Oh No! not another announcement at BA CON
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: uk
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At last...well said Brain fade!!
Life in BAcon is pants at the moment we all know the facts, and as long as Big bruvva has a noose round our neck it will continue to be this way. But loads have been good and morale is not dead. I feel the same as Brain fade; I am very sorry for the guys and gals in soton but their closure has led to some wild speculation.....and this snow ball is getting bigger and bigger!
If PH and his buddies dont give us some light in this forthcoming announcement, then I think it will be game over....not because the company is not making money but because it will no longer have a workforce. No one in their right mind can turn down offers from what is a boyant market on the vague hope that Ba Connect has some masterplan which they are not telling us.
In my opinion that is the core of the problem, we are not told anything!
Life in BAcon is pants at the moment we all know the facts, and as long as Big bruvva has a noose round our neck it will continue to be this way. But loads have been good and morale is not dead. I feel the same as Brain fade; I am very sorry for the guys and gals in soton but their closure has led to some wild speculation.....and this snow ball is getting bigger and bigger!
If PH and his buddies dont give us some light in this forthcoming announcement, then I think it will be game over....not because the company is not making money but because it will no longer have a workforce. No one in their right mind can turn down offers from what is a boyant market on the vague hope that Ba Connect has some masterplan which they are not telling us.
In my opinion that is the core of the problem, we are not told anything!
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: sussex
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA Connect Announces Closure of BHD-BHX
BA Connect announce closure of BHD-BHX on Aug 21 after only 3 and a bit months.
Flybe announce increase in frequency and capacity on the route.
Flybe announce increase in frequency and capacity on the route.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We contemplate and discuss the possible demise of the regional part of "British Airways PLC" and frankly it is very sad,
At that time a supposedly lower cost, wholly owned subsidiary, namely BACX, was expanded and installed, and everyone was assured the operation would move into profit. Presumably, entirely due to those expensive pilots and cabin crew being kicked back down to Heathrow!
It seems that theory was incorrect!
As one of the pilots whose life was turned upside down by this change, I will attempt to ignore the level of sympathy extended to me at the time, by the new occupiers.
I take no particular satisfaction in saying that, no doubt the best part of the operation (London City) will be salvaged, and the remainder given away to an operator with lower cost crews than BACON.
As someone said, such is life (apparently)
Announced today:
Latest News
WINTER 2006/7 SCHEDULE 1/Aug/2006
· New route between London City Airport and Madrid · Increased frequency between Manchester and Milan (Malpensa) · Suspension of Belfast – Birmingham route · Suspension of Isle of Man – Luton route · Increased frequency on Isle of Man – Gatwick · Improved timings from Manchester to Geneva, Glasgow and Vienna
BA Connect has today (August 1), announced a series of changes to improve route network profitability with most changes effective from the start of the winter season.
These include the launch of a twice-daily service between London City Airport and Madrid, and increased frequency between Manchester and Milan.
A strong route for both business and leisure, the London City – Madrid services will offer both Club Europe and Euro Traveller products on its 11 weekly flights. On sale from today at www.ba.com, fares are available from £49 fully inclusive. Flights will depart at 09.15am and 6.55pm.
Rising passenger numbers between Manchester and Milan have resulted in an increase in frequency from two to three flights daily, giving business and leisure passengers more travel options to the Italian fashion capital. The additional flight departs Manchester at 12 noon.
Also at Manchester, improved scheduled timings will be available on flights to Geneva with an earlier departure time of 06.45am; the evening Glasgow service will depart at 7.30pm instead of 8.50pm, and Manchester – Vienna flights will move to an afternoon departure at 4.25pm.
Elsewhere, Isle of Man–Gatwick increases from three to four flights Monday – Friday, with three flights on Saturdays and Sundays. The Isle of Man-Luton operation will be suspended, as will the Belfast-Birmingham route (from August 21).
BA Connect was launched in March this year and has already carried over one million passengers on its European and domestic services from UK regional airports.
David Evans, BA Connect’s managing director, said: “It’s important that we continue to give our customers what they want in terms of frequency and network while focussing on our business strengths. We have responded positively to customer requests for schedule improvements particularly at London City, Manchester and the Isle of Man.
Ends
WINTER 2006/7 SCHEDULE 1/Aug/2006
· New route between London City Airport and Madrid · Increased frequency between Manchester and Milan (Malpensa) · Suspension of Belfast – Birmingham route · Suspension of Isle of Man – Luton route · Increased frequency on Isle of Man – Gatwick · Improved timings from Manchester to Geneva, Glasgow and Vienna
BA Connect has today (August 1), announced a series of changes to improve route network profitability with most changes effective from the start of the winter season.
These include the launch of a twice-daily service between London City Airport and Madrid, and increased frequency between Manchester and Milan.
A strong route for both business and leisure, the London City – Madrid services will offer both Club Europe and Euro Traveller products on its 11 weekly flights. On sale from today at www.ba.com, fares are available from £49 fully inclusive. Flights will depart at 09.15am and 6.55pm.
Rising passenger numbers between Manchester and Milan have resulted in an increase in frequency from two to three flights daily, giving business and leisure passengers more travel options to the Italian fashion capital. The additional flight departs Manchester at 12 noon.
Also at Manchester, improved scheduled timings will be available on flights to Geneva with an earlier departure time of 06.45am; the evening Glasgow service will depart at 7.30pm instead of 8.50pm, and Manchester – Vienna flights will move to an afternoon departure at 4.25pm.
Elsewhere, Isle of Man–Gatwick increases from three to four flights Monday – Friday, with three flights on Saturdays and Sundays. The Isle of Man-Luton operation will be suspended, as will the Belfast-Birmingham route (from August 21).
BA Connect was launched in March this year and has already carried over one million passengers on its European and domestic services from UK regional airports.
David Evans, BA Connect’s managing director, said: “It’s important that we continue to give our customers what they want in terms of frequency and network while focussing on our business strengths. We have responded positively to customer requests for schedule improvements particularly at London City, Manchester and the Isle of Man.
Ends
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: Roman Empire
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
4468 makes a good point!
Well, 4468, I have to give you credit. Firstly, remembering the quite awful slanging which alternated between BRAL and mainline, probably to no-one's benefit except management. Yes, you were right. But who would have thought that the beancounters in BA could still have managed to lose money with such an opportunity. No surprises now having experienced both them, their lies and incompetence and the equally pathetic characteristics of our home grown lot.
Sorry if you felt you were lacking sympathy, I can tell you are a big enough individual not to reciprocate your perceptions to the current set of unfortunates at SOU.
For the future - well, two posts telling us it's not as bad as it seems. Just give us a few examples of positive news then please. Payrises? Job prospects? Expansion? New types? Even official talk of ideas and concepts for expansion if we DO make a profit would be good, it would show there was some sort of a PLAN!!! other than the constant base closure, route stoppages, pay stagnation etc.
Of course, 4468 is also technically correct when he says
However I think most people might think a wholly owned asset stripped subsidiary was also part of the corporate entity. Let me not be unfair however, because I believe he is absolutely right, no doubt Eastern, or Euromanx, or Loganair, or Emerald will end up doing the routes, and just like Air South West, will in fact make an absolute bloody fortune. The pity with hindsight is that mainline didn't just bugger off and, having asset stripped our LHR slots, left a BUSINESSMAN (as opposed to the idiots Evans, Witt and Hutchings) to make a fist of running what were pretty well sound routes all round. Again, 4468 is probably right, LCY will survive, INV and maybe IOM run in reverse with 737s from LGW, and the rest will be the subject of crocodile tears from WW.
Please someone, give me some solid reasons why I'm wrong, why WW really would like to keep us, why it's all an accounting trick....in the meantime, my sim ride with Thomsonfly is two weeks away.
Sorry if you felt you were lacking sympathy, I can tell you are a big enough individual not to reciprocate your perceptions to the current set of unfortunates at SOU.
For the future - well, two posts telling us it's not as bad as it seems.
Just give us a few examples of positive news then please. Payrises? Job prospects? Expansion? New types? Even official talk of ideas and concepts for expansion if we DO make a profit would be good, it would show there was some sort of a PLAN!!! other than the constant base closure, route stoppages, pay stagnation etc. Of course, 4468 is also technically correct when he says
Of course to be technically accurate, the "the demise of the regional part of British Airways PLC" took place about 4 years ago, when mainline pilots and aircraft were eased out of MAN and BHX.
Please someone, give me some solid reasons why I'm wrong, why WW really would like to keep us, why it's all an accounting trick....in the meantime, my sim ride with Thomsonfly is two weeks away.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maximuss
Because I have been through a similar experience myself, of course I have sympathy for those at SOU, and potentially many others in the months to come. It is a shame that our futures, and our family's, do not lay in our own hands.
Good luck to all of you. When it comes down to it, we're all in the same boat, and there's absolutely NO requirement for animosity.
EVER.
Because I have been through a similar experience myself, of course I have sympathy for those at SOU, and potentially many others in the months to come. It is a shame that our futures, and our family's, do not lay in our own hands.
Good luck to all of you. When it comes down to it, we're all in the same boat, and there's absolutely NO requirement for animosity.
EVER.
Join Date: Apr 2000
Location: Manchester
Posts: 26
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For the last five years or so the company has not come close to deserving the hard work and commitment by most of its employees, and not just the pilots. The amount of misplaced loyalty is nearly as staggering as the total ineptitude, bullying and crass mismanagement by those in positions of authority.
You could not write a script like this.
You could not write a script like this.
Captain Corelli,
In an earlier post you said:
not to mention the BRYMON fool heading up the CC who refused an offer to have the RJ pilots on the master seniority list. Talk about a missed opportunity to get a foot in the door!
Just to be clear, I understand that the “fool” who “refused the offer” refused it on behalf of and with the blessing of the entire CC, therefore I assume that you think that they were all fools. Remember that at the time of this so called offer there were only a handful of BACX pilots on the RJ. Clearly it was not only the BACC who could make an offer, it would have involved BA management too. TDLF the was doing all that he could to prevent the BACX CC from meeting with these BA managers to discuss the whole thing properly. Eventually, BACC drove the SCOPE thing through on the back of a pay package strike threat.
If the so called “CC fools” had gone along with this so called offer of a foot in the door, TDLF, McShutdowns, and The big Gorgonzola would have been straight out briefing all (at that time 90%) of the pilots who were not on the RJ on how the BALPA CC had stitched them up. And at the time, half of would probably have believed it. Hardly good for membership levels for a company that had only had recognition for 6 months.
Backing this deal would have perpetuated the farcical BA thing about pilots only being capable of converting to BA aeroplanes if they have flown a 50t aeroplane. - Bo*^”-ks. Even if the offer had been driven through with both CC’s working together, management both CX and BA would have been out for revenge and the chances of the foot in the door becoming anything more than that would have been very thin. They would have prevented it just to make a point.
Also, if it was a genuine offer of foot in the door, how come certain members of the BACC to this day continue to defend and support BA ,managements insistence that applicants from BACX / BACON have sit the whole of the BA bu^l”*it selection process. Yes, even LCG will admit if pushed, that the tests are a load of cr*p. Not only that, some members of the BACC are even involved in the selection process and have the cheek to ask colleagues from their subsidiary "why they wish to fly for BA". They have been flying aeroplanes with BA written on the side for 14 years! There is even a chance that members of the BACC could have been involved in failing applicants form BACON who fly the RJ, the very people who they said they were offering a free pass to. Some very competent pilots who were trained by BA by BA trainers on BA Aircraft on BA Mainline routes and yet they are not good enough to join BA. Where’s the sense in that then? Failed for not giving the righ b*^"it answer to one of those "Explain a situation when...blah blah questions. Failed for being too strong on leadership??? The BACC have been asked to withdraw their support for this inslting, divisive and discriminatory selection system and yet they continue to do so.
Finally, at the same time that RH was making his so called “foot in the door” offer, he was also offering BACX a guaranteed place on the NEC if we moved into the BA constituency. Well, we are in it, but surprise surprise, no NEC place for us .
In an earlier post you said:
not to mention the BRYMON fool heading up the CC who refused an offer to have the RJ pilots on the master seniority list. Talk about a missed opportunity to get a foot in the door!
Just to be clear, I understand that the “fool” who “refused the offer” refused it on behalf of and with the blessing of the entire CC, therefore I assume that you think that they were all fools. Remember that at the time of this so called offer there were only a handful of BACX pilots on the RJ. Clearly it was not only the BACC who could make an offer, it would have involved BA management too. TDLF the was doing all that he could to prevent the BACX CC from meeting with these BA managers to discuss the whole thing properly. Eventually, BACC drove the SCOPE thing through on the back of a pay package strike threat.
If the so called “CC fools” had gone along with this so called offer of a foot in the door, TDLF, McShutdowns, and The big Gorgonzola would have been straight out briefing all (at that time 90%) of the pilots who were not on the RJ on how the BALPA CC had stitched them up. And at the time, half of would probably have believed it. Hardly good for membership levels for a company that had only had recognition for 6 months.
Backing this deal would have perpetuated the farcical BA thing about pilots only being capable of converting to BA aeroplanes if they have flown a 50t aeroplane. - Bo*^”-ks. Even if the offer had been driven through with both CC’s working together, management both CX and BA would have been out for revenge and the chances of the foot in the door becoming anything more than that would have been very thin. They would have prevented it just to make a point.
Also, if it was a genuine offer of foot in the door, how come certain members of the BACC to this day continue to defend and support BA ,managements insistence that applicants from BACX / BACON have sit the whole of the BA bu^l”*it selection process. Yes, even LCG will admit if pushed, that the tests are a load of cr*p. Not only that, some members of the BACC are even involved in the selection process and have the cheek to ask colleagues from their subsidiary "why they wish to fly for BA". They have been flying aeroplanes with BA written on the side for 14 years! There is even a chance that members of the BACC could have been involved in failing applicants form BACON who fly the RJ, the very people who they said they were offering a free pass to. Some very competent pilots who were trained by BA by BA trainers on BA Aircraft on BA Mainline routes and yet they are not good enough to join BA. Where’s the sense in that then? Failed for not giving the righ b*^"it answer to one of those "Explain a situation when...blah blah questions. Failed for being too strong on leadership??? The BACC have been asked to withdraw their support for this inslting, divisive and discriminatory selection system and yet they continue to do so.
Finally, at the same time that RH was making his so called “foot in the door” offer, he was also offering BACX a guaranteed place on the NEC if we moved into the BA constituency. Well, we are in it, but surprise surprise, no NEC place for us
.
Last edited by biddedout; 2nd Aug 2006 at 06:32.
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Wouldn't you like to know !
Posts: 87
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
well biddedout, as I recall, it was Bill S, then our then legal eagle CC chairman, who single handedly rejected the offer without consulting the rest of the boys and girl who were in the room at the time. Of course, that's only what I was told by another cc member, so who is one to believe?? Tricky for us mortals.
I don't think there's much doubt it is a repent at leisure scenario. The rest of your argument is pure speculation, I doubt there are many who would agree - not that any of it helpsus now. Best forgotten I suppose.
I don't think there's much doubt it is a repent at leisure scenario.
The rest of your argument is pure speculation, I doubt there are many who would agree - not that any of it helpsus now. Best forgotten I suppose.
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Alpha Quadrant
Posts: 62
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BACon excerpt ATW Aug06
With the recent restructuring of its BA Connect regional operation into a low-fare carrier in response to LCCs, some wonder whether BA will import the model into its short-haul mainline operation at London Heathrow and Gatwick. Walsh says no. "I would argue we are most likely seen as the leading full-service network carrier and we are absolutely committed to maintaining a full-service product within British Airways," he states without hesitation. "It is significant that for the first time in ten years we have made a profit on our short-haul operations. Go back two or three years ago, probably even last year, [and] you would have heard people arguing that BA should pull out of short-haul. It is important that all parts of our business are profitable. There aren't too many network carriers around that can say that today."
The short-haul operations, which account for roughly two-thirds of passengers and one-third of revenue, posted an operating profit of £7 million last year compared to a deficit in excess of £300 million in 2000. However, only the Heathrow segment made money. Gatwick operations and the regional business still showed red ink, with the latter losing £20 millionalthough this represented a reduction from an operating loss of £27 million in FY05on revenue of £357 million.
"Psychologically it is nice to be back in profit on short-haul, but the level of profitability is nowhere near acceptable," acknowledges Walsh. "We have now three different programs running to address the three different parts of our business, all with a view to improving profitability. We have three short-haul businesses. It is important to differentiate between them. In the past, we would have adopted the one-size-fits-all approach to the problems that existed there. And we are very clear that you can't do that."
The regional operations, formerly known as BA CitiExpress, received a total makeover with the start of the summer schedule, including rebranding as BA Connect and a low-fare model. The 50 aircraft, consisting mostly of 50-seat regional jets with a smattering of larger RJs and smaller turboprops, now operate in a single-class configuration with paid-for catering.
"Coming in fresh from the outside, it's easier to take an independent view and make a quick decision," Walsh explains. "What I saw was a business that provided no passenger feed into our long-haul network, that was poor in terms of its commercial and financial performance and that was operating in a market dominated by low-fare carriers." With characteristic candor, he notes that while BA Connect has adopted an LCC model, it is not a low-cost carrier: "I would be fooling myself saying it is low cost, but it is competing in a low-fares environment." He has declared that the segment must return to profitability in the year ending March 31, 2008.
The short-haul operations, which account for roughly two-thirds of passengers and one-third of revenue, posted an operating profit of £7 million last year compared to a deficit in excess of £300 million in 2000. However, only the Heathrow segment made money. Gatwick operations and the regional business still showed red ink, with the latter losing £20 millionalthough this represented a reduction from an operating loss of £27 million in FY05on revenue of £357 million.
"Psychologically it is nice to be back in profit on short-haul, but the level of profitability is nowhere near acceptable," acknowledges Walsh. "We have now three different programs running to address the three different parts of our business, all with a view to improving profitability. We have three short-haul businesses. It is important to differentiate between them. In the past, we would have adopted the one-size-fits-all approach to the problems that existed there. And we are very clear that you can't do that."
The regional operations, formerly known as BA CitiExpress, received a total makeover with the start of the summer schedule, including rebranding as BA Connect and a low-fare model. The 50 aircraft, consisting mostly of 50-seat regional jets with a smattering of larger RJs and smaller turboprops, now operate in a single-class configuration with paid-for catering.
"Coming in fresh from the outside, it's easier to take an independent view and make a quick decision," Walsh explains. "What I saw was a business that provided no passenger feed into our long-haul network, that was poor in terms of its commercial and financial performance and that was operating in a market dominated by low-fare carriers." With characteristic candor, he notes that while BA Connect has adopted an LCC model, it is not a low-cost carrier: "I would be fooling myself saying it is low cost, but it is competing in a low-fares environment." He has declared that the segment must return to profitability in the year ending March 31, 2008.
"What I saw was a business that provided no passenger feed into our long-haul network, that was poor in terms of its commercial and financial performance
Astute business acumen!
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: The Sunny South
Posts: 66
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So what tw@t decided on "Connect" when the irony is that we don't ?
WW is pretending to give BACON a chance while quietly instructing Evans to scale back operations to make the inevitable disposal quick and ..... surprise surprise...... cheap. Evans is too old to go anywhere after BA CON and is therefore not concerned that he is the laughing stock of the industry.
WW is pretending to give BACON a chance while quietly instructing Evans to scale back operations to make the inevitable disposal quick and ..... surprise surprise...... cheap. Evans is too old to go anywhere after BA CON and is therefore not concerned that he is the laughing stock of the industry.
