View Poll Results: Do BACC have the best interests of CitiExpress at heart with their Scope Clause ??
Yes
32
15.92%
No
73
36.32%
Nope, only their own wallets!!!
96
47.76%
Voters: 201. This poll is closed
The BA Scope Clause.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The 51st State
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have thought the simplest thing to do would be to have every employee under the BA "umbrella" on the same contract. By that I mean any company which is wholly owned by BA. Obviously GB, Bmed, and Maersk do not apply as they are entirely separate.
One of the reasons that BA has so many problems is that it has too many people on different T's and C's, thereby leading to division and "scope clauses".
The basic premise is sound enough as it should prevent "contracting in" cheap labour, as per the merchant marine. However, within the same company it does start to become ludicrous.
If you are employed by BA then you should be on the master seniority list and paid the going rate. I suspect that it just won't happen as too many people have their own agenda, especially those within the BACC.
Remember, anything outside LHR does not exist as far the BACC is concerned, and that means everyone at LGW and BAR.
To those at BACX, welcome to BA, how do you like it so far?
Harry, citizen of the Republic, second class.
One of the reasons that BA has so many problems is that it has too many people on different T's and C's, thereby leading to division and "scope clauses".
The basic premise is sound enough as it should prevent "contracting in" cheap labour, as per the merchant marine. However, within the same company it does start to become ludicrous.
If you are employed by BA then you should be on the master seniority list and paid the going rate. I suspect that it just won't happen as too many people have their own agenda, especially those within the BACC.
Remember, anything outside LHR does not exist as far the BACC is concerned, and that means everyone at LGW and BAR.
To those at BACX, welcome to BA, how do you like it so far?
Harry, citizen of the Republic, second class.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maniac,
"Kevin, (aka airrage) a lot of us know exactly who you are, and more importantly which questions you are not answering."
- Everyone knows who I am because I knowingly posted my name, company and fleet on another thread when accused on being a BALPA Rep(which is strange because most of my Posts are definately not Pro-BALPA - ask Chris Darke/Merv Gren. or the BACC Pay Team). I have no need or desire like some here to hide my Views behind Anonymity and as such prefer to post openly on the BALPA Forum where I also annotate my name with airrage to show my Pprune identity. So you can quit trying to act like you're some brilliant detective, I personally chose not to coward behind a false name. " SFO Kevin Judkins - not BACC check yourself !!!!
Note that I am not demanding Maniac to reveal his Identity. One, because I couldn't care less and two, because I respect his wish for Anonymity, despite him not affording me the same respect on this thread. He should have left it up to myself to post my name on this thread despite me having done so elsewhere. However, I have no reason not to stand by my convictions with my name attached. Perhaps Maniac will do the honorable thing and tell us who he is Now, at least the choice has been left for him to decide.
As for your questions Maniac;
"1. I note no reply to the entirely reasonable and logical argument put forward by Rhythm Method. "
-Rhythm Method is alone here I agree in Posting coherent arguements amongst the other anti-BA crowd and I apologise for focusing on the majority of nonsensical posts rather than talk to the only level headed man in the crowd. The problem with separate T&C's across BA Fleets is unfortunately not a new Problem in BA(Dan, EOG, BAR, etc). As I identify who I am, anyone in BA can confirm that I have ALWAYS voiced oppositon to any outstations on separate T&C's having suffered it at EOG myself for 5years. I have also backed up my Views through action by NEVER bidding into the LHS of any outstations because of this and even remained as an FO for an extra 2.5years at EOG when such a Command was available, so I have put my money where my mouth is. I often take abuse from people who have bid into such Commands for this outed View. The only problem with demanding BA Pay Full T&C's is that they would argue that it was the different T&C's which were the reasons BA were attracted to buy BRAL/CFE in the first place. Would you be happy to accept full BA T&C's and contracts(retirement age 55?), but then take up a Position in BA commensurate with your New Seniority since being TAKEN over ? Like as a SH FO ? FO's might, but I suppose most Capt's would prefer to retain their Commands on type even if it means you don't get full access to all BA aircraft in doing so. I would love to have everyone under one contract and Positions Commensurate with one Seniority List, thats all I have been after for 8years, afterall it is only the non-mainline Capt's who actually are benefitting from any lower-rate Pay because they now have a Command they wouldn't normally have gotten under one PAY/Seniority until Years Later(some would have possibly retired as co-pilots). The problem is most guys chose one issue(like being a CAPT on less than mainline rates) but gloss over the fact that they only have their Commands in the first place because of those lower rates. Despite their best efforts you can't separate the two Issues Easily unless you also allow a complete Re-Bid for Positions."
As for.........
" 2. You don't actually comment on the points put forward by Tinytim, all you do is tell him how wrong he is.
and
3. You KNOW what he says about scope is correct, accurate and current, but you are too arrogant (or maybe honest) to even deny it. You just continue to bluster."
......I find it hard to decifer any real Points raised by TT in amongst the agressive anti-BA posturing. I would be happy to give my opinion on legitimate Points raised by anyone. HS has answered most other questions I think more than fully.
"Kevin, (aka airrage) a lot of us know exactly who you are, and more importantly which questions you are not answering."
- Everyone knows who I am because I knowingly posted my name, company and fleet on another thread when accused on being a BALPA Rep(which is strange because most of my Posts are definately not Pro-BALPA - ask Chris Darke/Merv Gren. or the BACC Pay Team). I have no need or desire like some here to hide my Views behind Anonymity and as such prefer to post openly on the BALPA Forum where I also annotate my name with airrage to show my Pprune identity. So you can quit trying to act like you're some brilliant detective, I personally chose not to coward behind a false name. " SFO Kevin Judkins - not BACC check yourself !!!!
Note that I am not demanding Maniac to reveal his Identity. One, because I couldn't care less and two, because I respect his wish for Anonymity, despite him not affording me the same respect on this thread. He should have left it up to myself to post my name on this thread despite me having done so elsewhere. However, I have no reason not to stand by my convictions with my name attached. Perhaps Maniac will do the honorable thing and tell us who he is Now, at least the choice has been left for him to decide.
As for your questions Maniac;
"1. I note no reply to the entirely reasonable and logical argument put forward by Rhythm Method. "
-Rhythm Method is alone here I agree in Posting coherent arguements amongst the other anti-BA crowd and I apologise for focusing on the majority of nonsensical posts rather than talk to the only level headed man in the crowd. The problem with separate T&C's across BA Fleets is unfortunately not a new Problem in BA(Dan, EOG, BAR, etc). As I identify who I am, anyone in BA can confirm that I have ALWAYS voiced oppositon to any outstations on separate T&C's having suffered it at EOG myself for 5years. I have also backed up my Views through action by NEVER bidding into the LHS of any outstations because of this and even remained as an FO for an extra 2.5years at EOG when such a Command was available, so I have put my money where my mouth is. I often take abuse from people who have bid into such Commands for this outed View. The only problem with demanding BA Pay Full T&C's is that they would argue that it was the different T&C's which were the reasons BA were attracted to buy BRAL/CFE in the first place. Would you be happy to accept full BA T&C's and contracts(retirement age 55?), but then take up a Position in BA commensurate with your New Seniority since being TAKEN over ? Like as a SH FO ? FO's might, but I suppose most Capt's would prefer to retain their Commands on type even if it means you don't get full access to all BA aircraft in doing so. I would love to have everyone under one contract and Positions Commensurate with one Seniority List, thats all I have been after for 8years, afterall it is only the non-mainline Capt's who actually are benefitting from any lower-rate Pay because they now have a Command they wouldn't normally have gotten under one PAY/Seniority until Years Later(some would have possibly retired as co-pilots). The problem is most guys chose one issue(like being a CAPT on less than mainline rates) but gloss over the fact that they only have their Commands in the first place because of those lower rates. Despite their best efforts you can't separate the two Issues Easily unless you also allow a complete Re-Bid for Positions."
As for.........
" 2. You don't actually comment on the points put forward by Tinytim, all you do is tell him how wrong he is.
and
3. You KNOW what he says about scope is correct, accurate and current, but you are too arrogant (or maybe honest) to even deny it. You just continue to bluster."
......I find it hard to decifer any real Points raised by TT in amongst the agressive anti-BA posturing. I would be happy to give my opinion on legitimate Points raised by anyone. HS has answered most other questions I think more than fully.
Last edited by airrage; 20th Sep 2002 at 01:20.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 14
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for being so honest airrage and Hand Solo.
You tip your hand (pun unintended) every time you post. BRAL's post was bang on the money; the problem really is that what you want and what we want are really not different sides of the same coin, they are different coins, and hence there is no compromise possible on here. What is really needed is a meeting (s) between our BALPA, your BACC, and the two sets of managements.
I live in hope.
Having said all that, I was talking to our Chief Pilot Fleets the other day, and he mentioned that mainline were now noticing that the load factors on the old RJ routes now operated by 737s are well down (relatively) and that the routes were not really viable on these aircraft types. The plan, apparently, is to replace them with Embraers in the short/medium term. This is the future for the BACEX base at Gatwick, expect an announcement soon. Having said all that, coud it be that this was a long range plan after all, and aimed at sorting out the short haul problems?
Finally, because it irks me a bit. Some BA guys keep going on about how BACE are 'proud to work for peanuts' or something like that.
We're not. We think we need to be paid more, and we shall be working towards that goal.
What we were proud of was our ability to get the job done, to achieve the flying roster, to provide a good service to the peeps who eventually pay our wages - the customer, and, (old fashioned concept though it is), be part of a successful Company. Ever since we started mixing with BA, we have amazed by the totally self oriented attitudes, the scrabbling for small print and the rule book to avoid carrying out the job, the ridiculous and constant detail changes to everything, the refusal to compromise at all with management over anything, and most of all the polarisation which exists between all levels of BA staffing.
It makes us sick to be part of it. Its NOT an individual thing (I even have friends who work for BA) itis a collective Company and Corporate malaise.
Harry, we don't like it at all - remember the only reason that BA's offer to buy us was accepted was because BA made it very clear that the franchise was not up for renewal. Despite 9/11, the market shrinkage, BA management , BA management implants to us, BA doctrines on how to do everything, despite having to accept BAR costs and overheads, WE ARE STILL MAKING A PROFIT! I leave it to your imagination how much bigger that would be if we had not had to become part of BA.
Well, no good wingeing, we're here now. But do accept that it will take a while before we fully acclimatise to the ME ME ME doctrine of the BA workforce ethic, which seems to me to run from the hangar cat up to Colin Marshall. And also, do not expect to have your own way with us over scope. I know you have tried to split our 146 guys away by bribing them with mainline Ts and Cs, because there's a horrid anomaly for you there which immediately breaches your scope plan ! In the final analysis, my colleague above has it right, you won't strike over this for the same reason you have actually raised the issue in the first place your own self interest.
Harry, love to buy you a beer sometime - how have YOU found BA?
You tip your hand (pun unintended) every time you post. BRAL's post was bang on the money; the problem really is that what you want and what we want are really not different sides of the same coin, they are different coins, and hence there is no compromise possible on here. What is really needed is a meeting (s) between our BALPA, your BACC, and the two sets of managements.
I live in hope.
Having said all that, I was talking to our Chief Pilot Fleets the other day, and he mentioned that mainline were now noticing that the load factors on the old RJ routes now operated by 737s are well down (relatively) and that the routes were not really viable on these aircraft types. The plan, apparently, is to replace them with Embraers in the short/medium term. This is the future for the BACEX base at Gatwick, expect an announcement soon. Having said all that, coud it be that this was a long range plan after all, and aimed at sorting out the short haul problems?
Finally, because it irks me a bit. Some BA guys keep going on about how BACE are 'proud to work for peanuts' or something like that.
We're not. We think we need to be paid more, and we shall be working towards that goal.
What we were proud of was our ability to get the job done, to achieve the flying roster, to provide a good service to the peeps who eventually pay our wages - the customer, and, (old fashioned concept though it is), be part of a successful Company. Ever since we started mixing with BA, we have amazed by the totally self oriented attitudes, the scrabbling for small print and the rule book to avoid carrying out the job, the ridiculous and constant detail changes to everything, the refusal to compromise at all with management over anything, and most of all the polarisation which exists between all levels of BA staffing.
It makes us sick to be part of it. Its NOT an individual thing (I even have friends who work for BA) itis a collective Company and Corporate malaise.
Harry, we don't like it at all - remember the only reason that BA's offer to buy us was accepted was because BA made it very clear that the franchise was not up for renewal. Despite 9/11, the market shrinkage, BA management , BA management implants to us, BA doctrines on how to do everything, despite having to accept BAR costs and overheads, WE ARE STILL MAKING A PROFIT! I leave it to your imagination how much bigger that would be if we had not had to become part of BA.
Well, no good wingeing, we're here now. But do accept that it will take a while before we fully acclimatise to the ME ME ME doctrine of the BA workforce ethic, which seems to me to run from the hangar cat up to Colin Marshall. And also, do not expect to have your own way with us over scope. I know you have tried to split our 146 guys away by bribing them with mainline Ts and Cs, because there's a horrid anomaly for you there which immediately breaches your scope plan ! In the final analysis, my colleague above has it right, you won't strike over this for the same reason you have actually raised the issue in the first place your own self interest.
Harry, love to buy you a beer sometime - how have YOU found BA?
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Inverness
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In spite of being the most obvious contradiction to the Scope clause, we feel a bit isolated up here. An LGW base would be classic BA, just like ABZ. Close the base down, then nightstop two complete crews EVERY night of the year.
BA terms and conditions would not actually make any of better off if we had to move to Gatwick - in fact, I don't think they'd benefit us anyway.
BA terms and conditions would not actually make any of better off if we had to move to Gatwick - in fact, I don't think they'd benefit us anyway.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Finally some reasonably toned debate:
bral
"What is so special about 100 seats? "
Arbitrary # based on the maximum aircraft size BA Pilots would agree to concede. It goes back to what I said earlier. If BA want ex-BRAL to fly 747's then we want it to be on T&C's prevailing in BA for that fleet-size. And BA Pilots don't mind conceding grandfather rights(Capt's stay as Capt's)but as long as they stay on similar sized jets. Lets face it, this isn't an unreasonable BA Pilot request.
We could have said, no they are now bottom of the Seniority, we want all Pilot positions filled by bidding which would cost BA and put all ex-CFE/BRAL guys at the bottom of SH RHS. It is a COMPROMISE. Do you really think BA Pilots should agree for guys to stay as CAPT's and then after 6months allow them to say fly any type/size of aircraft ? In extremes this could mean guys become a 747 CAPT's in BA after being in months after some guys have waited 20 YEARS !!!!!!!!!!! Would BRAL Pilots not have demanded some sort of restrictions if put in a similar position ?
Scope is not about keeping ex-BRAL/CFE guys out of large BA aircraft but keeping BA from outsourcing all our jobs from outside BA. The aircraft size is the compromise of allowing people to be no worse off than when they where taken over by BA. Without Scope BALPA would be unable to Negotiate from strength in future for anything !! Because BA would just threaten to find a cheaper Option.
BARON
"Ever since we started mixing with BA, we have amazed by the totally self oriented attitudes, the scrabbling for small print and the rule book to avoid carrying out the job, the ridiculous and constant detail changes to everything, the refusal to compromise at all with management over anything, and most of all the polarisation which exists between all levels of BA staffing. "
Please try to believe that this has been brought about through decades of experience with working in BA and under their management. Things in smaller firms or family firms are based on give and take. Large UK PLc is about MANAGEMENT taking as much as possible from employees and giving it to shareholders, getting management share options and then changing firms with a successful CV. They do not even attempt to build a profitable firm believe it or not. They are concerned with BRAND management Only. Large firms means POLITICS, it is ineviatble when working with say 46unions in BA, all with different rights.
The only thing BA Pilots have to defend themselves is our Agreements, which BA ignore when possible. Being a stickler for Rule books is not because BA Pilots are different than other Pilots, it is because we have found what works and what doesn't over decades of experience. There is a lot history in every little Rule no matter how stupid it seems, unfortunately the historic reasons for those Rules often gets lost with the Pilots retiring but you can bet it is because they conceded something in the past in exchange for it.
Example 1
- LH flight crew have a different bus than CC on arrival back into LHR (2buses meet aircraft). BA CC get paid for 45minutes after arrival, Pilots 30minutes. BA won't concede an extra 15minutes Pay and because buses continually showed up late for crew. To improve bus punctaulity, after years of Pilot complaints, BA only acheived it when a financial penalty for being more than 35 minutes late was acheived. Pilots recently conceded the extra bus to fund Flight engineers early dismissal due FSS. The bus union have subsequently blocked such action. you get the idea.
Example 2
Why BA Pilots get paid a lunch allowance even though they don't leave the plane and they get a meal onboard. SH Pilots used to get to go for lunch(yes its true)between sectors at a fancy full service waited Mess. Pilots agreed to take lunch onboard but BA then stopped their alowance. A comproise resulted, so BA improved efficiency 200% and closed the expensive Mess and Pilots kept the lunch allowance.
A retiring BA CAPT once told me that there is even a reason why we have a PEN in our hotel rooms and not a PENCIL.
Although frustrating and often personally disadvantaging, the Rules are there and need to be protected in a company as large as BA. The only raise BA Pilots have acheived in decades is from trading off these inefficiencies otherwise our wages would have been stagnant. It is important not to concede these things for free because BALPA use them as bargaining tools.
Baron
"Harry, we don't like it at all - remember the only reason that BA's offer to buy us was accepted was because BA made it very clear that the franchise was not up for renewal."
BRAL/CFE, etc for was bought out/Taken Over by BA, the reason the takeover was successful(BA not extending franchise as Baron mentioned)is largely irrelevant. An 80% Premium to the current share price existing at that time had something to do with them agreeing I think.
Everyone, including BA Pilots need to come to terms with that we are working for a large PLC. It is not our job nor our within our ability, despite this sounding harsh, to make BA profitable. We are one cog in a machine of 1000's worldwide. Even our Pay is largely an irrelevance to BA making a profit. They can lose more money on not hedging fuel prices right overnight than they pay us in a month. This is just one example of 1000's to show that we have a much more irrelevant contribution to BA in terms of profitability than we like to think. We cannot continue to think of BA as our little company and if we work a little harder we can turn things around. It is exponentially beyond the realms of our control, all we can do is do our job to the best of our ability and hope the guy in the officie pushes the fuel buy order at the right time, etc, etc.
bral
"What is so special about 100 seats? "
Arbitrary # based on the maximum aircraft size BA Pilots would agree to concede. It goes back to what I said earlier. If BA want ex-BRAL to fly 747's then we want it to be on T&C's prevailing in BA for that fleet-size. And BA Pilots don't mind conceding grandfather rights(Capt's stay as Capt's)but as long as they stay on similar sized jets. Lets face it, this isn't an unreasonable BA Pilot request.
We could have said, no they are now bottom of the Seniority, we want all Pilot positions filled by bidding which would cost BA and put all ex-CFE/BRAL guys at the bottom of SH RHS. It is a COMPROMISE. Do you really think BA Pilots should agree for guys to stay as CAPT's and then after 6months allow them to say fly any type/size of aircraft ? In extremes this could mean guys become a 747 CAPT's in BA after being in months after some guys have waited 20 YEARS !!!!!!!!!!! Would BRAL Pilots not have demanded some sort of restrictions if put in a similar position ?
Scope is not about keeping ex-BRAL/CFE guys out of large BA aircraft but keeping BA from outsourcing all our jobs from outside BA. The aircraft size is the compromise of allowing people to be no worse off than when they where taken over by BA. Without Scope BALPA would be unable to Negotiate from strength in future for anything !! Because BA would just threaten to find a cheaper Option.
BARON
"Ever since we started mixing with BA, we have amazed by the totally self oriented attitudes, the scrabbling for small print and the rule book to avoid carrying out the job, the ridiculous and constant detail changes to everything, the refusal to compromise at all with management over anything, and most of all the polarisation which exists between all levels of BA staffing. "
Please try to believe that this has been brought about through decades of experience with working in BA and under their management. Things in smaller firms or family firms are based on give and take. Large UK PLc is about MANAGEMENT taking as much as possible from employees and giving it to shareholders, getting management share options and then changing firms with a successful CV. They do not even attempt to build a profitable firm believe it or not. They are concerned with BRAND management Only. Large firms means POLITICS, it is ineviatble when working with say 46unions in BA, all with different rights.
The only thing BA Pilots have to defend themselves is our Agreements, which BA ignore when possible. Being a stickler for Rule books is not because BA Pilots are different than other Pilots, it is because we have found what works and what doesn't over decades of experience. There is a lot history in every little Rule no matter how stupid it seems, unfortunately the historic reasons for those Rules often gets lost with the Pilots retiring but you can bet it is because they conceded something in the past in exchange for it.
Example 1
- LH flight crew have a different bus than CC on arrival back into LHR (2buses meet aircraft). BA CC get paid for 45minutes after arrival, Pilots 30minutes. BA won't concede an extra 15minutes Pay and because buses continually showed up late for crew. To improve bus punctaulity, after years of Pilot complaints, BA only acheived it when a financial penalty for being more than 35 minutes late was acheived. Pilots recently conceded the extra bus to fund Flight engineers early dismissal due FSS. The bus union have subsequently blocked such action. you get the idea.
Example 2
Why BA Pilots get paid a lunch allowance even though they don't leave the plane and they get a meal onboard. SH Pilots used to get to go for lunch(yes its true)between sectors at a fancy full service waited Mess. Pilots agreed to take lunch onboard but BA then stopped their alowance. A comproise resulted, so BA improved efficiency 200% and closed the expensive Mess and Pilots kept the lunch allowance.
A retiring BA CAPT once told me that there is even a reason why we have a PEN in our hotel rooms and not a PENCIL.
Although frustrating and often personally disadvantaging, the Rules are there and need to be protected in a company as large as BA. The only raise BA Pilots have acheived in decades is from trading off these inefficiencies otherwise our wages would have been stagnant. It is important not to concede these things for free because BALPA use them as bargaining tools.
Baron
"Harry, we don't like it at all - remember the only reason that BA's offer to buy us was accepted was because BA made it very clear that the franchise was not up for renewal."
BRAL/CFE, etc for was bought out/Taken Over by BA, the reason the takeover was successful(BA not extending franchise as Baron mentioned)is largely irrelevant. An 80% Premium to the current share price existing at that time had something to do with them agreeing I think.
Everyone, including BA Pilots need to come to terms with that we are working for a large PLC. It is not our job nor our within our ability, despite this sounding harsh, to make BA profitable. We are one cog in a machine of 1000's worldwide. Even our Pay is largely an irrelevance to BA making a profit. They can lose more money on not hedging fuel prices right overnight than they pay us in a month. This is just one example of 1000's to show that we have a much more irrelevant contribution to BA in terms of profitability than we like to think. We cannot continue to think of BA as our little company and if we work a little harder we can turn things around. It is exponentially beyond the realms of our control, all we can do is do our job to the best of our ability and hope the guy in the officie pushes the fuel buy order at the right time, etc, etc.
Last edited by airrage; 20th Sep 2002 at 13:25.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Why not:
Put all BACE and BA pilots on one seniority list, with Grandfather rights for BACE Captains on current type, and have everyone on the same pay scale.
Effectively make the BA seniority list responsible for flying all the a/c regardless of which company operates them. If BA management want to outsource flying to subsidiaries/franchises then fine, they just have to use BA crews and pay them accordingly to fly the aircraft. That way the only thing you lose is the input and cost of BA overheads and management as flying gets out-sourced.
Pilot's pay, conditions, and prospects are preserved. Whether BA proper, or the franchise pays the crews doesn't matter - as long as the franchise contract makes it clear what the crewing cost will be and that it must be met at that level. If a franchise didn't want to take the contract under those conditions, it doesn't have to (though I imagine it would make little difference to the economics) - mainline would just have to operate the service itself. T's & C's for the whole flight crew workforce could then be negotiated en masse with BA Group management.
I'd be interested to know why anyone from whichever comapny would not benefit from this... but if I've suggested something stupid, my apologies! (I'll delete the post if I get too insulted)
Put all BACE and BA pilots on one seniority list, with Grandfather rights for BACE Captains on current type, and have everyone on the same pay scale.
Effectively make the BA seniority list responsible for flying all the a/c regardless of which company operates them. If BA management want to outsource flying to subsidiaries/franchises then fine, they just have to use BA crews and pay them accordingly to fly the aircraft. That way the only thing you lose is the input and cost of BA overheads and management as flying gets out-sourced.
Pilot's pay, conditions, and prospects are preserved. Whether BA proper, or the franchise pays the crews doesn't matter - as long as the franchise contract makes it clear what the crewing cost will be and that it must be met at that level. If a franchise didn't want to take the contract under those conditions, it doesn't have to (though I imagine it would make little difference to the economics) - mainline would just have to operate the service itself. T's & C's for the whole flight crew workforce could then be negotiated en masse with BA Group management.
I'd be interested to know why anyone from whichever comapny would not benefit from this... but if I've suggested something stupid, my apologies! (I'll delete the post if I get too insulted)
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: The Planet Earth
Age: 23
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
airrage. I think I can see where you are coming from, I wonder if you can say he same for us?
One minute we are a successful Regional Airline, making record profits year on year, and broadly speaking, as satisfied as pilots ever get to be. Then BA come and buy us. (I really wouldn't talk too much about share price if I were you!).
Worst of all, they then deluge us with appointments, mangers and BA personnel. They also merge us with another successful wholly owned subsidiary, already going through the BAisation routine. Our colleagues in Brymon tell us what BA management is like - but most of us smile and think they exaggerate.
Then we look at the Big Cheeses coming our way, (not to mention the little one, lol).
We get managers with no experience of managing, certianly not of managing regional airlines anyway. We get Fleet Manager appointments with no experience of manageing, or even of being an aircraft Captain, we get training captains likewise. We see appointments made blatantly to relatives of senior staff, and then they say everything must change. No specifics as to why we must change, just that we must.
We change SOPs, manuals, procedures, management structures, training structures, training procedures, passenger checkin methods, aircraft handling methods, pax and crew catering, uniforms, recruitment - EVERYTHING.
What happens next? Hmmmm, we start cancelling flights due to lack of crew, we have plummeting morale, we have dirty unkempt aircraft, total lack of timekeeping - its an effing disaster - but hey what do we know? Noone apologises, noone is fired, and the same management that achieved this masterpiece carry on with their buddy buddy tactics, changing things that worked for things that don't. I would be the first to stand in line and congratulate success, but this is bizarre. I don't know how, but somehow apparently we are still in the black, but it can't b by much.
This airrage, is why we don't trust or believe anything to do with BA. I can actually see what you mean with your last post, but I can tell you, this type of system may be ok for a large outfit like Marconi, oops, I mean BA (you see, methodology DOES matter) but it does not work in the smaller, tighter Regional setup.
I suppose I would be happy to accept BA Ts and Cs, but I'm not sure I would actually be better off. I certainly can't afford to retire at 55. I certainly don't want to become a tiny cog in the machine; I quite like being able to actively contribute, and see the difference my efforts make. It does seem however that this aproach is impossible within BA. I don't know who I feel sorriest for, you lot for having your system, or us lot for having to join your system.
Maybe there isn't an answer, but your attitude certainly doesn't help.
One minute we are a successful Regional Airline, making record profits year on year, and broadly speaking, as satisfied as pilots ever get to be. Then BA come and buy us. (I really wouldn't talk too much about share price if I were you!).
Worst of all, they then deluge us with appointments, mangers and BA personnel. They also merge us with another successful wholly owned subsidiary, already going through the BAisation routine. Our colleagues in Brymon tell us what BA management is like - but most of us smile and think they exaggerate.
Then we look at the Big Cheeses coming our way, (not to mention the little one, lol).
We get managers with no experience of managing, certianly not of managing regional airlines anyway. We get Fleet Manager appointments with no experience of manageing, or even of being an aircraft Captain, we get training captains likewise. We see appointments made blatantly to relatives of senior staff, and then they say everything must change. No specifics as to why we must change, just that we must.
We change SOPs, manuals, procedures, management structures, training structures, training procedures, passenger checkin methods, aircraft handling methods, pax and crew catering, uniforms, recruitment - EVERYTHING.
What happens next? Hmmmm, we start cancelling flights due to lack of crew, we have plummeting morale, we have dirty unkempt aircraft, total lack of timekeeping - its an effing disaster - but hey what do we know? Noone apologises, noone is fired, and the same management that achieved this masterpiece carry on with their buddy buddy tactics, changing things that worked for things that don't. I would be the first to stand in line and congratulate success, but this is bizarre. I don't know how, but somehow apparently we are still in the black, but it can't b by much.
This airrage, is why we don't trust or believe anything to do with BA. I can actually see what you mean with your last post, but I can tell you, this type of system may be ok for a large outfit like Marconi, oops, I mean BA (you see, methodology DOES matter) but it does not work in the smaller, tighter Regional setup.
I suppose I would be happy to accept BA Ts and Cs, but I'm not sure I would actually be better off. I certainly can't afford to retire at 55. I certainly don't want to become a tiny cog in the machine; I quite like being able to actively contribute, and see the difference my efforts make. It does seem however that this aproach is impossible within BA. I don't know who I feel sorriest for, you lot for having your system, or us lot for having to join your system.
Maybe there isn't an answer, but your attitude certainly doesn't help.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Abroad
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
M.M Why are you seemingly blaming airrage, when it seems you have a common enemy? I also work for BA mainline on L/H now, ex cadet, and I'm also disheartened like you both. I've been regionalised, franchised and generally shafted. Now that you're in BA you'll experience the same, but pls don't blame the likes of airrage and myself for wanting to stop the rot and protect our jobs.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Cu
Perfect solution, and I have said the same thing many times myself. But do you think the huge ranks of BA managers are going to implement something that downsizes their own importance or numbers, look at the arrogance of even building an office like Waterside on acres of prime land near LHR. This is what I mean about working for a huge outfit rather than a profitable small or family outfit. At EOG we were paid 30% less than the Pilots BA paid GO Pilots(their low-cost outfit). I would have been happy to have been seconded to GO and get a 30% pay rise. It didn't happen...........BRAND Management. We are told we don't have the big Picture, know the intricasies of cross-accountancy, etc.
Jet2
Sorry can't remember but it amused me all the same to think even to this detail our lives have been Negotiated.
MM
The 80% share price premium to which I referred was not BA's share price, but BRAL's when BA bought them, they paid 80% more than the price the BRAL shares were frozen at(so BA paid 180P for every 100P worth of shares). It is unfortunate for you that your owners sold out, and no-one is denying you were a great profitable firm before.....but sold out they did, so this past is largely irrelevant from here on in. All the rest of the frustrations you mention are the very things BA Pilots have been complaining about for the past 20years or so. We didn't create it or ask for it, and it certainly doesn't help that every other Pilot in the UK accuses BA Pilots for BA's problems. Whilst we work just as hard, have doubled productivity every 4years for decades, and we watch the low-cost Pilots getting paid in 1-2years what we get after building seniority of 12years+ in BA. With your short time in the company you can probably start to see it's not our fault, just as much as it's not yours. It's not my attitude, I am just a cog like it or not, it's beyond my control. BALPA's militancy protects us little cogs from how management would really like to treat us..........Yes much worse and probably for no improvement in profitability but maybe a Waterside in New York, or a different tailfin design, etc, etc.
The only chance we stand as tiny cogs in the huge BA meatgrinder is by giving BALPA as much fire-power as possible. You have to stop thinking small scale firm of flexing and bending over, and a bit of give and take, because BA relentlessly come back for more only to **** it out elsewhere. BALPA and BA Pilots are not the enemy, we just KNOW from DECADES of experience the BA Ops against Pilots, and are constantly trying to plug chinks in the BA Pilot Career armour. If you don't believe me now, you will in a few years down the road. Better to get that healthy glow of cynicsm now, it will save you years of frustration.
Perfect solution, and I have said the same thing many times myself. But do you think the huge ranks of BA managers are going to implement something that downsizes their own importance or numbers, look at the arrogance of even building an office like Waterside on acres of prime land near LHR. This is what I mean about working for a huge outfit rather than a profitable small or family outfit. At EOG we were paid 30% less than the Pilots BA paid GO Pilots(their low-cost outfit). I would have been happy to have been seconded to GO and get a 30% pay rise. It didn't happen...........BRAND Management. We are told we don't have the big Picture, know the intricasies of cross-accountancy, etc.
Jet2
Sorry can't remember but it amused me all the same to think even to this detail our lives have been Negotiated.
MM
The 80% share price premium to which I referred was not BA's share price, but BRAL's when BA bought them, they paid 80% more than the price the BRAL shares were frozen at(so BA paid 180P for every 100P worth of shares). It is unfortunate for you that your owners sold out, and no-one is denying you were a great profitable firm before.....but sold out they did, so this past is largely irrelevant from here on in. All the rest of the frustrations you mention are the very things BA Pilots have been complaining about for the past 20years or so. We didn't create it or ask for it, and it certainly doesn't help that every other Pilot in the UK accuses BA Pilots for BA's problems. Whilst we work just as hard, have doubled productivity every 4years for decades, and we watch the low-cost Pilots getting paid in 1-2years what we get after building seniority of 12years+ in BA. With your short time in the company you can probably start to see it's not our fault, just as much as it's not yours. It's not my attitude, I am just a cog like it or not, it's beyond my control. BALPA's militancy protects us little cogs from how management would really like to treat us..........Yes much worse and probably for no improvement in profitability but maybe a Waterside in New York, or a different tailfin design, etc, etc.
The only chance we stand as tiny cogs in the huge BA meatgrinder is by giving BALPA as much fire-power as possible. You have to stop thinking small scale firm of flexing and bending over, and a bit of give and take, because BA relentlessly come back for more only to **** it out elsewhere. BALPA and BA Pilots are not the enemy, we just KNOW from DECADES of experience the BA Ops against Pilots, and are constantly trying to plug chinks in the BA Pilot Career armour. If you don't believe me now, you will in a few years down the road. Better to get that healthy glow of cynicsm now, it will save you years of frustration.
Last edited by airrage; 20th Sep 2002 at 17:58.
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: The Planet Earth
Age: 23
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not blaming airage. I'm pointing out he can hardly expect anyone to be disadvantaged the way BACC are trying to do to us with scope and not complain. The more so when you see what BA has done to our Company.
airage should put himself in our shoes, and then just maybe he'll realise that his CC have scored once with DanAir a few years back. The world knows what they are like, their record speaks for itself even if it weren't vocalised by the likes of Kevin Judkins and Han Solo. No, we will not lie down and be walked all over.
Cu has a very good suggestion, but it will never happen, beacuase there would be a BA mainline outcry.
Remeber what Kevin said
"We could have said, no they are now bottom of the Seniority, we want all Pilot positions filled by bidding which would cost BA and put all ex-CFE/BRAL guys at the bottom of SH RHS..."
or
"There is no question of any CE guys flying the Rj on 'secondment' to BA as effectively they would be on a mainline aircraft on inferior terms..."
or
"I am telling you that if you want to be able to protect what you can/cannot fly, and the terms for the forseeable future, then you will support Scope...."
and
"The sooner you accept that you are now part of BA so anything that is good for BA Pilots is now good for you as well the better.."
In other words he is dictating his issue terms, and not even attempting to see the other side......oh, I really can't be bothered with this any more. Time will tell soon enough.
airage should put himself in our shoes, and then just maybe he'll realise that his CC have scored once with DanAir a few years back. The world knows what they are like, their record speaks for itself even if it weren't vocalised by the likes of Kevin Judkins and Han Solo. No, we will not lie down and be walked all over.
Cu has a very good suggestion, but it will never happen, beacuase there would be a BA mainline outcry.
Remeber what Kevin said
"We could have said, no they are now bottom of the Seniority, we want all Pilot positions filled by bidding which would cost BA and put all ex-CFE/BRAL guys at the bottom of SH RHS..."
or
"There is no question of any CE guys flying the Rj on 'secondment' to BA as effectively they would be on a mainline aircraft on inferior terms..."
or
"I am telling you that if you want to be able to protect what you can/cannot fly, and the terms for the forseeable future, then you will support Scope...."
and
"The sooner you accept that you are now part of BA so anything that is good for BA Pilots is now good for you as well the better.."
In other words he is dictating his issue terms, and not even attempting to see the other side......oh, I really can't be bothered with this any more. Time will tell soon enough.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MM
"airage should put himself in our shoes, and then just maybe he'll realise that his CC have scored once with DanAir a few years back. The world knows what they are like, their record speaks for itself even if it weren't vocalised by the likes of Kevin Judkins and Han Solo."
I WAS STUCK AT EOG(just after DAN takeover) FOR 5YEARS, I KNOW FIRST HAND WHAT IT WAS LIKE !
"Cu has a very good suggestion, but it will never happen, beacuase there would be a BA mainline outcry. "
Not a BA mainline outcry a BA management outcry, see my answer to CU above for more.
Remeber what Kevin said
"We could have said, no they are now bottom of the Seniority, we want all Pilot positions filled by bidding which would cost BA and put all ex-CFE/BRAL guys at the bottom of SH RHS..."
Yes, you can't expect to retain your Commands and fly JUMBO's the next week can you ? You were TAKEN OVER !!! The compromise of keeping Commands is aircraft restriction, do you think this is unreasonable, or you think you should get a JUMBO Command because you did 4-5years in BRAL ??
or
"There is no question of any CE guys flying the Rj on 'secondment' to BA as effectively they would be on a mainline aircraft on inferior terms..."
DO you really want to allow BA to fly BA aircraft on inferior terms. No, I would rather keep the terms and have you improve your life when you come across. Or would you prefer we all go to the lowest common denominator rather than secure the highest for us ALL.
or
"I am telling you that if you want to be able to protect what you can/cannot fly, and the terms for the forseeable future, then you will support Scope...."
Otherwise Ukraine Air will be doing it for US !!!
and
"The sooner you accept that you are now part of BA so anything that is good for BA Pilots is now good for you as well the better.."
You are part of BA now, don't you want the best terms and conditions possible ??
PS Baron Harkonnen....Finnish ?
"airage should put himself in our shoes, and then just maybe he'll realise that his CC have scored once with DanAir a few years back. The world knows what they are like, their record speaks for itself even if it weren't vocalised by the likes of Kevin Judkins and Han Solo."
I WAS STUCK AT EOG(just after DAN takeover) FOR 5YEARS, I KNOW FIRST HAND WHAT IT WAS LIKE !
"Cu has a very good suggestion, but it will never happen, beacuase there would be a BA mainline outcry. "
Not a BA mainline outcry a BA management outcry, see my answer to CU above for more.
Remeber what Kevin said
"We could have said, no they are now bottom of the Seniority, we want all Pilot positions filled by bidding which would cost BA and put all ex-CFE/BRAL guys at the bottom of SH RHS..."
Yes, you can't expect to retain your Commands and fly JUMBO's the next week can you ? You were TAKEN OVER !!! The compromise of keeping Commands is aircraft restriction, do you think this is unreasonable, or you think you should get a JUMBO Command because you did 4-5years in BRAL ??
or
"There is no question of any CE guys flying the Rj on 'secondment' to BA as effectively they would be on a mainline aircraft on inferior terms..."
DO you really want to allow BA to fly BA aircraft on inferior terms. No, I would rather keep the terms and have you improve your life when you come across. Or would you prefer we all go to the lowest common denominator rather than secure the highest for us ALL.
or
"I am telling you that if you want to be able to protect what you can/cannot fly, and the terms for the forseeable future, then you will support Scope...."
Otherwise Ukraine Air will be doing it for US !!!
and
"The sooner you accept that you are now part of BA so anything that is good for BA Pilots is now good for you as well the better.."
You are part of BA now, don't you want the best terms and conditions possible ??
PS Baron Harkonnen....Finnish ?
Last edited by airrage; 20th Sep 2002 at 18:20.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Manchester
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The Weakest Link
To Mr Airrage.
Yes I would like the highest possible common denominator for all. The trouble is that I don't believe that is what you have in mind.
Look at the contributors to this forum and their arguments - you and Hand Solo are are virtually 2, maybe 3 against a dozen or so united against you. Look at the odds in the poll at the start of this thread - gives you some idea of the thrust of most people's opinions don't you think?
Some of your stuff sounds quite a good idea, and quite innocuous - again, trouble is that is not the way it sounds by the time it has gone through the BACC filtering process.
So sorry, you are the weakest link - goodbye!
Yes I would like the highest possible common denominator for all. The trouble is that I don't believe that is what you have in mind.
Look at the contributors to this forum and their arguments - you and Hand Solo are are virtually 2, maybe 3 against a dozen or so united against you. Look at the odds in the poll at the start of this thread - gives you some idea of the thrust of most people's opinions don't you think?
Some of your stuff sounds quite a good idea, and quite innocuous - again, trouble is that is not the way it sounds by the time it has gone through the BACC filtering process.
So sorry, you are the weakest link - goodbye!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Charizard
"Yes I would like the highest possible common denominator for all. The trouble is that I don't believe that is what you have in mind."
As a LH Pilot with 8years worth of Seniority in BA, what do you think I possibly have to gain by Scope from You ?? An RJ Command when I could have taken a 737 Command 5years ago ?
"Look at the contributors to this forum and their arguments - you and Hand Solo are are virtually 2, maybe 3 against a dozen or so united against you. Look at the odds in the poll at the start of this thread - gives you some idea of the thrust of most people's opinions don't you think? "
No doubt this is the view held by the BRAL Pilots, but what kind of Results do you think a Poll of 3200 BA Pilots would produce ? you siad it yourself, there are only 2-3 BA Pilots on this thread at all. There are not a lot of guys that visit the site here now our Official Forum is so active and the only reason I did was because someone posted a link from the Official BALPA Forum and couldn't believe some of what I was reading. I blame BALPA or your own CC for not informing/communicating(PR) to you guys better about what Scope wants to accomplish.
There is no conspiracy folks, if there is I wish someone would explain how any BA Pilots are benefitting. If you can't see Scope is about protecting the longterm future of BA Pilots(which includes you)from outsourcing BA sched flights and thus retaining bargaining Power by BALPA then please elaborate !!!!!!
"Yes I would like the highest possible common denominator for all. The trouble is that I don't believe that is what you have in mind."
As a LH Pilot with 8years worth of Seniority in BA, what do you think I possibly have to gain by Scope from You ?? An RJ Command when I could have taken a 737 Command 5years ago ?
"Look at the contributors to this forum and their arguments - you and Hand Solo are are virtually 2, maybe 3 against a dozen or so united against you. Look at the odds in the poll at the start of this thread - gives you some idea of the thrust of most people's opinions don't you think? "
No doubt this is the view held by the BRAL Pilots, but what kind of Results do you think a Poll of 3200 BA Pilots would produce ? you siad it yourself, there are only 2-3 BA Pilots on this thread at all. There are not a lot of guys that visit the site here now our Official Forum is so active and the only reason I did was because someone posted a link from the Official BALPA Forum and couldn't believe some of what I was reading. I blame BALPA or your own CC for not informing/communicating(PR) to you guys better about what Scope wants to accomplish.
There is no conspiracy folks, if there is I wish someone would explain how any BA Pilots are benefitting. If you can't see Scope is about protecting the longterm future of BA Pilots(which includes you)from outsourcing BA sched flights and thus retaining bargaining Power by BALPA then please elaborate !!!!!!
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: London, England
Posts: 411
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bral,
BALPA are trying to form a deal so that no-one is worse OFF(a compromise)given the recent takeovers and ALSO secure the future of all of Us from Outsourcing to cheap labour(Eastern Europe is one example)
So How can this be done:
If you were a BRAL CAPT before,
- you will still be (as long as you stay on similar sized aircraft so that BA Pilots aren't disadvantaged, like introducing a 747, etc)
If you were a BA CAPT at that Base and it is now run by BACE;
- you can be seconded to BACE and aren't forced to move home, wife, kids.
FUTURE;
BA cannot operate with outside Pilots on BA aircraft or Routes. This means BALPA have Power come Negotiations, future Pay Deals, working agreements, etc. Without Scope BA just hire or create an E.European group that pays peanuts and tells us to take the same Pay or they will eventually outsource 100% of our jobs to this cheaper Option. They will continue to find cheaper options(3rd world) until the world is all as wealthy as the West and Pays are equal across the world.
Where is the conspiracy and why would anyone not want the FUTURE security it offers ?????
BALPA are trying to form a deal so that no-one is worse OFF(a compromise)given the recent takeovers and ALSO secure the future of all of Us from Outsourcing to cheap labour(Eastern Europe is one example)
So How can this be done:
If you were a BRAL CAPT before,
- you will still be (as long as you stay on similar sized aircraft so that BA Pilots aren't disadvantaged, like introducing a 747, etc)
If you were a BA CAPT at that Base and it is now run by BACE;
- you can be seconded to BACE and aren't forced to move home, wife, kids.
FUTURE;
BA cannot operate with outside Pilots on BA aircraft or Routes. This means BALPA have Power come Negotiations, future Pay Deals, working agreements, etc. Without Scope BA just hire or create an E.European group that pays peanuts and tells us to take the same Pay or they will eventually outsource 100% of our jobs to this cheaper Option. They will continue to find cheaper options(3rd world) until the world is all as wealthy as the West and Pays are equal across the world.
Where is the conspiracy and why would anyone not want the FUTURE security it offers ?????
Mistrust in Management
Charizard
Look at the contributors to this forum and their arguments - you and Hand Solo are are virtually 2, maybe 3 against a dozen or so united against you.
Just like to point out that we have elected the BACC to look after BA pilots. Presumably you have elected your CC to look after your good selves. I don't expect that many of our reps would be elected if part of their manifesto read that they had no interest in making sure that BA flying was carried out by BA pilots.
I genuinely do wish all of you the very best, and I sincerely hope that some time soon you will find yourselves on mainline T & C's. (Thats if there is any sort of BA mainline left after 'Dubya' has let off a few firecrackers.)
Regards
Exeng
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bral - Firstly some simple maths pertaining to your post:-
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They are removing 16 RJs from the mainline fleet, removing 16 RJs worth of pilot positions from mainline and displacing almost all the pilots at BHX, MAN and the LGW RJ fleet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And what will replace the RJs? The 737/Airbus a/c from the regions. You ex CFE are BA pilots - you can fly them, or do they have too many seats?
By my reckoning BA currently have
x Concorde, 777 ,767, 757, 747, 737, A320, A319, ATRs in London
8 A319s at BHX
16 RJs at LGW
which is x+24 aircraft
After this proposal we would have:
x Concorde, 777 ,767, 757, 747, 737, A320, A319, ATRs in London
8 A319s extra at LHR
0 RJs at LGW
which is x+8 aircraft, or 16 RJs worth of pilot positions removed from BA.
As for this :-
The BACC want scope to protect their members from the possibility that BACX could increase the size of aircraft in the future? But you (BACX) say BACC, can operate the a/c provided your pilots are on BA T&C's. OK say the BACX managers - we agree to that. Ah, but won't BACC then say, "Only after our Mainline guys who used to work for BAR are allowed to operate them." Then there are the ex CFE pilots, after all they are too junior to others who have bid for the Airbus/737 - what happens to them? After all they ARE BA pilots and they will not be able to stay on a similar sized jet (grandfather right as you called them). Sorry airage, BACC wants it all ways, BALPA are NOT looking after the interest of its BACX members.
Well see my sums above. If BACX managers agreed to let you fly the RJ on the same T & Cs as BA (which they haven't) its still has the potential to take 16 RJs worth of jobs out of BA. BA management want to offload the RJs to suit their own needs so I would damn well expect that anyone in BAR who wants to stay in the regions or anyone in CFE who wants to protect their grandfather rights on the aircraft gets first choice on it. BACC quite rightly demand the best deal for BA pilots. By all means protest to your own CC, but that doesn't change the fact that the British Airways RJs are an issue to be resolved between BA management and the BACC. If or when a deal is struck between the two partys then you can do what you like with them, but until then they stay as BA aircraft . If you want to buy a whole fleet of 99 seat RJs then go ahead, but the wholesale transfer of BA owned/leased aircraft to a subsidiary or an independent company is a different issue entirely.
quote:
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
They are removing 16 RJs from the mainline fleet, removing 16 RJs worth of pilot positions from mainline and displacing almost all the pilots at BHX, MAN and the LGW RJ fleet.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
And what will replace the RJs? The 737/Airbus a/c from the regions. You ex CFE are BA pilots - you can fly them, or do they have too many seats?
By my reckoning BA currently have
x Concorde, 777 ,767, 757, 747, 737, A320, A319, ATRs in London
8 A319s at BHX
16 RJs at LGW
which is x+24 aircraft
After this proposal we would have:
x Concorde, 777 ,767, 757, 747, 737, A320, A319, ATRs in London
8 A319s extra at LHR
0 RJs at LGW
which is x+8 aircraft, or 16 RJs worth of pilot positions removed from BA.
As for this :-
The BACC want scope to protect their members from the possibility that BACX could increase the size of aircraft in the future? But you (BACX) say BACC, can operate the a/c provided your pilots are on BA T&C's. OK say the BACX managers - we agree to that. Ah, but won't BACC then say, "Only after our Mainline guys who used to work for BAR are allowed to operate them." Then there are the ex CFE pilots, after all they are too junior to others who have bid for the Airbus/737 - what happens to them? After all they ARE BA pilots and they will not be able to stay on a similar sized jet (grandfather right as you called them). Sorry airage, BACC wants it all ways, BALPA are NOT looking after the interest of its BACX members.
Well see my sums above. If BACX managers agreed to let you fly the RJ on the same T & Cs as BA (which they haven't) its still has the potential to take 16 RJs worth of jobs out of BA. BA management want to offload the RJs to suit their own needs so I would damn well expect that anyone in BAR who wants to stay in the regions or anyone in CFE who wants to protect their grandfather rights on the aircraft gets first choice on it. BACC quite rightly demand the best deal for BA pilots. By all means protest to your own CC, but that doesn't change the fact that the British Airways RJs are an issue to be resolved between BA management and the BACC. If or when a deal is struck between the two partys then you can do what you like with them, but until then they stay as BA aircraft . If you want to buy a whole fleet of 99 seat RJs then go ahead, but the wholesale transfer of BA owned/leased aircraft to a subsidiary or an independent company is a different issue entirely.
Last edited by Hand Solo; 21st Sep 2002 at 00:53.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Manchester
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ermmmm,
16 x RJ jobs out of BA? What about:
1. The current BA pilots taking BACE jobs with us?
2. The recruiting going on this year for BA?
Someone mentioned earlier you were trying to negotiate now for all FUTURE pilots, not just current ones. Seems he was right, because no net jobs are currently being removed from BA mainline, they are just being transferred to a different type or base, and those who don't want to move base don't have to, and don't effectively take any remuneration cut.
Hence, there ARE no BA jobs actually going. If there were, I could sympathise, and you would be within your rights to object to what would be effectively constructive dismissal.
You are also being disingenuous - at least BACE are only talking about its current, PART MAINLINE workforce, whereas you have apparently set yourselves up as representing the future of all BA flightdeck crew for ever. I wonder how many of you would sacrifice anything for an as yet unemployed cadet?
It seems OK to you to have some of your mainline people seconded to us, but RETAINING their mainline seniority and privileges, to be sucked back when you feel like it. Perhaps our BALPA should refuse to sanction helping mainline pilots out any more? Would the current BA guys with BACE prefer to hang on to their BA seniority with us, or lose it because BACC insist on having it all their way, thus provoking BACE CC to retakiate in kind? Perhaps our CC should refuse to countenance providing paid flying employment for BA mainline pilots who would otherwise be on the dole, or maybe cabin crew?
Exeng - I take your point. Strange though, that all these people couldn't be bothered to cast a straw vote.
16 x RJ jobs out of BA? What about:
1. The current BA pilots taking BACE jobs with us?
2. The recruiting going on this year for BA?
Someone mentioned earlier you were trying to negotiate now for all FUTURE pilots, not just current ones. Seems he was right, because no net jobs are currently being removed from BA mainline, they are just being transferred to a different type or base, and those who don't want to move base don't have to, and don't effectively take any remuneration cut.
Hence, there ARE no BA jobs actually going. If there were, I could sympathise, and you would be within your rights to object to what would be effectively constructive dismissal.
You are also being disingenuous - at least BACE are only talking about its current, PART MAINLINE workforce, whereas you have apparently set yourselves up as representing the future of all BA flightdeck crew for ever. I wonder how many of you would sacrifice anything for an as yet unemployed cadet?
It seems OK to you to have some of your mainline people seconded to us, but RETAINING their mainline seniority and privileges, to be sucked back when you feel like it. Perhaps our BALPA should refuse to sanction helping mainline pilots out any more? Would the current BA guys with BACE prefer to hang on to their BA seniority with us, or lose it because BACC insist on having it all their way, thus provoking BACE CC to retakiate in kind? Perhaps our CC should refuse to countenance providing paid flying employment for BA mainline pilots who would otherwise be on the dole, or maybe cabin crew?
Exeng - I take your point. Strange though, that all these people couldn't be bothered to cast a straw vote.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: The 51st State
Posts: 229
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Did someone mention drinks, great, mines a lager please!
Being a bit of a hybrid, BA, then CFE, then BA, I suppose I have had the advantage/disadvantage of seeing both sides of the argument. A lot of what is being said makes a lot of sense.
I know where AIRRAGE and Co are coming from because they have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, hence they have views that may not seem palatable. Unfortunately understanding WHY BA is the basket case it is does not necessarily make the situation better.
The inaction of all the minor "cogs" plus the low quality of employee at BA means only one thing, financial ruin. In defence of BA pilots they at least partially understand the situation they are in.
Everyone else thinks they are in the civil service and that BA will somehow last forever. It won't! Remeber peple are recruited by BA because they "fit in", not because thet will do a good job. If our managers were genuine entrepreneurs then they would be running there own companies. They live in the comfort zone.
Unfortunately in a misguided attempt to protect what little is left mainline pilots are manipulating the situation to their own advantage, despite what they may say. The argument is that "you should know your place" because if you don't protect "my job" then "you" will have nothing to aspire to.
My own T's and C's have NOT improved as a result of being at BA. This is not unusual. Of my immediate circle of friends, the 3 cabin crew members are worse off, BUT the office dwelling type has enjoyed a substantial rise!
What I do find worrying is that on talking to recruitment people from other companies the message seems to be that, and I paraphrase, "we don't generally employee ex-BA because they cannot do the job". By that they mean that we as BA employees are seen as inflexible, regimented, and sticklers for rules and procedures. This is obviously at odds with what is a dynamic and fluid aviation market.
The company is in decline, whether or not it is terminal depends on the employees as well and the managers.
This argument should NOT be happening in a healthy company. If the BACC was serious then it would ensure that ALL BA employees were under the same T's & C's. Unfortunately the BACC represents many members, many of whom would not support such a motion.
Junior doctors have such a tough time because senior doctors had a similar tough time when they were junior. The same ethos applies in BA.
Solution : Answers on a postcard please.....
Harry
p.s. Each day at BA is more amusing/bemusing than the last, can we still get an allowance for not having a hotel room with a bath?
Being a bit of a hybrid, BA, then CFE, then BA, I suppose I have had the advantage/disadvantage of seeing both sides of the argument. A lot of what is being said makes a lot of sense.
I know where AIRRAGE and Co are coming from because they have been in the wrong place at the wrong time, hence they have views that may not seem palatable. Unfortunately understanding WHY BA is the basket case it is does not necessarily make the situation better.
The inaction of all the minor "cogs" plus the low quality of employee at BA means only one thing, financial ruin. In defence of BA pilots they at least partially understand the situation they are in.
Everyone else thinks they are in the civil service and that BA will somehow last forever. It won't! Remeber peple are recruited by BA because they "fit in", not because thet will do a good job. If our managers were genuine entrepreneurs then they would be running there own companies. They live in the comfort zone.
Unfortunately in a misguided attempt to protect what little is left mainline pilots are manipulating the situation to their own advantage, despite what they may say. The argument is that "you should know your place" because if you don't protect "my job" then "you" will have nothing to aspire to.
My own T's and C's have NOT improved as a result of being at BA. This is not unusual. Of my immediate circle of friends, the 3 cabin crew members are worse off, BUT the office dwelling type has enjoyed a substantial rise!
What I do find worrying is that on talking to recruitment people from other companies the message seems to be that, and I paraphrase, "we don't generally employee ex-BA because they cannot do the job". By that they mean that we as BA employees are seen as inflexible, regimented, and sticklers for rules and procedures. This is obviously at odds with what is a dynamic and fluid aviation market.
The company is in decline, whether or not it is terminal depends on the employees as well and the managers.
This argument should NOT be happening in a healthy company. If the BACC was serious then it would ensure that ALL BA employees were under the same T's & C's. Unfortunately the BACC represents many members, many of whom would not support such a motion.
Junior doctors have such a tough time because senior doctors had a similar tough time when they were junior. The same ethos applies in BA.
Solution : Answers on a postcard please.....
Harry
p.s. Each day at BA is more amusing/bemusing than the last, can we still get an allowance for not having a hotel room with a bath?