BA Pilots Ponder BMI Proposal
Join Date: Mar 1999
Location: N/A
Posts: 64
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
1033,
BMI are losing in xs of £250m pa. Bmi have no assets apart from the slots and one A320; the rest are leased. The pension scheme is 80% invested in equities and is a total basket case (in fact worse than BA's NAPs scheme). They were v.close to being insolvent when Bishop exercised his Put option to sell it to Lufthy in 2008(?). That's why he had to accept less than he was due under the original deal he struck with Lufthy/Scandinavian (the company had to be solvent to exercise the option). They are bust!
BMI are losing in xs of £250m pa. Bmi have no assets apart from the slots and one A320; the rest are leased. The pension scheme is 80% invested in equities and is a total basket case (in fact worse than BA's NAPs scheme). They were v.close to being insolvent when Bishop exercised his Put option to sell it to Lufthy in 2008(?). That's why he had to accept less than he was due under the original deal he struck with Lufthy/Scandinavian (the company had to be solvent to exercise the option). They are bust!
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: over the hill
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Studi
In the UK there is 'TUPE' legislation (Transfer of Undertakings Protection of Employment). This guarantees the terms of employment are carried over from the previous employer so as not to disadvantage the employee upon transfer.
It has been said that this legislation will protect the bmi employees where it is triggered throughout this transfer. It is not concerned with future scenarios such as career progression, seniority, etc.
This is not the only problem with the bmi transfer.
Most people's (pilots included) aspirations concern 1) Salary 2) career progression.
Given that BA has just introduced its new 34 point scale and has indicated that the bmi workforce will join at the bottom, most, if not all the bmi pilots will see TUPE 'kicking in' to protect them.
A 5 year F/O would have to wait a further 6 years before he would see an increase in salary, a 5 year Capt.-12 years, a 10 year Capt.- 16 years, & a 15 year Capt.- 20 years. As far as I am aware, the legislation does not compel any further increases in salary until the 'catch up' is complete. So we have Captains with 15-20 years to go before retirement with about, er.. 15-20 years before they can expect a salary increase. Nice, eh? Oh, and I don't think that the law compels the employer to match our (pathetic) subsistence allowance with the pilots of the new parent company.
As far as I am aware the present state of affairs regarding seniority are that we will be added to the bottom. There have been (and still are) 'discussions' going on on other forums about that; The BA pilots' argument is that they have been assured that no-one will be disadvantaged, so I can understand their concerns about integration.
The most common theme from our side is the BMED integration 3 years ago where Date Of Joining was used across both workforces, under advice from BALPA, the same union representing both sets of pilots here. There will have to be robust negotiations over all of these items.
The bmi pilots cite the fact that we are bringing a large number of slots (more than a fifth) of the size of the BA portfolio across; unlike previous mergers into BA, along with aircraft & qualified Crews; unlike previous mergers into BA.
The BA pilots state (quite correctly) that in its present form bmi would not be around in a year's time & therefore we should be glad of anything that's offered. Well, in order to get the books signed off in the latter part of 2010, WPS (our CEO) had to have a plan B if any sale did not follow through. It involved cutting it loose from the hub style of operation of the past, it would involve more LH & MH flying & would be a 'blank sheet of paper' approach. This, and a possible offer from Virgin or the Middle East were options.
Bmi has posted significant losses over the last few years. We have been run to lose money since the tie-up with DLH & SAS back in 1999, where losses would be covered in part by DLH & SAS. Anything of value was stripped systematically from under the noses of DLH, our main external shareholder. I am led to believe that our Cargo company was owned separately by our Main Shareholder who benefitted hugely. Aircraft were leased & sub leased through a company owned by our Main Shareholder at extortionate rates. We are still paying for leases on buildings that have remained unoccupied for years, some in countries we no longer fly to. When BMED was integrated, there was supposed to be a sum set aside for re-liverying their aircraft; this was not carried out until last year after the Main Shareholder had forced the sale onto DLH. (paid for by the loss making airline)
The last 10 years saw advertising disasters, on-board product cock-ups of monumental proportions,etc.
DLH gave the impression of being serious about turning it around, but with no serious investment in aircraft that could use the slots, it was never going to work. following restructuring, and with several hundred job losses, bmi's admin. costs ballooned. That's right - they went UP! (could this be an efficient way of writing down tax just before the disposal?)
It was obvious that DLH had no intention of turning bmi around in the last couple of years; after acquiring the 20% of shares from SAS there was a clause whereby if they sold bmi before Sept 2010,SAS would get a cut. Guess what? within days of that expiring, we were put up for sale.
The staff have all made sacrifices to try to keep the old ship that was bmi afloat, while its owners had started to cut that ship up for scrap while it was still at sea.
Those that transfer to BA will, at least have a job; but there is a feeling of unease out there that we're in for more of the same.
There you go Studi, I bet you wish you had never asked!!!!!
The second thing I fail to understand is why BMI pilots current collective agreements become worthless due to transfership of ownership of BMI. Can you sell a company to a new owner without also transfering to the new owner the obligations towards the employees? Is this possible in the UK? Sounds weird to me, it's like inheriting money from someone who had huge depts and died, but without the depts.
It has been said that this legislation will protect the bmi employees where it is triggered throughout this transfer. It is not concerned with future scenarios such as career progression, seniority, etc.
This is not the only problem with the bmi transfer.
Most people's (pilots included) aspirations concern 1) Salary 2) career progression.
Given that BA has just introduced its new 34 point scale and has indicated that the bmi workforce will join at the bottom, most, if not all the bmi pilots will see TUPE 'kicking in' to protect them.
A 5 year F/O would have to wait a further 6 years before he would see an increase in salary, a 5 year Capt.-12 years, a 10 year Capt.- 16 years, & a 15 year Capt.- 20 years. As far as I am aware, the legislation does not compel any further increases in salary until the 'catch up' is complete. So we have Captains with 15-20 years to go before retirement with about, er.. 15-20 years before they can expect a salary increase. Nice, eh? Oh, and I don't think that the law compels the employer to match our (pathetic) subsistence allowance with the pilots of the new parent company.
As far as I am aware the present state of affairs regarding seniority are that we will be added to the bottom. There have been (and still are) 'discussions' going on on other forums about that; The BA pilots' argument is that they have been assured that no-one will be disadvantaged, so I can understand their concerns about integration.
The most common theme from our side is the BMED integration 3 years ago where Date Of Joining was used across both workforces, under advice from BALPA, the same union representing both sets of pilots here. There will have to be robust negotiations over all of these items.
The bmi pilots cite the fact that we are bringing a large number of slots (more than a fifth) of the size of the BA portfolio across; unlike previous mergers into BA, along with aircraft & qualified Crews; unlike previous mergers into BA.
The BA pilots state (quite correctly) that in its present form bmi would not be around in a year's time & therefore we should be glad of anything that's offered. Well, in order to get the books signed off in the latter part of 2010, WPS (our CEO) had to have a plan B if any sale did not follow through. It involved cutting it loose from the hub style of operation of the past, it would involve more LH & MH flying & would be a 'blank sheet of paper' approach. This, and a possible offer from Virgin or the Middle East were options.
Bmi has posted significant losses over the last few years. We have been run to lose money since the tie-up with DLH & SAS back in 1999, where losses would be covered in part by DLH & SAS. Anything of value was stripped systematically from under the noses of DLH, our main external shareholder. I am led to believe that our Cargo company was owned separately by our Main Shareholder who benefitted hugely. Aircraft were leased & sub leased through a company owned by our Main Shareholder at extortionate rates. We are still paying for leases on buildings that have remained unoccupied for years, some in countries we no longer fly to. When BMED was integrated, there was supposed to be a sum set aside for re-liverying their aircraft; this was not carried out until last year after the Main Shareholder had forced the sale onto DLH. (paid for by the loss making airline)
The last 10 years saw advertising disasters, on-board product cock-ups of monumental proportions,etc.
DLH gave the impression of being serious about turning it around, but with no serious investment in aircraft that could use the slots, it was never going to work. following restructuring, and with several hundred job losses, bmi's admin. costs ballooned. That's right - they went UP! (could this be an efficient way of writing down tax just before the disposal?)
It was obvious that DLH had no intention of turning bmi around in the last couple of years; after acquiring the 20% of shares from SAS there was a clause whereby if they sold bmi before Sept 2010,SAS would get a cut. Guess what? within days of that expiring, we were put up for sale.
The staff have all made sacrifices to try to keep the old ship that was bmi afloat, while its owners had started to cut that ship up for scrap while it was still at sea.
Those that transfer to BA will, at least have a job; but there is a feeling of unease out there that we're in for more of the same.
There you go Studi, I bet you wish you had never asked!!!!!
Last edited by skip.rat; 12th Jan 2012 at 00:36.
Join Date: Jan 2011
Location: warwick
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BMI guys – sorry to have to tell you this, but when you come up against the BA CC all that stuff about being “United in the Interests of British Airline Pilots” goes out the window, and the BA CC will use its weight within BALPA to trample all your hopes and aspirations into the dust - you will be on your own - you are only as strong as your own membership group/CC.
What you will be offered is one of two options:
1/ The bottom of the BA seniority list – with all that that implies for your prospects.
2/ A separate seniority list where you will end up in a situation similar to the GSS guys – BA FOs taking your command slots and so blocking your access to command, or even (in the event of downsizing) you tenure in your job, while they retain their golden parachute back to mainline.
For the baby and regional guys its even worse – you can expect to be ‘sold down the river’ to the highest bidder (or more accurately the outfit that will accept the least to take you away) just like the BA Connect guys were. I say again you are only as strong as your own membership group/CC.
Notwithstanding the above, should an issue arise that negatively affects BA pilots (eg Openskies) you will be expected to support the BA campaign and have your subs used to finance any legal action.
What you will be offered is one of two options:
1/ The bottom of the BA seniority list – with all that that implies for your prospects.
2/ A separate seniority list where you will end up in a situation similar to the GSS guys – BA FOs taking your command slots and so blocking your access to command, or even (in the event of downsizing) you tenure in your job, while they retain their golden parachute back to mainline.
For the baby and regional guys its even worse – you can expect to be ‘sold down the river’ to the highest bidder (or more accurately the outfit that will accept the least to take you away) just like the BA Connect guys were. I say again you are only as strong as your own membership group/CC.
Notwithstanding the above, should an issue arise that negatively affects BA pilots (eg Openskies) you will be expected to support the BA campaign and have your subs used to finance any legal action.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
DLH didn't seem too bothered what happened to BMI when it was in their stable? Neither did VC.
Seems the same goes for the T's & C's of Lufthansa Italia? Are they on the same benefits and pay package as DLH? Nope, didn't think so.
Studi advocates the type of IA that saw the death of Alitalia, another case of 'who would buy that???'. Intense IA saw that company, in a country reknowned for its vicious use of IA to ensure untenable wages, deliberately recind its AOC, declare itself bankrupt and re-issue a joint Alitalia/Air One AOC with new contracts. All those that wanted a job and were wanted by the company (exclude Union officials and anyone vocal against the company) had to sign a new contract. Alitalia Air One reborn. Another victory for the 'they would never take us on' brigade. I also seem to remember, taxying through Vienna one morning, thinking that no-one in their right mind would by such a diverse fleet as Austrian Arrows, saddled as they were with a massive debt. Up popped LH , bought them and stripped the fleets.
Germany has the dubious, lucky honour of being the financial driver behind Europe. It does have a good export economy that drives a high standard of living. It hasn't had a useless Chancellor who has raped personal, private pensions over the past decade forcing companies into massive corporate debt due to over taxed pension funds being driven into the red. Unfair, over riding taxes levied against Airlines under a very flimsy 'green' umbrella has seen UK LH traffic driven over to the continent, into the arms of DLH, AF, KLM as savvy passengers, especially premium, avoid extortionate APD.
The scenario in the UK is different to that of Germany of that there is no doubt, but to advocate another Union into pushing for IA under the guise of looking to protect your own ass into the future is a little rich. Look at the T's & C's in Lufthansa Italia and Austrian Arrows and see if they meet your exacting standards before trying to throw other pilots to the wolves.
We see this from different perspectives. DLH has done well to keep themselves where they are but the economics behind DLH and BA are wildly different. IAG has the ability to transfer slots between subsiduarys. If BA Express were to get a grounding then they have the startup slots and terminal capacity to get going. If they are brought onto the Master seniority list under BA then, and only then, does our Scope agreement apply. The ability to 'start up' BA Express in any other for is then severly curtailed by lack of Terminal Space, lack of route structure and lack of Slots. Whilst not impossible it would make starting up another subsiduary company very difficult and costly.
This is NOT about IA, striking etc. This is about how best to integarte BMI into BA and adhere to TUPE to ensure that neither BMI or BA pilots are disadvantaged. Always remeber that TUPE applies to both companies.
As to the bullet point Q&A from the BACC being 'one sided' what do you expect? They are there to answer the queries and worries from BA pilots, not BMI pilots. I would be very surprised if the BMICC hasn't produced something very similar for their members. The 90 day consultation period for TUPE only begins once it has been agreed that BMI is to be integrated. Therefore the decision rests purely with the BA pilots as to whether they are prepared to accept productivity changes to achieve this as the company is demanding.
Once that agreement is in (5-1 in favour as a rough straw poll) then the TUPE chanllenges rear their heads. At the moment the junior pilots who would be most affexted by the nature of the merger, especially with repect to seniority, are being asked to vote on something that they, and the CC, have no firm ideas on. Only speculation. In this respect it is a leap into the dark and therefore takes alot of discussion.
Personally I think the integration can only be a good thing in the long run. Both for BA and for the future securities of the BMI pilots. BA has alot of cash for future fleets and, with time and space, the future growth could bring the possibilty of a return of terms and conditions. Hopeful? Possibly but at least we will be there to try it and not withering on a dying SH vine.
Seems the same goes for the T's & C's of Lufthansa Italia? Are they on the same benefits and pay package as DLH? Nope, didn't think so.
Studi advocates the type of IA that saw the death of Alitalia, another case of 'who would buy that???'. Intense IA saw that company, in a country reknowned for its vicious use of IA to ensure untenable wages, deliberately recind its AOC, declare itself bankrupt and re-issue a joint Alitalia/Air One AOC with new contracts. All those that wanted a job and were wanted by the company (exclude Union officials and anyone vocal against the company) had to sign a new contract. Alitalia Air One reborn. Another victory for the 'they would never take us on' brigade. I also seem to remember, taxying through Vienna one morning, thinking that no-one in their right mind would by such a diverse fleet as Austrian Arrows, saddled as they were with a massive debt. Up popped LH , bought them and stripped the fleets.
Germany has the dubious, lucky honour of being the financial driver behind Europe. It does have a good export economy that drives a high standard of living. It hasn't had a useless Chancellor who has raped personal, private pensions over the past decade forcing companies into massive corporate debt due to over taxed pension funds being driven into the red. Unfair, over riding taxes levied against Airlines under a very flimsy 'green' umbrella has seen UK LH traffic driven over to the continent, into the arms of DLH, AF, KLM as savvy passengers, especially premium, avoid extortionate APD.
The scenario in the UK is different to that of Germany of that there is no doubt, but to advocate another Union into pushing for IA under the guise of looking to protect your own ass into the future is a little rich. Look at the T's & C's in Lufthansa Italia and Austrian Arrows and see if they meet your exacting standards before trying to throw other pilots to the wolves.
We see this from different perspectives. DLH has done well to keep themselves where they are but the economics behind DLH and BA are wildly different. IAG has the ability to transfer slots between subsiduarys. If BA Express were to get a grounding then they have the startup slots and terminal capacity to get going. If they are brought onto the Master seniority list under BA then, and only then, does our Scope agreement apply. The ability to 'start up' BA Express in any other for is then severly curtailed by lack of Terminal Space, lack of route structure and lack of Slots. Whilst not impossible it would make starting up another subsiduary company very difficult and costly.
This is NOT about IA, striking etc. This is about how best to integarte BMI into BA and adhere to TUPE to ensure that neither BMI or BA pilots are disadvantaged. Always remeber that TUPE applies to both companies.
As to the bullet point Q&A from the BACC being 'one sided' what do you expect? They are there to answer the queries and worries from BA pilots, not BMI pilots. I would be very surprised if the BMICC hasn't produced something very similar for their members. The 90 day consultation period for TUPE only begins once it has been agreed that BMI is to be integrated. Therefore the decision rests purely with the BA pilots as to whether they are prepared to accept productivity changes to achieve this as the company is demanding.
Once that agreement is in (5-1 in favour as a rough straw poll) then the TUPE chanllenges rear their heads. At the moment the junior pilots who would be most affexted by the nature of the merger, especially with repect to seniority, are being asked to vote on something that they, and the CC, have no firm ideas on. Only speculation. In this respect it is a leap into the dark and therefore takes alot of discussion.
Personally I think the integration can only be a good thing in the long run. Both for BA and for the future securities of the BMI pilots. BA has alot of cash for future fleets and, with time and space, the future growth could bring the possibilty of a return of terms and conditions. Hopeful? Possibly but at least we will be there to try it and not withering on a dying SH vine.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by zzz
BMI are losing in xs of £250m pa. Bmi have no assets apart from the slots and one A320; the rest are leased. The pension scheme is 80% invested in equities and is a total basket case (in fact worse than BA's NAPs scheme). They were v.close to being insolvent when Bishop exercised his Put option to sell it to Lufthy in 2008(?). That's why he had to accept less than he was due under the original deal he struck with Lufthy/Scandinavian (the company had to be solvent to exercise the option). They are bust!
bmi owns a lot more than one A320. It also has other assets too such as a fairly hefty share in NATS.
Lufty were forced to buy bmi for a reduced price and that lack of desire has really hurt bmi recently with no clear direction for company being disseminated by Lufty.
bmi are trading at a loss and have been for a while, which is of course unsustainable, but with a clear strategy from IAG and access to their coffers, then there is no reason why it couldn't return to profit in the future. It would take a lot of work and would need the backing of IAG to do it, but if the IAG strategy is to keep the company as a seperate entity and they invest in that, then bmi can get back to being a profitable organisation.
If anyone here says they know what the IAG strategy for bmi is, then they must be senior IAG management, as no-one and I am including the most senior people at bmi in this, know what the plan is going to be.
So everything that has been posted on here is just conjecture coloured with each poster's individual prejudices or beliefs. There is no fact here at all.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ACAS lists the mainline fleet as being entirely leased (chiefly ILFC, BOC, Macquarie, AerCap) with the exception of... one owned A320 (G-MIDT). Now the Regional fleet is another story - it's mostly owned - but the sale value of small Embraers these days is not enormous.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Studi, Not sure why you are getting so incensed by all of this, which is still mostly hypothetical, especially when you have "no skin in the game". Whatever the result, it is the BA pilots that will have to live the consequences of what happens and surely a weakened BA would be in the interests of DLH so why the constant and vociferous postings from an entrenched position? I could understand a BMI or BA pilot or even a hold-pooler getting exercised about this issue I just do not understand where your are coming from. Please do not take this a criticism, I am just trying to understand why you are adamant about this issue?
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As far as I know Alitalia is still trading. The problem of Alitalia have not been pilots, but overall outdated work practices plus being an unfortunate mid-size network carrier. They followed the same path as similar airlines in Europe like Swiss, Austrian, Brussels, etc by going under the umbrella of one of the big three. But they did not sell out themselves on the way to it.
in a row, and we went into mediation after one day. Officially we could not strike for LHI due to IA laws, so we requested other things to be negotiated away later on in exchange for SCOPE. We would not just give in without a new scope agreement. The situation was very different as it was hard to justify to apply a German contract to an Italian company. So at the end we got no influence on the contract, but at least a new very clear scope agreement plus the duty for the company to apply the same standards for LHI in selection and training.
You enhance your own career by new longhaul slots at the cost of BMI pilots who have to join the line behind you. You roll over to Willy without getting anything in return in terms of new scope clause.
Integrating BMI will give job stability, it will give future employment protection through TUPE and SCOPE. It will allow for continued career progression and bring benefits from roster stability and choice. The method of integration will then be discussed under the 90 day Tupe consultation. I fail to see what 'new scope' clause you elude to? All IAG aircraft to be flown out of LHR by BA Mainline???? Pie in the Sky.
Once concessions have been granted, when the company and the economic circumstances are on the increase, as a cohesive group of BA and former BMI pilots operating the majority of slots out of LHR, then, only then can we push to recover ground. Now is not the time for BASSA style 'all or nothing' suicide action.
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: Ireland
Posts: 1,621
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not sure why the ACAS info is wrong - perhaps if they are finance leases, or used as security against commercial mortgages, the bank/lessor shows up as the owner even though they are in reality bmi assets?
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Age: 58
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All BMI pilots will join at the bottom of the seniority list in their respective seats - this ensures that no BA pilot is disadvantaged.
All BMI First Officers will have first access to vacated commands from ex BMI captains retiring or moving fleets - this ensures that no BMI pilot is disadvantaged.
Note - if ex BMI first officer moves fleet (I.e. goes to long haul for a bit) then their right to a former BMI command is void. So you will have to stay short-haul or lose your 'early' command opportunity but that is / was the current situation in BMI now so again your are not disadvantaged either. Seems fair to me?
All BMI First Officers will have first access to vacated commands from ex BMI captains retiring or moving fleets - this ensures that no BMI pilot is disadvantaged.
Note - if ex BMI first officer moves fleet (I.e. goes to long haul for a bit) then their right to a former BMI command is void. So you will have to stay short-haul or lose your 'early' command opportunity but that is / was the current situation in BMI now so again your are not disadvantaged either. Seems fair to me?
I believe that I am right in saying nobody knows how BA are going to manage both pilot bodies until the TUPE consultations next month. That assumes that BA pilots vote Yes to the BA takeover.
This endless speculation doesn't really help anybody.
This endless speculation doesn't really help anybody.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
True and one thing we can all be sure of is that if there's any merging of seniority lists it won't be next month! Maybe next year, so if you're joining this year then it shouldn't affect you.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: U.K.
Age: 46
Posts: 3,112
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For crying out loud.
Repeat after me.
IAG (not BA) is buying 100% of the shares in bmi. This means no TUPE is needed as nothing is being merged.
What happens in the future is nothing more than a guess, but if bmi is kept as a standalone company (like BA and Iberia) then there will never need to be a merging of anything and TUPE will not apply.
Clear?
Repeat after me.
IAG (not BA) is buying 100% of the shares in bmi. This means no TUPE is needed as nothing is being merged.
What happens in the future is nothing more than a guess, but if bmi is kept as a standalone company (like BA and Iberia) then there will never need to be a merging of anything and TUPE will not apply.
Clear?
Join Date: May 2000
Location: South East
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What happens in the future is nothing more than a guess
If the BA pilots vote for integration then BMI will be merged into the BAOpco. IAG have stated it's entirely in the pilots hands. From the Balpa forum I'm 99% certain the vote will be passed.
Hence 99% certain Tupe will apply.