BA/bmi merger (was Virgin & Balpa - bmi next ?)
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA have in the past sent staff on courses for corporate spirit building - I can not confirm that this included fight crew but it is a fact for many others in administrative roles.
The point is though ( and this is NOT a crtitism ), that BA do encourage a great deal of corpoate loyalty. This loyality seems to have coloured a few views. Atitudes like this were very similar in bmi for a while. M Bishop had a very loyal following which was subsequently rudely dispelled for many.
The point is though ( and this is NOT a crtitism ), that BA do encourage a great deal of corpoate loyalty. This loyality seems to have coloured a few views. Atitudes like this were very similar in bmi for a while. M Bishop had a very loyal following which was subsequently rudely dispelled for many.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What relevance does that have to this thread? There doesn't appear to be any BA pilot here who's been to a BA corporate identity day, and company loyalty to BA bears no relevance to the fact that the Bmi CC have grossly overplayed their hand. Even if every BA pilot on here was grossly disloyal and hated BA you'd still never persuade them that parachuting Bmi pilots in with their Bmi DOJ was acceptable.
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well....Hand, you clearly have a degree of hatred flowing through your system!
The point is quite simple....there is a lot being written here that has a lot of passion. Passion that clouds objectivity. You write from the perspective of a BA employee, influenced by the BA experience. Like wise, I am from a bmi background ( although I hope the management haven't coloured my views too much ). There is a cool rational view to these matters which MAY leave you slightly dissatisfied.
I suspect neither BACC, bmiCC or BALPA will dictate the terms of this merger, it will be management, accountants and lawyers looking for the most cost effective outcome.
That ought to make YOU worried.
The point is quite simple....there is a lot being written here that has a lot of passion. Passion that clouds objectivity. You write from the perspective of a BA employee, influenced by the BA experience. Like wise, I am from a bmi background ( although I hope the management haven't coloured my views too much ). There is a cool rational view to these matters which MAY leave you slightly dissatisfied.
I suspect neither BACC, bmiCC or BALPA will dictate the terms of this merger, it will be management, accountants and lawyers looking for the most cost effective outcome.
That ought to make YOU worried.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 89
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does it bother anyone else that some of the people who post here are charged with looking after the safety of thousands of people and millions of pounds of equipment. If I was not a pilot and I looked through some of the posts here I would be seriously concerned about the state of mind of some of the people sitting at the front of my aeroplane. You know who you are and you are doing your reputation and that of your fellow pilots much damage. Joe public must be wondering what the f**k is going on.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
No hatred running through me Anton, or any other BA pilot here, but if mud slinging makes you feel better then so be it. All you've got on here are clear statements that you've asked for far more than the law entitles you to or theBA community is prepared to grant you. If you want to carry on withering on about what you think is fair, what Big BALPA ought to do, why mysterious 'Corporate Identity' days are robbing you of your birthright, or any other of the fig leaves you like to use to disguise an unpleasant reality then to go right ahead!
Oh by the way, the thinly veiled threats about the accountants worrying us don't really wash. Remember they are BAs accountants, and we've been talking to them for months. You don't think we're aware of their plans?
Oh by the way, the thinly veiled threats about the accountants worrying us don't really wash. Remember they are BAs accountants, and we've been talking to them for months. You don't think we're aware of their plans?
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I've said it before Hand......we will see.
I really don't think there has been much mud slinging from this side either - no demands, no dictate, no belittling.... I'll even apologise for my colleagues negotiating in good faith.
I really don't think there has been much mud slinging from this side either - no demands, no dictate, no belittling.... I'll even apologise for my colleagues negotiating in good faith.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This is business Studi, not a socialist collective. The fact that you couldn't grasp the economic reality of the PP34/PP24 debate tells me you don't have much to add to this debate beyond a rose-tinted view of pilots hugging together and dancing under rainbows for the wider benefit of the two winged master race. It is a lovely ideal. It is, however, not the way the rest of the world operates.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: everywhere
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Seeing as though the pp34 and pp24 subject has come up... I have crunched the numbers and considering that BA pilots are contracted to 900 hours and bmi pilots are contracted to 740 hours, pp34 does in fact reprisent a significant reduction in salary. Any thoughts?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A reduction in salary to who?
I'm missing your point, sorry.
As for the hours I'm assuming that those midland pilots that accept a voluntary transfer to the Ba msl will be contracted to 900 hrs. Those that stay on the fleet within the fleet will remain on the 740 hrs pay protected until the 34pp provides an uplift.
Have I missed something?
I'm missing your point, sorry.
As for the hours I'm assuming that those midland pilots that accept a voluntary transfer to the Ba msl will be contracted to 900 hrs. Those that stay on the fleet within the fleet will remain on the 740 hrs pay protected until the 34pp provides an uplift.
Have I missed something?
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: everywhere
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A full time contract at midland is 740 hours and at ba 900 hours. Bmi pilots are being told by various people on here that they will only get tupe contracts or pay frozen until the pp34 catches up with them. However that is based on 900 hours. Tupe does not allow for the change in hours as it is a fundimental part of the contract. The bmi cc could negotiate a variation to the contract but as I stated, after crunching the numbers the 34pp would be about a 20% pay cut in hourly terms.
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: GLASGOW
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
X-wind,
The basic salary is not linked to hours flown at BA. That's paid as an hourly rate on top of your pp. Im led to believe there is no flying hour rate at midland? Regardless its my understanding that no BMI pilot will be financially worse off than he is at present by their integration into BA. Also the 900 hour limit is traditionally a bumper that only the LH come up against, or so I'm lead to believe.
Id be astounded if BA dont know exactly whats due under tupe, absolutely astounded!
N.
Ps to those having a go at Hand he's just telling it as it is as seen by most BA pilots. Personal attacks only serve to further undermine the arguments.
The basic salary is not linked to hours flown at BA. That's paid as an hourly rate on top of your pp. Im led to believe there is no flying hour rate at midland? Regardless its my understanding that no BMI pilot will be financially worse off than he is at present by their integration into BA. Also the 900 hour limit is traditionally a bumper that only the LH come up against, or so I'm lead to believe.
Id be astounded if BA dont know exactly whats due under tupe, absolutely astounded!
N.
Ps to those having a go at Hand he's just telling it as it is as seen by most BA pilots. Personal attacks only serve to further undermine the arguments.
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: London
Age: 42
Posts: 21
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Gents and Gals
Argueing on here is as useful and as wise as a box of frogs on a winters day.
We do both sides no favors behaving this way and guess what? What ever is written here won't change one dot on your offer.
I will wish you all good luck and maybe ask for a little calm and restraint as a minority on both side is presenting each company in a bad light.
See you in CRC soon.
Ps its not true , we're not like the Borg all singing the company and union mantra
Argueing on here is as useful and as wise as a box of frogs on a winters day.
We do both sides no favors behaving this way and guess what? What ever is written here won't change one dot on your offer.
I will wish you all good luck and maybe ask for a little calm and restraint as a minority on both side is presenting each company in a bad light.
See you in CRC soon.
Ps its not true , we're not like the Borg all singing the company and union mantra
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: London
Age: 44
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The lesser of two "evils"?
I think the bmi chaps and ladies could benefit from a bit of background to the bmi acquisition, what is currently going on in BA shorthaul, and how the pilots got involved.
I worked in what Anton may describe as an “admin” role in BA Waterside for a few years. I have never been to, or heard of a “corporate identity” day – and suspect they do not exist.
BA did not buy bmi. IAG bought bmi. The difference is significant.
IAG made no secret of the fact they are only interested in the slots from bmi, nothing else. At the same time two of IAG’s current business units, BA and IB, are in the midst of large strategic reviews of their shorthaul businesses (as are most legacy carriers). I won’t say anymore than that for BA, however the result of a similar review for Iberia was for the formation of IB Express.
Now, IAG (based on the Bath Road) wanted bmi to become the new “BA Express” for BA shorthaul. The terms and conditions would be benchmarked to Vueling, as Vueling are now the new benchmark in terms and conditions for pilots in Europe. BA were set against this and want to keep shorthaul “in-house”, a struggle they have recently also been fighting at LGW. IAG saw an opportunity for leverage here, and told BA they could only get bmi in-house if they reduce their costs by a set target, together with changes on the revenue side. A large BA project kicked-off, and the 34PP scale is but a small part of this, but perhaps the most visible to pilots. IAG were also very clear that bmi costs cannot be allowed to rise be even 1 penny. But, with cost reductions from BA and their pilots, IAG were happy to allow integration of bmi LHR into BA LHR shorthaul.
One point was very clear, bmi costs cannot be allowed to rise. If pilots were to join the BA MSL in bmi DOJ order this would imply a substantial cost increase, to which IAG would not permit. If bmi pilots want to fight for this it is my opinion that they risk blowing the whole integration deal and going over to new conditions that remain unknown.
Now, I do not know the exact details of how IAG were planning on setting up BA Express using bmi, but it was suggested by one manager in IAG that TUPE would not apply as bmi as a unit were making horrific losses, and they would not be integrated into any existing business unit. I am not a lawyer and nor is he so I can’t comment on the validity of this, but I will say that the IAG legal team, and their lawyers based in the city are VERY good and would make sure everything is legal.
As an outsider looking in I think the deal offered to bmi pilots, and BA pilots for that matter, is fair. Bmi pilots gain secure employment and lose little when many of their ex-bmi colleagues in other roles will be on the dole . If what I read here is correct they even keep grandfather rights and “dead man’s shoes” for commands – in my humble opinion a very generous offer. BA pilots gain from slightly better prospects due to longhaul expansion, but have had to lose some overtime pay as part of the deal.
Those in bmi who think they will keep seniority in BA with associated pay increases clearly have no understanding of, or respect for, how IAG works with its business units. Seniority will not happen as it leads to cost increases. IAG are ruthless and determined, they make no secret of this, and the certainly are not in the business of making friends.
I worked in what Anton may describe as an “admin” role in BA Waterside for a few years. I have never been to, or heard of a “corporate identity” day – and suspect they do not exist.
BA did not buy bmi. IAG bought bmi. The difference is significant.
IAG made no secret of the fact they are only interested in the slots from bmi, nothing else. At the same time two of IAG’s current business units, BA and IB, are in the midst of large strategic reviews of their shorthaul businesses (as are most legacy carriers). I won’t say anymore than that for BA, however the result of a similar review for Iberia was for the formation of IB Express.
Now, IAG (based on the Bath Road) wanted bmi to become the new “BA Express” for BA shorthaul. The terms and conditions would be benchmarked to Vueling, as Vueling are now the new benchmark in terms and conditions for pilots in Europe. BA were set against this and want to keep shorthaul “in-house”, a struggle they have recently also been fighting at LGW. IAG saw an opportunity for leverage here, and told BA they could only get bmi in-house if they reduce their costs by a set target, together with changes on the revenue side. A large BA project kicked-off, and the 34PP scale is but a small part of this, but perhaps the most visible to pilots. IAG were also very clear that bmi costs cannot be allowed to rise be even 1 penny. But, with cost reductions from BA and their pilots, IAG were happy to allow integration of bmi LHR into BA LHR shorthaul.
One point was very clear, bmi costs cannot be allowed to rise. If pilots were to join the BA MSL in bmi DOJ order this would imply a substantial cost increase, to which IAG would not permit. If bmi pilots want to fight for this it is my opinion that they risk blowing the whole integration deal and going over to new conditions that remain unknown.
Now, I do not know the exact details of how IAG were planning on setting up BA Express using bmi, but it was suggested by one manager in IAG that TUPE would not apply as bmi as a unit were making horrific losses, and they would not be integrated into any existing business unit. I am not a lawyer and nor is he so I can’t comment on the validity of this, but I will say that the IAG legal team, and their lawyers based in the city are VERY good and would make sure everything is legal.
As an outsider looking in I think the deal offered to bmi pilots, and BA pilots for that matter, is fair. Bmi pilots gain secure employment and lose little when many of their ex-bmi colleagues in other roles will be on the dole . If what I read here is correct they even keep grandfather rights and “dead man’s shoes” for commands – in my humble opinion a very generous offer. BA pilots gain from slightly better prospects due to longhaul expansion, but have had to lose some overtime pay as part of the deal.
Those in bmi who think they will keep seniority in BA with associated pay increases clearly have no understanding of, or respect for, how IAG works with its business units. Seniority will not happen as it leads to cost increases. IAG are ruthless and determined, they make no secret of this, and the certainly are not in the business of making friends.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: everywhere
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Agreed personal attacks get this debate nowhere.
My understanding is that at ba if cap is not flown a claw back of salary is introduced is that correct? I agree that ba accountants and lawyers are pulling the strings and that the bmi costs must remain neutral but have they actually defined the frame work?
My understanding is that at ba if cap is not flown a claw back of salary is introduced is that correct? I agree that ba accountants and lawyers are pulling the strings and that the bmi costs must remain neutral but have they actually defined the frame work?
Having recently left short haul I can confirm that approx 750 hrs per year is a realistic figure for BA so I can't see how the BMI pilots will be working any harder than they do now.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: everywhere
Posts: 127
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ok but if ba wanted you to fly all the way up to the 900 hours is there anything in the contract to stop them? Or for you to be able to decline without penalty?
Just to draw an anology 740 hours total is a bit like 80% part time. I don't think anyone would volunteer to go full time but keep the part time pay.
The bmi pilots are not responsible to meet any monthly minimum and as an average because of inefficiencies in rostering end up flying in the region of 650 hours or so. Some obviously do more and some less. To continue on this line. Have the redundancies been calculated on pilots available for 900 hours per year or the 740 as per the existing contract?
Just to draw an anology 740 hours total is a bit like 80% part time. I don't think anyone would volunteer to go full time but keep the part time pay.
The bmi pilots are not responsible to meet any monthly minimum and as an average because of inefficiencies in rostering end up flying in the region of 650 hours or so. Some obviously do more and some less. To continue on this line. Have the redundancies been calculated on pilots available for 900 hours per year or the 740 as per the existing contract?
Join Date: Mar 2010
Location: The Home of the Gnomes
Posts: 412
Likes: 0
Received 3 Likes
on
2 Posts
My understanding is that at ba if cap is not flown a claw back of salary is introduced is that correct?
If you hold a Blind Line (work assigned based upon what is left over after trip line construction - effectively preference rostering), you are CAP protected as it is the company's responsibility to assign you enough work.
... and make sure you don't confuse flying hours with credit hours. BA pilots are contracted to achieve 1056 (or thereabouts) credit hours per year. This includes all leave, sim duties and anything else a pilot may be called upon to do - including occasionally flying airliners. Trip construction does not automatically mean that flying hours equal credit hours so in practice on shorthaul, you will find yourself flying 700 to 730 hours per year to achieve CAP. You will struggle to do more unless you hit the overtime quite hard.
I am sure that with some swapping of routes/schedules that BA will have BMI pilots flying their 740 hours a year.
What is the ratio of synthetics in BMI with pure flying hours?
What is the ratio of synthetics in BMI with pure flying hours?
Have the redundancies been calculated on pilots available for 900 hours per year or the 740 as per the existing contract?