GSS F/O pay
Thread Starter
Joined: Nov 2004
Posts: 920
Likes: 10
From: UK
GSS F/O pay
A search of the forums came up with a starting figure of £35,200 for a F/O, but this was last Novemebr.
Is this still correct - I can't imagine anyone wanting to join a 744 operator with this salary!
Is this still correct - I can't imagine anyone wanting to join a 744 operator with this salary!
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 274
Likes: 0
From: near the beach
Hi again.
Since no staff travel available. Do you need to travel to Stanstead everytime or will the company position you - where ever needed - how does it work. In a previous post it was said, that many Germans working at GSS.
Some of these guys most be commuting - do they really pay fullfare every time going to work.
Thanks and regards. Twin2040.
Since no staff travel available. Do you need to travel to Stanstead everytime or will the company position you - where ever needed - how does it work. In a previous post it was said, that many Germans working at GSS.
Some of these guys most be commuting - do they really pay fullfare every time going to work.
Thanks and regards. Twin2040.
Joined: Aug 2005
Posts: 516
Likes: 0
From: uk
Sean,
No it's not.
BA have opted to use an outside contractor to do some of their work. You don't have a cargo airline, so hence it's not nicking is it?
You have loads of opportunities within your own airline, yet like dogs in mangers you always have to look at others with envy.
I remember when I worked for DHL, we did some occasional BA subs. Some of your guys were saying that you should have the right to come and take DHL commands ! Unbelieveable really.
Thank god I have nothing to do with you lot at BA, I sympathise with the GSS pilots.
No it's not.
BA have opted to use an outside contractor to do some of their work. You don't have a cargo airline, so hence it's not nicking is it?
You have loads of opportunities within your own airline, yet like dogs in mangers you always have to look at others with envy.
I remember when I worked for DHL, we did some occasional BA subs. Some of your guys were saying that you should have the right to come and take DHL commands ! Unbelieveable really.
Thank god I have nothing to do with you lot at BA, I sympathise with the GSS pilots.
Last edited by stansdead; 26th October 2005 at 08:30.
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
From: UK
I seem to recall that GSS only exists because of protestations by BALPA, to the CAA about BA outsourcing cargo work to Atlas. GSS are evidently too expensive to justify an additional cargo aircraft as profit is everything, which happens to be the same argument GSS use to justify the BA freight being flown by them instead of BA aircraft. Rather ironic.
Joined: Jul 2003
Posts: 312
Likes: 0
From: UK
Facts are:
1) Freight market currently suffering from some over capacity so certainly not enough money in it for BA to invest in freighters.
2) BA is currently short of money for anything and has said they do not intend to aquire any long haul aircraft of any sort during the next 3-4 years. Their focus is on the Pension fund ( NAPS) problem and general debt reduction, though some of this is academic as it relates to potential exposure on leases rather than cash they actually owe here and now.
3) Aquisition of cargo aircraft therefore is very low priority and just wont happen. There is a current need for more passenger 777s but a)none are available for the next 2 years and b) as above, they havent got the cash. As result they are having to watch market share erosion by Emirates, Cathay et al and are simply managing relative decline.
4) For BA a pure freighter operation has to be farmed out or not done at all. Hence it is not "BA work" from the staffing point of view.
1) Freight market currently suffering from some over capacity so certainly not enough money in it for BA to invest in freighters.
2) BA is currently short of money for anything and has said they do not intend to aquire any long haul aircraft of any sort during the next 3-4 years. Their focus is on the Pension fund ( NAPS) problem and general debt reduction, though some of this is academic as it relates to potential exposure on leases rather than cash they actually owe here and now.
3) Aquisition of cargo aircraft therefore is very low priority and just wont happen. There is a current need for more passenger 777s but a)none are available for the next 2 years and b) as above, they havent got the cash. As result they are having to watch market share erosion by Emirates, Cathay et al and are simply managing relative decline.
4) For BA a pure freighter operation has to be farmed out or not done at all. Hence it is not "BA work" from the staffing point of view.
Joined: Apr 1999
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
From: UK
Those facts aren't entirely accurate:
1)No need to buy, dry lease is an option.
2) BA certainly is not short of money. They are paying off over £1bn of debt per year. Profits are strong despite the high oil price. Their focus on the pension fund is short term, brought about by the likelihood of being forced to address it by the pension regulator next year. Best make the staff pay this year before the company has to pay next.
3) See above regarding cash. Market share seems to be holding up reasonably well according to internal data. I'm not sure how you think BA are losing out to CX when they launched a third daily HKG service last year. The loads are good on all flights too.
4) In the short term yes. Cargo makes a huge contribution to BAs profits. Lufthansa have succesfully operated a freight division for donkeys, it's not beyond the wit of BA to do the same.
1)No need to buy, dry lease is an option.
2) BA certainly is not short of money. They are paying off over £1bn of debt per year. Profits are strong despite the high oil price. Their focus on the pension fund is short term, brought about by the likelihood of being forced to address it by the pension regulator next year. Best make the staff pay this year before the company has to pay next.
3) See above regarding cash. Market share seems to be holding up reasonably well according to internal data. I'm not sure how you think BA are losing out to CX when they launched a third daily HKG service last year. The loads are good on all flights too.
4) In the short term yes. Cargo makes a huge contribution to BAs profits. Lufthansa have succesfully operated a freight division for donkeys, it's not beyond the wit of BA to do the same.
Joined: Jul 2001
Posts: 334
Likes: 0
From: chances are, not at home
I'll tell you whats ironic Matey - BACCs threatening of strike action/imposition of secondees, over the granting of dedicated freighter work to fellow British and European pilots, then the deafening silence when an 'operating for British Airways Cargo' sticker is slapped on the side of yet another American registered and crewed 747 freighter. (I'm afraid thats where your job went, JCB1)
As for relative prices, I doubt Atlas is significantly cheaper than GSS. The reluctance on the part of BA to add a 744 to GSSs aoc is more likely due to the inconvenience of making the aircraft JAR compliant and the resulting longer term commitment, versus an 'as and when' availability from Atlas. I hear GSS' dispatch reliability is one of the best of BAs various subcontractors, and one thing I can guarantee is that if BA mainline flew the 744Fs, then costs would sky-rocket.
As for relative prices, I doubt Atlas is significantly cheaper than GSS. The reluctance on the part of BA to add a 744 to GSSs aoc is more likely due to the inconvenience of making the aircraft JAR compliant and the resulting longer term commitment, versus an 'as and when' availability from Atlas. I hear GSS' dispatch reliability is one of the best of BAs various subcontractors, and one thing I can guarantee is that if BA mainline flew the 744Fs, then costs would sky-rocket.
Last edited by Joe le Taxi; 13th November 2005 at 15:45.