Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Terms and Endearment
Reload this Page >

BA/bmi merger (was Virgin & Balpa - bmi next ?)

Terms and Endearment The forum the bean counters hoped would never happen. Your news on pay, rostering, allowances, extras and negotiations where you work - scheduled, charter or contract.

BA/bmi merger (was Virgin & Balpa - bmi next ?)

Old 11th Apr 2012, 17:15
  #341 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
There is no 'legally correct' way to integrate the two working bodies. There are ways that comply with TUPE and ways that don't. So long as any one of the multitude of TUPE-compliant methods is chosen BA will win any challenge, or the challengers will run out of money. 101917 is simply speculating like everyone else. BA employ expensive lawyers and aren't about to waste that money implementing a windfall solution that ratchets up the costs of Bmi. Those who doubt this should consider this afternoons announcement of 500+ redundancies at LGW.
Hand Solo is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 17:32
  #342 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: everywhere
Posts: 127
As you say the only real solution is something that is mutually acceptable to the majority. Fortunately PPRuNe is not representative.
xwindflirt is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 17:35
  #343 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Unless you are either one of, or representing one of the interested parties then it's all speculation. And even then you'd still be speculating on the intent and objectives of the other parties involved.
Hand Solo is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 18:03
  #344 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LHR
Posts: 90
As has been said, any method of integration that the BMI-CC are not happy with risks legal challenge. Keep in mind that it's not just the BACC that don't want BMI pilots integrated on BMI-DOJ. BA have no interest in putting a 24-year BMI pilot on PP24 and giving them the pay-rise associated with that. So the simplest method for BA is to not integrate the two groups at all.

All that BA need to do then is make sure TUPE is complied with (BMI pilots have no legal right to a place on the BA MSL).

It is becoming likely (source: people who know a lot more than me) that the outcome will be as follows:


- BMI pilots flying the BA airbus fleet, but with a separate rostering system (they may/may not fly with BA airbus pilots)

- They will use Carmen (already used at LGW) to be rostered (I gather very similar to what they have now)

- The work rostered to them will be extracted before the BA bidlines are constructed. It will consist of a fair share of trip types, weekends off, etc.

- The BMI-pilot group will decrease in size with retirement of BMI-pilots. No new pilots will join their group.

- They will have access to new commands commensurate with current career prospects. Probably on a dead-man's-shoes basis.

- BMI pilots may have the option to join the BA MSL (and hence move fleets) in accordance with their BA-DOJ.

- BMI pilots will retain their BMI-DOJ for purposes of Staff Travel and redundancy.



While the BACC were never going to agree to the full demands of the BMI-CC, they believe that they could have agreed and achieved something significantly better for the BMI pilots than what I've described above. The BMI-CC believe they can do better still by going it alone. We shall see, but I wouldn't be holding my breath...
BusDriverLHR is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 18:17
  #345 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Age: 55
Posts: 72
The work rostered to them will be extracted before the BA bidlines are constructed. It will consist of a fair share of trip types, weekends off, etc.
Sorry - won't work as it disadvantages a BA pilot who may want to bid for the trip that is extracted. Why do they get ANY week-ends off? I didn't get a week-end off (other than leave) for a couple of years. Why should the junior BA guys work week-ends when the BMI guys don't?
Jockster is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 18:24
  #346 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 89
(source: people who know a lot more than me) that the outcome will be as follows:
That is not looking difficult
ScotPilot is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 18:28
  #347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LHR
Posts: 90
Sorry - won't work as it disadvantages a BA pilot who may want to bid for the trip that is extracted. Why do they get ANY week-ends off? I didn't get a week-end off (other than leave) for a couple of years. Why should the junior BA guys work week-ends when the BMI guys don't?
There will be more work, hence more weekends off. They will get their fair share. The number of weekends off/ quality of triplines available to current BA airbus pilots will not decrease, hence they will not be disadvantaged.

From a legal point of view, I don't think TUPE would be complied with if a BMI pilot who currently can achieve x number of weekends off per month is now told they can now have none.

From a 'fairness' point of view (subjective, and perhaps sadly irrelevant), I don't think it would stack up either. Making BMI pilots work every weekend regardless of length of service for the benefit of current BA pilots is certainly not something I've heard suggested by any other BA pilot.
BusDriverLHR is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 18:31
  #348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: LHR
Posts: 90
That is not looking difficult
I handed you that one on a platter, touche.
BusDriverLHR is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 18:56
  #349 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course
Posts: 2,116
:
The work rostered to them will be extracted before the BA bidlines are constructed. It will consist of a fair share of trip types, weekends off, etc.
Sorry - won't work as it disadvantages a BA pilot who may want to bid for the trip that is extracted. Why do they get ANY week-ends off? I didn't get a week-end off (other than leave) for a couple of years. Why should the junior BA guys work week-ends when the BMI guys don't?
bmi bring a number of slots to the party, including weekend slots/destinations. Pre-extracting work from the pot to the level of weekend slots brought in does not therefore disadvantage any existing BA pilot. I suspect that existing BA pilots would quite like the experience of some of bmi's medium haul routes/nightstops - should they be available or not to BA pilots? Swings and roundabouts.

When I was on the Airbus, I know that I really enjoyed the opportunity of the 4 day trips to LCA - pseudo longhaul with out the time changes
TopBunk is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 19:13
  #350 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 688
I suspect that existing BA pilots would quite like the experience of some of bmi's medium haul routes/nightstops
I bet they would!

For precisely the reasons outlined by TopBunk, it seems to me that BMI pilots would do well to keep ALL the MH/LH routes that they currently operate? rostered in the way they currently are (albeit working harder for their new owner). That way Jockster has no grounds for complaint, and neither do BMI's A319/320/321 pilots?

I can't imagine anybody could possibly object to the standalone operation that would result? Not that I imagine it's what many in BA would have hoped for?

Tidy!
4468 is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 20:45
  #351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: england
Posts: 733
This is starting to look more like a mixed fleet/worldwide fleet situation, where routes are rotated throught the fleets. Separate rostering systems that compy with both rostering agreements, but that also ensure the work is all covered.
hunterboy is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 22:09
  #352 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 185
The BA pilots were given a vote on whether to integrate BMI or remain a standalone. Well they voted to integrate so bring it on!

It seems that IAG were amenable to the standalone option and to save all the wrangling may just opt for that, as they surely don't have to abide by the outcome of the their pilot's vote.

So if that were the case the BACC may have a little more to weigh-up when defining their uncharitable interpretation of the "integrate" vote. Having voted to protect their futures from a standalone they seem to want to offer little in return except to tell us to be grateful - nice.
MrBenip is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 22:34
  #353 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
You don't appear to have grasped who is doing what here Mr Benip. The integrate/non-integrate argument took place between IAG and BA. The BACCs concessions helped BA win the argument. That ship has sailed now. IAG listen to the OpCos, not pilots. Having helped BA win the argument for integration, why do the BA pilots now owe you? You, at this stage, have done nothing whatsoever for IAG, BA or the BA pilots. On the other hand, BA and the BA pilots have saved you from having your T&Cs savaged by IAG by bringing you into the BA fold. One might say you should be damned grateful, unless you thought Willie Walsh was going to give you a warm handshake, a warm handjob, and say "Welcome to IAG boys!".
Hand Solo is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 22:43
  #354 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 185
Hand Solo, Funny how you see it from your side of the fence. If I thought the BA pilots voted to save my T's and C's I surely would be grateful but we all know why the vote went the way it did - certainly not to save my skin! So do me a favour and quit the "be grateful" line.
MrBenip is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 22:53
  #355 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
The BA pilots voted in their own interests - they're not a charity and BA is not a refuge for pilots from bankrupt UK airlines. However you don't seem to be fully cognisant of what your options were. They were:

1) Go bankrupt and join the dole queue.

2) Join IAG as a standalone and play your own personal part in turning around the 1M per day losses of bmi.

3) Join BA and get some top cover while BA sorts out the basket case which is bmi. The BA pilots are paying for that top cover. To expect whistles and bells on top is dreaming.

There's nothing uncharitable about the BACCs interpretation of the 'integrate' vote. It's exactly the interpretation we voted for. If you don't like it then go whinge to the Bishop or Lufthansa. It's their fault you're bankrupt, not ours.
Hand Solo is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 23:05
  #356 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 185
Quote "On the other hand, BA and the BA pilots have saved you from having your T&Cs savaged by IAG by bringing you into the BA fold."

I absolutely agree that you have voted in your own interests and why would'nt you? I i know would. So my point is, please stop writing as in your above quote as though YOU have voted to save ME, I find it very patronising. If anything has saved us it's your company's interest in more slots and the requirement for pilots to fly them, not the "BA pilots".

Last edited by MrBenip; 11th Apr 2012 at 23:19.
MrBenip is offline  
Old 11th Apr 2012, 23:17
  #357 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,964
As an employee in the industry, this thread really makes you think. The only thing missing is the employers point of view and that only matters if 50+1% of a seniority list is affected.
Litebulbs is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2012, 07:35
  #358 (permalink)  

PPRuNe Person
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Mr Benip, assuming you are a BMI pilot (the joys of anonymity here on PPRuNe!) then it must have been a very stressful time over the past months. Now at least you can look forward to increased job security with benefits of continuity of employment.

BA pilots (and all employees) have been through stressful times as well, not long ago we were asked to reach into our pockets and help save the company. This time round we have been asked to reach into our pockets again. Our LGW colleagues have also done the same which has prevented them from being included in the current round of job cuts there.

So BA pilots are not immune from the financial worries of the industry, far from it.

So it is against this background that we view the integration of your colleagues. We felt that if we had the chance to prevent a Jetstar-like operation at LHR then we would take it.

As a side-effect of our self-interest, naturally those joining pilots would of course be protected from this as well.

The threat of redundancy has hopefully gone away now but be assured that IAG would have offered you far worse than your current T's & C's had the vote not been for integration.

It is understandable that you feel vulnerable in this situation, but it is not the intention of BA pilots that you feel patronised. However there is a sense that your collective expectations have not been as well-managed as they could have been.

All the best and see you in the CRC soon.
overstress is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2012, 09:59
  #359 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 185
Overstress, Thank you for your post which whilst explaining the facts is pleasantly moderate and non-imflammatory unlike one particular poster on here. I certainly hope you are more representative of the people I will be flying with and look forward to that.

After our full integration of Bmed, some of whom even carried over their more generous favourable pension contributions from the company than we enjoyed and also had their training positions preserved etc, still unbelievably, there were a few dissenters. But in the main things quickly settled down to a harmonious workforce. After consultation with Balpa and the management we believed this was the only way to go and time proved this to be so.

To get to the point really, it is only management that benefits from rifts and divisions within the pilot community and in the long term is detrimental to us all if we are not all on the same T's & C's according to our aviation experience. I am therefore quite shocked at the short term view displayed by the BACC. If the BACC support us joining on the bottom of the SL together with much lower pay points then if management think we are happy with this then you can expect some very hard bargaining for keeping your own T's & C's in the future. Divide and conquer is a tactic that always wins.

Whilst I appreciate you have been fighting to preserve your terms recently I fail to see that as the integration is bringing more slots and hence expansion to your company that you would suffer, when we are only 300 or so, if we were zipped into your SL. You are not being asked to eke out what you already have but the integration is bringing more "food" to the table to eat so surely status quo. You do need extra pilots with a decent experience spread to fly the extra slots.

I really am sorry to hear on here that people think we are "lucky to have a job" (and yes we are) and if that is the feeling conveyed when we join then it won't be enjoyable having our noses rubbed in it while you guys quickly take advantage of the slot expansion whilst we sit at the bottom being made to feel eternally grateful that we are there at all. Not a good situation for pilot unity and a few short term advantages for you guys moving to LH whilst management ponder their next move.

You are probably right about the situation not being handled well but I think our BmiCC were caught by surprise at the hardened attitude of your BACC and naturally want to explore all options - not an easy task. I for one would have favoured a fleet bid freeze so you guys have first crack at LH that the extra slots provide then no BA F/O would be disadvantaged, not even much with bidline either as there would be more flying to go round and vacancies created when you guys move across to LH so again status quo.

So there are my final thoughts and I fear everyone will be losers (some sooner than later of course) the way it is all going.
MrBenip is offline  
Old 12th Apr 2012, 10:41
  #360 (permalink)  

PPRuNe Person
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Mr Benip: to address some of your points hopefully in the spirit of discussion rather than confrontation, I think rather than a short-term view, the BACC are looking to the future. If they were truly short-term, they would not have recommended a 10m package of cuts to their members with a view to retaining integration.

If BMI pilots were to join at the bottom of the list they would retain their current salary under TUPE until their service in BA meant that they had caught up with the payscale. The BACC had little choice over the 34-point pay scale given the pressures that retirement legislation has made on our agreements and indeed the whole industry.

You will not have your noses rubbed in anything by BA pilots, we are all looking forward to the new opportunities and everyone is far too busy for that kind of thing, it simply won't happen. You will get a smile and a handshake I can assure you.

No-one stays at the bottom of the MSL for long, expansion will continue and with it progression. Even at the bottom, stability is nearly 100% and trips can be swapped electronically to improve lifestyle.

If the BMICC felt that the BACC displayed 'hardened' attitudes, perhaps they may have pondered why - probably a reflection on their battle-hardened state!

IAG/BA are tough employers and the BACC have to be ahead of the game readying themselves for the future challenges facing us.

I will stay away from 'zipped seniority' except to say that BA would never go for it as it would hugely increase their costs at a time when they have to turn loss-making BMI to profit within 2 years - the BACC would never be able to persuade BA to go for zipping even if it supported it.

I hope this helps to explain our viewpoint.

I imagine that there will be many BMI pilots with loads of unanswered questions - people concerned about basings, nightstops, tours, commuting, A330s and much more. Those in the regions/baby must be very concerned as well. I hope you get your answers soon.
overstress is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service - Do Not Sell My Personal Information -

Copyright 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.