bm

I suspect that is what many astronauts have thought, while strapped onto a rocket carrying them into orbit...'gosh, this thing was supplied from the lowest bidder.'

Sorry folks, 'tis business.
Want more MoD business for your UK carriers?
Prepare to ante up...:ugh:

Oh yes...BALPA, a paper tiger.:rolleyes:

Actually, the US Navy provided quite a bit of support services. And other US units took over British Forces NATO duties for them to go to the Falklands. But that is neither here nor there.


Yes, I can see how the French helped. Why did BALPA bother with that statement. Why didn't they just say anyone but a US carrier.

It really is about the lowest bidder!

As a taxpayer I'd hope the MOD went for the best deal. I recognise that best might not mean the cheapest but what would the papers have said if the MOD had NOT gone for the best deal?

Are we sure that perhaps NO EU carrier bid for the work at all?

I am curious how the US crew could be the cheapest, when they are not UK-based, presumably fly an older aircraft, away from maintenance base, and suffer the same or similar other costs (fuel, crew) as other bidders.

Perhaps the contract is so completely ridiculous, that penalties for non-delivery of service due to technical problems (of an older, charter aircraft without the maintenance base support of a UK-based airline) are so low that it does not matter...

Is it that hard to place an order for a cargo/passenger hybird aircraft, maintained by BA/Virgin, at a cost far lower than the aircraft flown/chartered at the moment. (of course the answer is yes...)

UK MOD always go for the lowest bid, not necessarily the best.
Hence some of the kit our forces are lumbered with.

Doc C

Oddly enough, Omni has quite well maintained aircraft and it is owned by one family, who have been in the airline business awhile...and oddly enough, been profitable nearly the whole time.
A niche carrier, if you will.

It's Too Late...
 

I can agree with most of the postings, here, regarding this topic. I have to say, however, that it's a 'global economy'. If we have a problem with that, we should have successfully fought it 20 years ago. To do so now is futile, as it's far too late.

I find that some of the stuff my country does is crazy. In some cases, I'm sure things make sense. In some cases, to say that it's crazy is quite correct.

PantLoad

Boring old economics
 

In purely financial terms it is better to spend money at home. If the UK gives a US contractor a job the money is gone. Give the same contract to a home supplier and you collect tax from the company, the workers, and all the people who support them. I have been told that the difference is about 30%, so unless the foreigner is willing to work at those sorts of discount it is actually less costly in the long run to source at home.