BA plan could slash staff pensions by a third

[LTNman]

http://www.uk-airport-news.info/heat...ws-190206c.htm

British Airways is said to have tabled plans to slash staff pensions by more than a third. It is feared that the move, aimed at plugging BA's £1.4bn pension black hole, could trigger a forth summer of strikes for the airline.

The proposal was discussed in briefings with staff and union representatives last week, The Business newspaper claims. A final decision will be put to BA's workforce next month.
The airline also mooted equally unpopular proposals in the meetings, which include making staff work longer or requiring them to pay more towards their pensions.

The whole workforce will be affected by the changes, from pilots and cabin crew to check-in staff. For their part, union representatives have said they will do 'whatever it takes' to block any reduction in payments for BA staff.

The airline is seeking to tackle a £1.4bn deficit in one of its main pension schemes, which has 34,500 members. Proposals under consideration include recalculating pension payments to reflect average salary over the length of a career rather than final salary. This could reduce pensions by 36% in some cases, and would particularly hit pilots, who start on a low salary but typically retire on around £100,000.

Balpa, the pilots' union, said it would resist any moves to cut pensions. A spokesman said: 'We will defend our position whatever it takes.' Balpa says it does not accept that changes to BA's pension scheme are inevitable.

It said: 'Pensions are your future, your family's future, and a promise from the company. BA's massive communications exercise gives the impression that the future of your pension is precarious and major changes are required. We do not accept that.'

The GMB union, which represents check-in and administrative staff, said any proposal to cut pensions by more than a third would not be acceptable. The GMB has 5000 members in the BA pension scheme.

BA insisted that no decisions have been taken. A spokesman said that possibilities such as the shift to 'career average' pensions were examples of action contemplated by other FTSE 100 companies, rather than hard and fast measures. He said: 'With some of these companies, the answers tabled hadn't been lasting solutions. We're really looking for lasting solutions.'

[MrAnon]

I think they'll have a fight on their hands. The pilots seem quite organised and ready to fight:

http://www.bacanaffordtopay.com

http://www.befairba.org

[acbus1]

Balpa, the pilots' union, said it would resist any moves to cut pensions. A spokesman said: 'We will defend our position whatever it takes.' Balpa says it does not accept that changes to BA's pension scheme are inevitable.

Strange how we don't hear this sort of response from BALPA when airlines other than BA slash pensions.

[TopBunk]

Originally Posted by acbus1

Strange how we don't hear this sort of response from BALPA when airlines other than BA slash pensions.

WHat you have to remember is that BALPA are just a group of pilots elected to represent their community. In BA, the community are prepared to defend their pension and the reps are carrying that out. The fact that other BALPA constituencies may not do so reflects more of those communities than on BALPA the organisation.

[X11]

Topbunk

Sadly that is not necessarily the case. Anecdotal evidence demonstrates that the amount of support given by BALPA to the Company Councils of "other" airlines, is vastly inferior to that given to BA, on equally important issues.

That you suggest Pilots in other companies are less determined to defend their pensions is a sad indictment of your ignorance, or indeed arrogance.

[Hand Solo]

The vast majority of work involved in the BA pensions campaign is done by BA pilots, not by BALPA staff. If you want a similar type of campaign all you've got to do is find a dozen of your pilots who'll give up any semblance of a normal life outside work to spend virtually every spare moment campaigning, lobbying, programming, cajoling, publishing and a whole load of other ancillary tasks. Once you've got all of those you should speak to Jim McAuslan, who is a very affable man, and ask him for the professional support you think that you need to fight your campaign The key is that it is your campaign, not BALPAs. They are there to provide the financial, legal and public relations expertise needed to run a campaign, the onus is on the pilots to organise the campaign themselves

[TopBunk]

X11

What utter rubbish!

BTW I think you'll find that BA pilots now represent only about 35-40% of BALPA members, and that the BALPA staff spend less than 35-40% of their resources on the BA pilot community, in part because of the efficiencies of scale.

As Hand Solo says, this campaign is being run predominantely by BA pilots.

[BYMONEK]

Not for one minute do I believe that BALPA are prepared to offer the same support, especially financially, to other Airlines as they would do to BA. Many years ago I remember a video being produced, by BALPA, for the BA Pilots in regards to the new allowance structure. This at the time was still in the proposal stage. How much did it cost to produce & provide every pilot in BA with that? Did the cost come from the Airline's Company Council? Did it hell. It was from the BALPA budget that we ALL contribute towards. If we were all treated equal then I guess I should have received a nice glossy video when I was informed of no pay rise that year. But then again I was working for one of the charters so a piece of paper would suffice!

[Human Factor]

How much did it cost to produce & provide every pilot in BA with that?

Can't have been cheap but they probably saved a fair bit of cash by not providing it for every pilot. This one and a few others I could name didn't get one.

[the heavy heavy]

[quote=BYMONEK]Not for one minute do I believe that BALPA are prepared to offer the same support, especially financially, to other Airlines as they would do to BA.

i fly with ex city flyer capts who have balpa to thank for ending up on 744 with protected capt's pay. along with their fellow cityflyer fo's they recieved free bids onto a fleet that displaced senior ba pilots/balpa members from acheiving their pref bid! whilst it is old news balpa negotiated in favour of the city flyer pilots on all fronts except seniority, and only then because they knew it would have precipitated a strike. despite rob halls assurances, rob then a 737 capt now a ba sen manager, that no ba pilot would be worse off the fact was that 737x commands and 744 fo slots were lost to ba pilots who would have achieved valid bids that year.

since this is the last time that balpa were faced with a direct clash of 2 pilot groups interests i think it would be difficult to say balpa sided with the ba groups interests!

not to mention the fact that we are the single biggest source of the money in the pot and this pot is used for the benifit of all members are u not being a tad narrow minded?

the day someone less lazy than myself starts a ba pilots assoc i'm sure your pot will get smaller and we'll get on with protecting our t&c's. then all the BA hating wannabees who are prepared to work for peanuts and at the whim of monkeys can keep on undermining the status and professional respect that their peers earned for them without us having to give a dam or give money to the organisation that represents them.

only a couple of days ago some clown was bleating how he would do 'anything' to fly a 757 for first choice!

[Captain Correlli]

since this is the last time that balpa were faced with a direct clash of 2 pilot groups interests i think it would be difficult to say balpa sided with the ba groups interests!

Yeah, right!!!!!
Try telling that to the BRAL/BACX/BACON pilots who were in the same position as the CityFlyer guys.
Try mentioning their pensions - a much much smaller deficit, (less than 1% I understand) of the NAPS deficit, but did we or do we or will we get any advice or assistance?
[That question was rhetorical by the way, responses by HandSolo and Twinrotor head will be predictable, these so-called colleagues like so many mainliners are only interested in themselves, and their union.]

We shall all sink or swim together on this one, and by not supporting their , oh let's get it right, "Wholly owned Company" colleagues. They will reap what they sow.

[DarkStar]

I've found BALPA to be like BA's customer service. I've seen good and bad come out, mainly good in my case, but all FC have to stick together, any division will be leapt upon by BA Mgmt. I thought Mr Hall flew 777's before he jumped onto the Operations gravy train called OPIP. That 'initative' has crashed and burned without any success or improvements except of course for certain peoples career's.

Rumour control from the ground is that they will NOT be strike action, but a 'Work - to - Rule', which could be even more disruptive than a strike given the ancient agreements for the Ramp staff. I joke not.

Certainly, if some staff did work to rule they might find themselves working harder

Must fly....

[the heavy heavy]

'Yeah, right!!!!!
Try telling that to the BRAL/BACX/BACON pilots who were in the same position as the CityFlyer guys.'

sorry chap, your not in the same position as the cityflyer guys.

it was BA's decision to integrate cityflyer into the mainline operation and not balpa's! once BA decided to integrate balpa did a very good job in getting the cityflyer boys a very good deal, a feeling which most of the boys i've flown with seem to hold.

your position at bral/bacx/bacon is very different. the company would appear to have no interest in bringing the regional ops into the mainline company. since ba bought your operations with the intention of running low cost regional ops, to replace the existing BA regional ops, exactly what would you expect balpa and your fellow balpa members to do about it?

i applied and was interviewed by ba and signed a contract that contained certain t&c's. i can only assume that whatever contract you signed is being honoured by your employer.

i am heading into a dispute because my t&c's look like they are about to be drastically changed. i DO NOT expect atr pilots in manchester to be supporting me, nor do i expect them to be moaning that i'm not interested in involving myself in a dispute that has nothing to do with me.

i hope that all pilot groups, in whatever company, with whatever background fight like tigers to protect their t&c's. i'll be fighting for mine and for those of my colleagues at BA.

[BYMONEK]

Heavy

I don't have an axe to grind with BA. My issue is with BALPA. So please don't get all defensive and assume that we're all BA wannabes because that makes you appear very arrogant and i'm sure you're not at all! As for me being narrow minded, i'd like to think not with 20+ years and several Airlines behind me but i'm always prepared to listen and learn.

Not good form by the way to mention individual names on Pprune.

p.s What's wrong with wanting to fly a B757 with First Choice? Didn't we all start off prepared to sell our right arm to get into Aviation!

[Hand Solo]

BYMONEK - I can buy blank DVDs for about 20p a shot, so if BALPA bought them bulk I reckon they could get them down to 2p each. A bit of video work costs barely a few hundred quid and if BALPA are paying more then I can recommend somebody who'll do the job cheaper. All in all BA pilots provide proportionally far more funds to BALPA than their memberships numbers represent so whats the big deal about them getting a DVD/newsletter/free bookmark etc etc.

Corelli - You're clearly entrenched in your viewpoint, but as has been pointed out countless times before, BACX was not the same as CFE. You were given two bases, 16 aircraft, lots of routes and direct seniority list access to BA for anyone on the RJ100 with the only concession asked being some BA pilots on the RJ. Your company council turned it down. You want to kick up a stink about your pension deficit? Then ask your company council what they are doing about. I think your days would be a lot easier if you dropped the idea that because your company is owned by BA then the BA pilots are responsible for sorting out all your woes.

[the heavy heavy]

[quote=BYMONEK]Heavy

I don't have an axe to grind with BA. My issue is with BALPA. So please don't get all defensive and assume that we're all BA wannabes because that makes you appear very arrogant.

bymonek,

re-read my post. did not mention ba wannabee's, my quote was ba hating wannabees. their seem to be a lot of them about. hate ba for no obvious reason but desperate to climb the slippery pole by any means possible.

as for you 'not good to mention names on pprune'. point taken but don't think i've exactly unmasked an unknown as his name was on every balpa document we recieved for several years.

i agree that a drive to suceed is required to achieve a career in aviation. my point is that as the mol's and ww's (hope that's discreet enough for u)of this world attempt to drive down t&c's, 170hr flying school graduates who are willing to do anything for a job scare me. i for one was not prepared to sell my right arm for my first job. if the raf had told me i wasn't up to it i would have tried for a sponsorship, if that failed i would have used my degree in a career i was more suited to.

if u believe that the demise of the airlines fully sponsored schemes and the reduction in manpower from the forces has caused an increase in the standard of pilot applying to the airlines then u and i are talking to very different recruiters.

if u believe that the t&c's being offered to new entrants at any airline are being offered in the hope of attracting the best pilots and not the cheapest pilots then may i humbly suggest that your being niave, even with 20yrs+.

so is it a suprise that as the airline management have worked out that jar-ops and the caa will let them put 170hr pilots in jets and those pilots seem prepared to workk for almost nothing to get experience that those of us, u included, 15-20 years down the line find the t&c's we thought we'd signed up for are now in danger?

don't get me wrong many of the folks i fly with where 170hr pilots on joining ba and are very capable and able bunch of aviators. probably why they passed a very difficult selection process. the vast majority of them would have had no chance, like me, of raising the 60k for their atpl and thus would have found jobs elsewhere.

so as i said my biggest fear is a chap with a new f atpl who's dream is to fly a 757 for a charter company and is willing to do it for almost nothing and dosen't see that 10 years down the road there may be a guy willing to do it for free.

[BYMONEK]

Hand Solo
Give me a break! I'm not talking about DVD's, i'm refering to VIDEOS. Videos that were produced around 6 years ago and sent to many a Pilot's home via the Royal Mail. A video that was professionally produced and edited and sent to over 2000 BALPA members. BA BALPA members.

I'd also like to know how "BA Pilots provide proportionally more funds to BALPA than their memberships numbers represent" Do you pay more than 1%? Not only do your maths not add up but now you're implying that a BA's Pilot 1% is worth more than the 1% of a non BA pilot. Explain how that works then? If anything, it's the reverse. Due to good allowances and flight pay structure, Pilots in BA will contribute to BALPA a lower percentage of their final nett pay than most other Airlines' Pilots who's pay is predominantly based on basic with few extras.

If BA do decide to reduce your retirement benefits and I sincerely hope they don't, then I recommend you put together a far better reasoned and factual argument to fight your case than simply treating dissenters as idiots.

[Captain Correlli]

Hand Solo - orator extraordinaire, if one doesn't like the subject, change the facts.

HandSolo won't give anyone a break - he has his line in specialist dialectic and sloganeering, just like his buddy tandemrotor. Ignoring his line, my point at present relates to pensions. I and a few others asked BALPA and BA on here and directly at the time for support in opposing the closure of the BRAL scheme to new members. We pointed out that presumably owning a Company counts for something, ie BA should not count BACX as equivalent to Monarch or Emerald or whoever you like, because BACX and BA mainline were owned by the same shareholders, however you like to describe it. We also pointed out that if closure of the BRAL scheme to new members went ahead without opposition, then mainline would be next. It is obvious to all that a small outfit like BRAL had virtually no industrial clout compared to mainline, but mainline CC were determined to show how sophisticated and superior they were to the newcomers, and basically Solo and his mates and BALPA provided no assistance at all, and the scheme was closed. One of the irritating things about BA generally is that when it suits them, we are part of BA (ie dumping their wannabe Captains on us - we had no voice or choice in that, which screwed up many longer serving BRALs who were relocated because mainline FOs had pinched their seats) We are also very much BA when it comes to be overcharged by BA for services, handling etc etc, not to mention being turned into a lossmaking enterprise because of their inept management - and very much separate when it comes to any benefits for our workforce. Any GSS pilots reading this will identify exactly with what I mean - British Airways Line Pilot's Association sadly, that is what it is, and always will be about.
However, let's stick to pensions. Sad to say, we were proved right, and the BA pension scheme was also closed to new members (you will note the HUGE amount of opposition to this closure by both BALPA and Solo and his friends - yet once again a case of "I'm all right Nigel" - yes yes, I'm sure they sympathised......now, just as we forecast, their scheme, like ours, is faced with some tough choices, and because, FINALLY, their own back pocket is threatened, we get all the hot air and froth and threats of a strike. Interesting to wonder whether had they looked down from their Ivory tower [with swampy foundations] earlier, both pensions schemes might still be open to new members - but never let anyone accuse them of foresight, common sense, or anything except selfish and greedy self-interest.
Conclusion - even now, working together might just save both schemes, not to mention being a shot in the arm for the sad and sorry remnants of what was a highly profitably regional operation before BA imported their managers and techniques. I don't expect it to happen though, Solo and Co have allowed themselves to be manipulated by Willie in exactly the way Scargill was manipulated by Maggie - in this case, the public are sick to death of BA industrial action, usually wildcat and usually in the summer. Do you think they will have any sympathy for Solo and co - I doubt it.
Do you think the public will want to hear about pensions of a group who can be presented as earning hugely in excess of 100K pa (because that's how Willie will present it). I'm sure the rebuttals of my post will once again traipse over the justification for not allowing BRAL pilots into the seniority list, I'm sure it will once again be all our fault, with talk of what we brought to the party compared to Chippy Fryer, (what exactly are BA doing with the 2200 prime time LHR slots they got from us????; how DO those slots compare in value to a few obsolescent RJs???) but hey, let's stick to the issue. BALPA might do well to remember what happened to the Miners Union..............

[BusyB]

Not taking sides but 2200 slots - where do they all come from? Thats more than three days continuous or are we talking about 6 slots a day?

[overstress]

the public are sick to death of BA industrial action, usually wildcat and usually in the summer. Do you think they will have any sympathy for Solo and co - I doubt it

But I'm sure Hand Solo & co will not care about the public, they will be sorry that they are being inconvenienced, but will consider that their employer reneging on their contracts deserves action in the strongest possible terms.