They do not work from home as they would miss their Feng Shui meetings for which rooms are booked!

Though it`s not good Feng to meet on a Friday!

;)

<<......they wish to carry on as a franchise and do not wish to be subsumed into BA ....>>

Sorry, if I gave the impression that the work was to ne subsumed into BA.

What is proposed - I am informed - is rather than the Franchisees' work being subsumed into BA, the opposite is to take place. BA SH (and MH) work is to be reorganised with the work farmed out to the Franchisees as described previously with only the BA pilots being seconded to the Franchisees.

The high cost of the BA SH operation is not due to the cost of the pilots but due to the cost of the cabin crew and ground staff. The Franchisees have said that it will take them 12months to train enough staff of their own and set up improved scheduling systems so Summer 05 will be the date by which all this happens.

Carnage Matey - regarding Rod in HK during the groundstaff walk-out, he flew out and back on CX (better product?!) and walked past me on the Sunday afternoon - outside Dan Ryan's in Pacific Place. I didn't see his dog but he did have his wife with him!!!!

Sharman; Since when has the ramp / cabin brew been the high cost source and flt crew deemed as competitively priced. All three units combine to make the Euro routes costly besides which the rapid and competitive growth of the LCs has caused huge fiscal problems for all Euro short haul operators ex LHR.

HZ123

You really should pay more attention to what is going on.

A process started pre 911 and was temporarily halted post 911 before being concluded and implemented early last year whereby the BA pilots total packages were benchmarked against LH, KLM and AF. This delivers to the company equivalent salary levels against our major, full service European competitors. I hasten to add that the company gains by virtue of better productivity from BA pilots varying well into double-digits in percentage terms.

Meanwhile this benchmarking has not been conducted elsewhere, and it is those areas where the terms and conditions and numbers are WELL above industry standard.

As part of the benchmarking process, BALPA determined the number of employees per aircraft and the number of employees per pilot in comparison to LH etc, who have very similar fleet portfolios, and demonstrated to management that BA was overmanned by about 20,000. Some of those have now gone, but much more is needed. OK, some of the BA excesses are due to LHR (BA is the UK's 2nd biggest bus operator, for example), but many working practises need to be brought into the late 20th let alone the 21st Century. Areas that need urgent attention are certainly Cabin Crew and MT (Drivers) and no doubt that black hole aka baggage handling is also right up there. That's on the front-line, as to the back room staff, I know less specifics but could well imagine that a thorough spring clean is needed.

As to Flight Crew, no doubt the company have their wish list for us, but overall at Board level they have no real issues with us.

Thanks for that. There are problems in trying to achieve CC and Ramp cuts. Ramp has for some time been short staffed and subsequent on-line recruitment has failed to obtain the numbers of new contract ramp staff, due in the main to the pay levels offered which are now lower than Aviance / OCS.

Ideally the unit would be best outsourced but I could not see a company large enough or with the experience to take on BA ramp activities. As regard to MT I think you will find there that also it is under resourced and they have failed in the past to recruit staff as the new contract rates are less than many LHR based coaching groups.

One other issue is that even with the ground service package outsourced BA will be required to provide the equipment and logistics and some cases of previous outsourcing the end result has been worst service and greater costs. For example I am reliably informed that our motor vehicle service contract costs a minimum of £1000 per annum plus actual costs per service / repair and this charge is on a Ford Fiesta and the sum rises with the vehicle type.

CC are recruiting 750 staff at present with a basic of £9800 plus allowances which means if they end up on shorthaul there will not be a great deal of those.

I would tend to agree with you that we may be seen to franchise more Euro routes and concentrate on Eastern block and the newer former soviet states that offer good returns for the immediate future.

Benchmarking total packages against LH, AF,- ie old established European carriers may be interesting, but these airlines also have enormous cost problems. The challenge is coming from the low cost carriers, especially in Europe . They continue to expand, open up new routes, especially from the UK provinces, while BA contracts into its Heathrow heartland.
Most of BAs costs ,- and those include remuneration/productivity relationships,- render it vulnerable and thats true of pilots just as much as cabin crew , ground staff and management . No one group can say " Its them, not us". All BA folk are in the current situation together.

Skylion,

The second P in PPRuNe stands for pilots. Perhaps having costs stand in comparison to the LCC's frightens the denizens of Waterworld far more than those on the flightdeck. Comes under the heading of far too difficult or, for the deeply cynical, turkeys voting for Christmas.

Regards
Rob

If BA were to pass all SH flying to its franchise partners this would leave an awful lot of staff based LHR with no job i.e. redundant. BA has no real interest in paying redundancy (trying to preserve its cash pile) and no enthusiasm for dealing with the inevitable conflict with its staff unions. Can't really imagine BA has the stomach for quite such a reorganisation.

Could always be wrong though.....

Skylion, BA's longhaul pilots are working to the legal limits already: the list of people on the status sheet each month who are up on the rolling 900 hour limit runs into pages - the productivity issue is not there in LH.

As to shorthaul the fundamental issue is whether the integrated network carrier has any future at all. Without shorthaul feed a lonhaul network carrier can not survive and yet the shorthaul network that feeds longhaul at a main hub is INEVITABLY inefficient in terms of daily aircraft utilisation compared to the point to point model of the lo cost carrier.

The reasons for this are fairly obvious - interline baggage, turnaround times where aircraft need catering, fitting the arrival times of the waves of incoming SH aircraft to provide realistic integrations with the Longhual services, nighstopping aircraft at European outstations to facilitate the interline connections etc etc.

BA SH pilots are not unproductive in terms of DUTY hours and at, in the LGW case, often 750 + flying hours per year not that inefficient compared to the lo costers in terms of flight hours, (or stick time as the Americans say), either. On a personal note I dont think I could physically cope with a 30 year career of over 750 hours SH flying a year anyway.

It is notable that many BA shorthaul pilots earn less than they would at an equivalent seniority in a lo cost carrier.

I think Ed Roddington has it when he says the "elephant in BA's row boat" is the 4.8 Billion of debt incurred by Robert A@ling. Compared to a cashflow positive company from interest on money at the bank like Ryanair, BA is slowly drowning in interest repayments.

There are, I suggest, very real isssues of Corporate Governance that allowed a Board of Directors to act with such impunity as far as shareholder value is concerned. I doubt very much that they will ever be addressed

The only solution appears to be the "run the production line faster and blame the workers", so often the way with British Industry over the years.

One thing is for sure, BA's LH network will not exist without shorthaul feed. I doubt that costs could be taken far below what is already achieved at operations like the Gatwick shorthaul network, at least on the pilot pay and productivity side, in an open market. The issue has to be either a restructuring of the debt or the end of a British integrated network carrier. Perhaps the latter course is the discipline of the market at work, but I and my pilot colleagues didn't create the overdraft.

Now that has to be the simplest, most accurate, broad-brush, 'big picture' assessment of BA's problems I have read on here, or anywhere else for that matter.
Congratulations on an incisive diagnosis - the only problem is the problem itself, which appears pretty insoluble.:(

At the risk of sounding poorly informed, what exactly did Bob do to run up such a huge debt?:confused: Ethnic tails are admittedly a joke, but only millions - not billions.

Have to agree; Bob was the person who made some effort to enforce tougher working conditions and had he been supported by the board and other management we might not be in such serious problems.

When Levin and King turned the British Airways Corporation into a plc, they identified an optimum headcount of 42000 to be sufficient for the expanding BA of the early 90’s.

Then something went badly wrong and Ailing Bob found himself in the chair. His first action was to hire 24000 functionally challenged buffoons, who know nothing and were qualified for even less, to make BA ‘the best managed company in the World

Finding themselves with nothing to do, these parasites rushed about with clipboards and mobile phones getting in the way of the people who were doing the job. As performance declined, they introduced targets and KRAs which steadily became the only incentive driving the Company.

Those who cried ‘ICEBERG’ were rubbished and sidelined, and very soon the only people who remained in positions of responsibility were the YesBobs, whose sole pleasure was the favour of the Emporer. ‘Full speed ahead’ became the battle cry.

They continued toward inspired policies such as $1bn fixed rate loans at 10%, financing the 777s with Yen loans when the Yen was weak. Those same loans now cost a fortune as the balance tips. There are more and worse lamentations.

Now we pay £39000 an hour in interest alone, the management is still pervaded by incompetence to the very highest levels. The Cabin Crew, who have legendary numbers of managers, are about to get yet more managers. Terminal 4 is an unmitigated disaster, and they haven’t a clue what to do. They’re running about like Chicken Lickin as the sky falls in. All courtesy of the worst offender of all, Strike Meat.

The solution is clear as a shining star, 24000 administrative non-operational staff need to leave. This apocalyptic prescription is so terrifying for the legions of inepts, who have no chance of employment elsewhere, that they are in denial.

Whilst we still turnover £7.1bn, there may be enough to keep the gravytrain on the rails. Otherwise, administration would be the only way out. It’s like having woodworm.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/cult/roobarb/images/32/12.gif

Top Bunk - I agree the BA board only have a few issues with BA Flight Crew.

1. The huge cost of BA Crew

and

2. The outdated Bidline system.

That's all...

:hmm:

DarkStar

Just shows how little you know then, doesn't it!

Just as an example:

Bidline at LHR - shorthaul fleet : I have flown 730 hours in the last 12 months, no overtime, consiously trying to maximise time off and doing single sector days if possible.

Carmen at LGW - B737: flying about 750 hours per anunum with little satisfaction of choice of days off or destinations.

Can I suggest that you don't comment on what you don't know about in future.

Darkstar If I could second Topbunks comments. I fly the -400 and fly between 850 and 900 hrs a yr. Explain to me how I'm inefficient and overpaid again? BTW when I went over the 900 hrs one time, the company deducted the enforced time off from my salary. Cost me 2400 quid to sit at home for working to the companies requirements. Seems like someone has been telling you porky pies...

PoodleVelour:
I believe the debts came from 2 main sources, buildings (Waterside, new world cargo centre) and aircraft (buying 50+ 747 400s, 40+ 777 200s and then after that 60+ new Airbus for european routes). Not sure what the exact numbers are but they are probably on the BA website.

Add to that building and then dismantling a hub at Gatwick and the pensions liabilities and there's the problem.

Roobarb wrote:

"The solution is clear as a shining star, 24000 administrative non-operational staff need to leave"

But according to this recent article

http://www.guardian.co.uk/airlines/s...106942,00.html

there is now 46000 staff, 13000 have gone in the last 2 years and there are rumours of another 5000 this year. That makes a possible 18000 total to go. Is roobarb asking for another 24 on top of that, leaving 22, or 6 more to make 24 total, assuming that the rumoured 5 is real and the first 13 were all admin? And can there really be that many "administrative non-operational staff" left in BA? I think I read on these pages that some of the 13000 to go were engineers at Gatwick ?

My point is, it seems to me 22000 isn't enough for a company the size of BA so maybe the outsourcing european flying rumour has some truth ? If more people get sacked then at least some would have to come from operational staff wouldn't they?

Does anyone from BA know what the numbers are, how many admin are left after the 13 + 5 cuts ?

And also, what does "the worst offender, strike meat" mean, I don't know that term?

Clearly Darkstar is anti crew as this is not the first thread that he has had a pop off in. What is the betting he is probably a BA senior manager so in fairness he/she is entitled to be out of touch with many of the BA problems.

I believe Mr Meat is a spoonerism, allowing the infamous individual to pass these annals un-named.

13000 staff cut so far is an accounting excercise. If you compare the staff numbers as published by BA in its accounts, I have figures as follows:

which shows how even from the obese 65k in 2000, we still have lost a maximum of 8000 employees. The rest is an accounting fudge, with people 'doubling-up' some jobs, and others sitting at home on full pay. Others stand around in Waterside pretending to be pot plants:} .

The fact is we have 3 people for every 2 jobs, in an industry where we cannot afford the luxury of a behemoth bureaucracy.

The old dog is right.

Mick Stability

Agreed. Still can't quite see how how the Manpower Equivalent (MPE) method of counting job losses actually adds up to any savings.

Beyond that, haven't BA withdrawn form a lot of activities that used to be done in-house? i.e contracted in catering, some terminal services etc... shouldn't that mean a need for even fewer staff than the figure calculated?

Top Bunk - I know more than you think. The money that is hosed down on Crew on draft, the waste of TAS crews. If Bidline is so efficent, why haven't other airlines adopted it then?

I know of Crew Hotels being split between Flight and Cabin Crew for crazy reasons, such as the Cabin Crew hotel had showers and not baths in their rooms. I used to travel on duty often, stay in the same hotels as Crew and yet a Capt's allowances were more than mine - how can that be justified? Why should he have greater allowances than anyone else?

HZ123 - I'm not anti-Crew, in fact many of my friends fly for BA and hence my insight which is obviously unwelcome by some. I think Hand Solo said you were a ramp worker or a trainer or something like that.....now there is a group of people who don't appreciate Crew! Is your name Charlie?

One of several reasons and a selective quote to support your agenda. Hotels are agreed by BALPA when BALPA is happy that crew are able to achieve adequate rest before a duty. If you had really stayed in many hotels (which I doubt) you would understand the importance of a hotel meeting a required standard. Cabin crew stay in some appalling places e.g. The Carlton in JNB before it was closed down.

Just shows how out of touch you are because that system disappeared long ago.

Your postings appear to be driven by envy.

Just one issue with Loaded's anaysis: that LH wouldn't exist without SH. VS seems to survive without in-house feed. Provided there are sufficient frequencies into the hub provided by whoever (i.e. low-cost or other) so that pax can make reasonable connections, LH would attract traffic. Might have to agree interline/codeshare agreemnts to avoid poaching by others but ownership not vital. Also, it would avoid pro-rate nonsense where SH sector is sold way below cost in order to attract pax onto LH. I agree such a restructuring is so daunting that it's unlikely to happen.

I agree with all Roobarb says but another factor was the fixation with "new management" philosophy.

Bob Ayling was very close to New Labour and Tony Blair and the fixation with monitoring and league tables were common to both.

In response to long hospital waiting times the government didn't spend the money on doctors and nurses but tried to tackle the problem by establishing performance league table and monitoring waiting times.

Bob did exactly the same thing. Flights were delayed by loading shortages, but instead of recruiting 2 loaders on 20K p.a. he would recruit a junior manager on 40k, equip them with a clipboard and stopwatch, and send them forth.

We then knew that last weeks delays might have been 4% less than a week before but not a single extra bag would have been loaded.

This happened throughout the airline. Cabin Crew introduced whole new layers of non-flying management to monitor sickness, measure how many crew could be removed before the complaints from passengers got worse etc. but nothing was actually done to improve the product.

Waterworld was stuffed with people working hard measuring things, but not actually doing anything to improve the bottom line.

They know the cost of everything and the value of nothing.

Torquelink - Yes, Flight Crew allowances are now incorporated into pay and naturally pension. However, the difference in allowances still exists and you ahve not been able to justify why its higher for Flight Crew than Cabin Crew or Groundstaff - please justify? As I say, many of my friends are BA Flt Crew and they state quite openly that Bidline works for the benefit of Crew rather than BA - can you justify that as well?

It's not envy, that's a standard answer from Crew. It's being able to highlight areas where so much money is being frittered away due to out-dated working practices. If BA was to start again, Bidline would be out the window straight away - I assume you can argue against that as well? Longhaul crew have so much time off, a mate of mine flew 4 trips on 777 in two months!

P.S - In a previous job I stayed at Hotels all over the network and probably stayed more hotels than yourself.

:hmm:

Err....no.

Don't doubt it but without a look at why I can't respond. How about the fact that I regularly fly between 5 and 6 transatlantics a month, is that good enough for you?

Doesn't prevent you talking nonsense though.

Dark star

BA is undoubtedly sinking under a weight of extreme and arcane IR paractices. The pilot community is already working close to its legal limit in some areas. As a group we (yes I am one) have moved a long way. We have many agreements about how we should operate but in reality pilots bend over backwards to keep the operation on the road on the day. I simply cannot be anymore flexible day to day.

Bidline may well be a costly rostering system. I have little info on comparisons. Can see TASS is a cost that may need addressing. Not sure about the Duty free week though. My understanding was that this was for the lack of bank holidays - don't most people get those?

Specifics aside, the pilot community could undoubtedly find something else to contribute but I think I speak for many colleagues when I point out that many other groups in BA are extraordinary in their operation. MT at the moment is simply absurd. The whole farce about needing a "chock man" recently....I for one will go further but FIRST it's time for those that would lead us to bite the bullet and take on those more militant groups. At the moment I am left with the impression that the most aggressive, miltant groups get away with murder. That needs to change!

Regards

Diesel

PS just seen your comments on allowances - they really are £2.50/hr for all of us....not sure what you are driving at about captain getting more. Am I missing out on something????

Darkstar

Bidline is in many companies - virtually every company in the USA has a bidline system - many limited to 75 block hours per month at that, in comparison to our 86/88 hours.

Allowances - ground staff on duty probably get more than flight crew since our changes. £2.50 per hour (taxed at 18%) does not go far in many destinations (OSL, ZRH etc in SH, HKG etc in LH).

Differences still exist with the captain being paid more than ....? Tell us exactly what you mean, cos' I think you'll find that you are wrong, all flight crew get £2.50 per hour TAFB (reduced proportionally if we get back early!).

TAS - I presume you mean Time Assignable. Usually the company's doing not the pilots'. Correct me if I'm wrong, but TAS results from the company canceling a flight or changing the type. Then the pilot is made time assignable, giving the company the opportunity to reuse them - extra standby in effect. If they then choose not to use him, then it's hardly the fault of the pilot.

Draft Payments - paid overtime in efffect for working over and above contracted hours. When required (not that often) it is often because of c*ck ups in other departments. The actual amounts paid are not much different to those at LGW under the Carmen rostering system for Rest Day working. Another thread at the moment suggests that Ryanair pilots are paid Eur 150-ish per block hour overtime - that is more than I get for overtime.

Stupid?
 

My post's do refer as to why BA has to re-structure. I understand Monday 26Jan will be the day of 'the announcement'.

HZ123 - Ha! Nice one....

Darkstar,

You say the flightcrew are overpaid ?

I defy you to find any cheaper Flight Crew on the North Atlantic than most of the F/Os on the 767.

Pop onto 123.45 over the Atlantic and you can listen to me and the Captain play:

"I have the Cheapest F/O on the North Atlantic tonight, he gets paid: xxxxx Beat That!"

Most nights the reponses are:

"Is that a month?!?!?!"

Most 767 F/Os are Year 2 F/Os earning less than most of the Long Haul Cabin Crew.

On a recent heavy trip me and the other F/O passed the time while the Capt was on his rest laughing at the fact that between us we earned less than the CSD.

In the bar that night the Junior Cabin Crew were horrified to learn they took home more each month than we did and actually bought us a drink out of pity!

Now who ever heard of the Cabin Crew getting the first round in !!

It comes to something when a BA Longhaul Pilot earns less than the Cabin Crew, now who's overpaid ?

FadeC

FadeC - I have never said Flt Crew are overpaid. In fact, I concur with your 767 F/O comments related to Cabin Crew pay. My comments relate to out-dated IR practices and agreements.

I do believe that something is wrong when Cabin Crew are earning more than Flt Crew and, dare I say it, many Managers within BA - not all Managers are useless.(...and I'm not Mgmt either) and probably most earn more than myself.

It also beggars belief that many people aspire to Cabin Crew because of the money they can earn (though the new starter rates are more realistic). BA has to tackle it's greatest cost.

:rolleyes:

Having been both Cabin Crew and FC I can assure you that FC earn considerably more than the CC. This " the CSD earns more than the FO" is just rubbish. Too many niave guys believing too many tall stories told after too many beers. The new contract CC actually are getting paid very little. My other half is a CSD, I'm a Capt and she never takes home close to 50% of my net monthly pay. More often than not it is less than a third.

(Many CEP's aren't getting paid the industry standard but that is the deal they signed for when they joined and is another matter. That is how they pay for their training.)

I agree, in part, with the sentiments of Darkstar. Bidline is overly complicated. There does need to be change but I can't really see that the FC can be any more flexible than they already are, the CC on the other hand are NEVER flexible and that has to change.

MT, surely they are about to be outsourced. A total disgrace.

IM, also possibles for outsourcing.

The bottom line is that any idea that saves cash is good idea at the moment.

Hmmm.....I don't think BA needs much "outsourcing" per se, especially considering that most outsourcing leaves such a messy bureaucracy behind (to "monitor" the outsourcing company) to negate any cost savings derived from the outsourcing process....

What I imagine they need is an opportunity to tear up the entire company and start from scratch. It's an old airline, it's never been forced to drastically re-organise, let's break down some of those empires (in all areas) and build an airline for the 21st century.

After all, in 10 years time there'll only be 3 major network carriers across the EU. BA could, nay should, be one of them. But it needs to stake its claim ]now.

What's the betting that the so called big announcement turns out to be a big let down, just more of the same. Maybe a few more MPE job reductions and lots of talk of efficiency. Probably tackle the less obstructive of the unions, leaving the most militant as they might strike. Few more years of struggling before Rod moves to pastures new. He really doesn't have to fix it all, just appear to have done something and avoid going bust...

Cynical but oh so true Diesel. I just wish it was otherwise.:(