BMI mainline pilots made redundant?
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If BMI was bust and BA rescues it, that would be one thing, but just buying out a competitor surely BA should respect the internal structure of their purchase.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bmi outstations today, BA LGW pilots or the B767 fleet pilots next time around. Should the BACC add some industrial might to this issue? Just because it is legal it doesn't mean it is the only legal solution available. From a policy perspective BALPA should fight this from every possible angle. If the 2 CCs can work together on this point of common interest maybe their relationship will blossom just in time to deal with more thorny issues over the coming weeks.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: South East
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a brief period for the combined CC's to influence IAG through BA before the dismantling of BMI commenced. Regretably it didn't work out.
The axe is now being wielded pre BA integration so the BACC now have no say in what is going on and are not even party to the discussions.
It's down to the BMICC to see what they can salvage.
The axe is now being wielded pre BA integration so the BACC now have no say in what is going on and are not even party to the discussions.
It's down to the BMICC to see what they can salvage.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ollie Onion:
I would be very careful making assumptions like that! I am not at all sure what, if any, BA's involvement in these strategic decisions is? Are you?
This deal does not complete for another week. At that point IAG will become the owners of BMI. At some point in the following 5 months BMI will die and become part of BA.
My point is IAG are the buyers here, NOT BA!
IAG are NOT an airline, and if you want to see how they operate, take a look at the Iberia Express or Iberia Strike threads!!
look you:
There already was an eagerness on the part of the BACC to engage with the BMICC on the issue of integration, but for reasons with which I have some sympathy, it was not possible to reach common ground at that time.
The BACC are no longer 'officially' able to contribute to the current consultations. Though I suspect we can be confident we will not be disappointed with activities behind the scenes?
how can BA cherry pick who it keeps on using the bases as criteria?
This deal does not complete for another week. At that point IAG will become the owners of BMI. At some point in the following 5 months BMI will die and become part of BA.
My point is IAG are the buyers here, NOT BA!
IAG are NOT an airline, and if you want to see how they operate, take a look at the Iberia Express or Iberia Strike threads!!
look you:
There already was an eagerness on the part of the BACC to engage with the BMICC on the issue of integration, but for reasons with which I have some sympathy, it was not possible to reach common ground at that time.
The BACC are no longer 'officially' able to contribute to the current consultations. Though I suspect we can be confident we will not be disappointed with activities behind the scenes?
Join Date: May 2009
Location: 4gotten
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am probably missing something (wouldn't be the first time) but why are IAG or BA even being mentioned in this. As of the present, they are as far as I am aware not the owners of BMI, Lufthansa are.
With this in mind, talk of how BA or IAG manage things should apply post approximately 20th April. Until this time, Lufthansa and BMI management are the ones officially making this cull and I would expect it to be dealt with under the current AFS for BMI pilots.
As I say, perhaps I'm missing something but it would appear to me that either these redunadncies are handled and decided upon internally by Lufthansa/BMI management prior to the takeover or by IAG/BA after the over. If it is the latter then TUPE would apply. If it is the former, I would expect that WPS should stand by his loyal outstation staff and say "not on my watch" to any pressure by future owners. In previous communiques, the line has been that the management would try and minimise job losses rather than to consider pulling the plug on the business.
As positions will be needed by the future employer, surely this is contrary to that stance.
With this in mind, talk of how BA or IAG manage things should apply post approximately 20th April. Until this time, Lufthansa and BMI management are the ones officially making this cull and I would expect it to be dealt with under the current AFS for BMI pilots.
As I say, perhaps I'm missing something but it would appear to me that either these redunadncies are handled and decided upon internally by Lufthansa/BMI management prior to the takeover or by IAG/BA after the over. If it is the latter then TUPE would apply. If it is the former, I would expect that WPS should stand by his loyal outstation staff and say "not on my watch" to any pressure by future owners. In previous communiques, the line has been that the management would try and minimise job losses rather than to consider pulling the plug on the business.
As positions will be needed by the future employer, surely this is contrary to that stance.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thick E:
I stand to be corrected, but I believe TUPE only applies once BA own BMI. That is to say, NOT when LH own it, but also NOT when IAG own it either.
Approximately 25% of the slot portfolio is required to be relinquished by BA as part of the deal. (Branson claims to have a plan for them!
)) Significant productivity savings by both BA and BMI Airbus pilots will also dramatically decrease the manpower requirements of the new entity.
One way or another there was always going to be a surplus of pilots to be dealt with?
I stand to be corrected, but I believe TUPE only applies once BA own BMI. That is to say, NOT when LH own it, but also NOT when IAG own it either.
As positions will be needed by the future employer, surely this is contrary to that stance.
)) Significant productivity savings by both BA and BMI Airbus pilots will also dramatically decrease the manpower requirements of the new entity.One way or another there was always going to be a surplus of pilots to be dealt with?
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That seems to be a triumph of hope over expectation. Lufthansa want out of the bmi business so much they are going to pay IAG to take it off them. There'll be no "not on my watch" coming out of the Fatherland. Once again, people need to have a good look at what TUPE does and not not confer. The idea that TUPE makes people redundancy-proofed is incorrect I'm afraid. What you expect Lufthansa and bmi to do now isn't really that relevant as by next Friday it'll be IAG in charge and they'll do it their way.
People are getting way too hopeful as to what UK employment law will give them. The reality is that the law favours the deep-pocketed employer over the employees, and once the employer has decided to shed staff it's impossible to force them to revisit the decision. Courts and Employment Tribunals can only issue un-enforceable reinstatement orders and award limited compensation. The best hope for those facing redundancy now are the company councils influencing BA to find a cost neutral way to keep everyone on board (and it will need to be cost neutral, as IAG won't allow any department to grow it's way out of losses). Can the bmi CC come to their senses and start looking to save jobs rather than waste their time pursuing seniority?
People are getting way too hopeful as to what UK employment law will give them. The reality is that the law favours the deep-pocketed employer over the employees, and once the employer has decided to shed staff it's impossible to force them to revisit the decision. Courts and Employment Tribunals can only issue un-enforceable reinstatement orders and award limited compensation. The best hope for those facing redundancy now are the company councils influencing BA to find a cost neutral way to keep everyone on board (and it will need to be cost neutral, as IAG won't allow any department to grow it's way out of losses). Can the bmi CC come to their senses and start looking to save jobs rather than waste their time pursuing seniority?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm sure there is enough resource out there to work on avoiding redundancies and pursuing BALPA's preferred method of dealing with any that can't be avoided. Eggs and baskets, belt and braces call it what you like. Do you have something personal against the bmiCC? You always seem to be well versed in their activities and always disapproving!
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Too far from the equator
Posts: 745
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The sacking of ' outstation ' crew irrespective of seniority is not a new phenomenon . I , and many others , were the victims of exactly this practice when BA took over Dan Air in 92 .
There must be an SOP manual they dig out when they need it .
There must be an SOP manual they dig out when they need it .
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Uk
Age: 42
Posts: 473
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To clarify, no pilot has been made redundant but positions have been put at risk and the holders of these positions have been informed. Out station pilots, some trainers and managers. Why? Because these roles will not continue so the employees must be consulted with. That is what is now happening and it is likely new positions will be offered to those affected. Seniority is not a legally sound system and because these are base closures or management posts being lost Last in first out cannot be used and the company agreements don't apply in a merger. When Glasgow closed those pilots were put at risk and then offered roles at LHR. Not all pilots were put at risk just those posts affected. This way is legally sound. All bmi pilots will support resolutions to ensure these pilots get new posts.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
look you - I've nothing against the bmi CC per se, I simply think they've been either naive or negligent in their handling of the present situation. Having been briefed on the way it was going to be by arguably the most experienced negotiating team in the UK when it comes to dealing with BA, they decided they knew better and would do their own thing. You've only got to look at their communique in which they waxed lyrical about how they'd made sacrifices since 2011, how Lufthansa had promised them more long haul flying, how they weren't really a short haul airline, how they'd 'negotiate' with BA. Cloud cuckoo land! One can only hope that this rather rude wake up call will prompt them to reappraise their position and take a more sensible approach to events. Don't pin your hopes on Big BALPA changing things. The only influence they have on BA is through the BACC and their position has been clear for some time.
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why would they piss money up the wall on a case they can't win? Merging the Bmi pilots with the BA MSL would be a gift be are under no legal obligation to offer. They can run the Bmi pilots as a separate fleet within the requirements of the law. What would you sue BA for? Complying with the law and TUPE?
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let's not drag this thread back to the same old integration of lists debate, yawn. This is about redundancy and method being used for 'selecting' the unfortunate ones.
This is a fundamental issue for all uk pilots. If your airline has pilots at more than one base you should be afraid!
This is a fundamental issue for all uk pilots. If your airline has pilots at more than one base you should be afraid!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The law says who must? BALPA are not the employer. BALPA may suggest but they cannot compel. If BMI merged the list with BMed it's because BMI felt they had to. A union cannot force an employer to do something against their will. The law says sweet FA about pilots seniority lists. BA employ lots of people doing the same jobs on different contracts. BA can legally run the BMI pilots on a seperate, standalone fleet, with different T&Cs and no access to the master seniority list or the Postings and Promotions process and be fully compliant with TUPE. Once you understand that you are half way to recognising the reality. It matters not what BALPA say. All that matters is what IAG/BA can do.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 157
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You certainly live up to your username Hand Solo!
Please, can we keep this thread on topic. It is about bmi pilots being made redundant because of where they are based. Next time around it might be your airline facing the problem. BALPA policy, as I understand it, is last in-first out across a global pool of pilots. This is not a legal discussion, it is a matter of industrial relations and how British pilots react, especially those employed within the group (including BA pilots). If it is meekly accepted this time, it will become the norm. VS pilots fought off redundancy by fleet post 9/11, bmi pilots kept broadly DoJ 2 years ago when the company wanted to dismiss Captains. Do we want to spend the rest of our careers worrying that the next base or fleet or type change that we take could put us at risk of redundancy and reset our careers to day one?
Please, can we keep this thread on topic. It is about bmi pilots being made redundant because of where they are based. Next time around it might be your airline facing the problem. BALPA policy, as I understand it, is last in-first out across a global pool of pilots. This is not a legal discussion, it is a matter of industrial relations and how British pilots react, especially those employed within the group (including BA pilots). If it is meekly accepted this time, it will become the norm. VS pilots fought off redundancy by fleet post 9/11, bmi pilots kept broadly DoJ 2 years ago when the company wanted to dismiss Captains. Do we want to spend the rest of our careers worrying that the next base or fleet or type change that we take could put us at risk of redundancy and reset our careers to day one?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How much did they waste on obtaining your precious holiday pay
2) I stand to be corrected, but I believe the case fought by BALPA will benefit most of us, in most airlines???
This thread is about redundancies! If we could all pretend we are on the same side for a second, perhaps we could ALL stop looking like a bunch of 'spoilt brats'??
Guest
Posts: n/a
Is the BMi fleet size and mix part of the equation? If there are any leased airframes to go back to lessors then QED one needs fewer crew.
I don't know the numbers but hopefully someone will be along to spell it out.
Sad to say I never got to travel with them and judging by comments here, I'm the worse for that.
Good luck to all.
I don't know the numbers but hopefully someone will be along to spell it out.
Sad to say I never got to travel with them and judging by comments here, I'm the worse for that.
Good luck to all.
Join Date: Jan 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thomson Airways made pilots redundant a couple of years ago.. LIFO on its own wasn't deemed a "safe" enough way of doing it.
It was done using a redundancy matrix but was so heavily weighted to LIFO over things like poor performance and sickness that you would have to had been on the verge of being fired for poor performance anyway before it had any effect.
Redundancy by base was tried a bit later but was avoided by allowing pilots affected to transfer (at there own cost) to a proximate base.
BALPA has all of this experience within its ranks which I'm sure they'll be calling upon. Especially if BA has a current recruitment requirement.
It was done using a redundancy matrix but was so heavily weighted to LIFO over things like poor performance and sickness that you would have to had been on the verge of being fired for poor performance anyway before it had any effect.
Redundancy by base was tried a bit later but was avoided by allowing pilots affected to transfer (at there own cost) to a proximate base.
BALPA has all of this experience within its ranks which I'm sure they'll be calling upon. Especially if BA has a current recruitment requirement.