Is BA still a responsible Company?
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: England
Posts: 50
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Still confusing seniority with status lists my friend! Calm down and actually consider the proposition with regard to your position on your status list only. Obviously there won't be 300 bmi types joining any single status list, there are about 170 Capt and 150 FOs.
What fleet are you on anyway? If you are a widebody then none of this affects you, if you are narrowbody then you'll move up the list to a better position than where you are now.
What fleet are you on anyway? If you are a widebody then none of this affects you, if you are narrowbody then you'll move up the list to a better position than where you are now.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"BMI Baby and regional ... were never a part of the buyout."
BMI Baby and regional were bought. How can that not be part of the buy-out?
This started (go back to the first post) about Baby, who are all losing their jobs. And you lot have now changed this into the people with the most cushy jobs bickering about being 'disadvantaged'!!!! You are carrying on like a bunch of spoilt toddlers. Shut up and do something to help those Baby pilots instead. If you carry on like this then I hope that the arrival of the bmi pilots gives BA management every excuse to drive a giant wedge right through those gold-plated Ts&Cs of yours!!!
BMI Baby and regional were bought. How can that not be part of the buy-out?
This started (go back to the first post) about Baby, who are all losing their jobs. And you lot have now changed this into the people with the most cushy jobs bickering about being 'disadvantaged'!!!! You are carrying on like a bunch of spoilt toddlers. Shut up and do something to help those Baby pilots instead. If you carry on like this then I hope that the arrival of the bmi pilots gives BA management every excuse to drive a giant wedge right through those gold-plated Ts&Cs of yours!!!
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Trossie,
Get your facts straight. BMI baby and BMI Regional were to be sold by LUFTHANSA before any interested party bought BMI Mainline. The original purchase agreement was that IAG would buy BMI Mainline for circa £125 Million. If IAG were forced to take BMI Baby & Regional then the purchase price for BMI Mainline would be dropped considereably to cover the costs of disposing of those assets that LH failed to sell.
LH agreed to take liability for the pensions deficits and then, as a massive, profitable company (at the time) dumped the entire liability onto the Pensions regulator. Both LH AND the pensions regulator must take responsibility for that.
Baby/Regional were never wanted by IAG they don't fit the business model, they fly the wrong aircraft and operate out of the wrong airports for the IAG model. What don't you understand about that. It's a shame, my mate is losing his job and I, as a fellow pilot, feel for him but how do you think we, as a bunch of employees, are going to convince the board of IAG to protect two companies that don't fit, don't fly the mainline types and were never wanted?
Personally I feel very sorry for the guys in both companies however I also felt sorry for Zoom, XL etc. etc. etc.
I can do no more for them either.
Sums up your attitude adequately I suppose. Screw everyone else as long as I get what I feel to be justice. Sorry, not going to happen. 
Get your facts straight. BMI baby and BMI Regional were to be sold by LUFTHANSA before any interested party bought BMI Mainline. The original purchase agreement was that IAG would buy BMI Mainline for circa £125 Million. If IAG were forced to take BMI Baby & Regional then the purchase price for BMI Mainline would be dropped considereably to cover the costs of disposing of those assets that LH failed to sell.
LH agreed to take liability for the pensions deficits and then, as a massive, profitable company (at the time) dumped the entire liability onto the Pensions regulator. Both LH AND the pensions regulator must take responsibility for that.
Baby/Regional were never wanted by IAG they don't fit the business model, they fly the wrong aircraft and operate out of the wrong airports for the IAG model. What don't you understand about that. It's a shame, my mate is losing his job and I, as a fellow pilot, feel for him but how do you think we, as a bunch of employees, are going to convince the board of IAG to protect two companies that don't fit, don't fly the mainline types and were never wanted?
Personally I feel very sorry for the guys in both companies however I also felt sorry for Zoom, XL etc. etc. etc.
I can do no more for them either.
I hope that the arrival of the bmi pilots gives BA management every excuse to drive a giant wedge right through those gold-plated Ts&Cs of yours!!!
Last edited by Wirbelsturm; 30th May 2012 at 11:44.
Join Date: Feb 2010
Location: Planet Moo Moo
Posts: 1,279
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The decision on LGW fleet replacement is ongoing at the moment. Currently either the 737NG or the A320NEO are the front runners. However, as the restructuring of the management tree has given us 'Chief Pilot Boeing' and 'Chief Pilot Airbus' I have a feeling the SH will, possibly, remain Airbus.
All IMHO of course.
(I doubt they will bolster the 734 fleet with more aging, check heavy aircraft!)
All IMHO of course.
(I doubt they will bolster the 734 fleet with more aging, check heavy aircraft!)
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: A little south of the "Black Sheep" brewery
Posts: 435
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wirbelsturm:
"Sums up your attitude adequately I suppose. Screw everyone else as long as I get what I feel to be justice."
I'm an outsider here, I won't get anything out of anything that happens or doesn't happen. Just the toddler bickering that comes across here doesn't put many of you in a good light. And some of you probably need to be treated like toddlers!
Jockster:
"If he leaves a load of rubbish in the garage." The Baby and regional guys are just going to love you for this comment, aren't they?!!
Some of the crass "I'm alright" attitudes that come across here are disgusting. When people are losing their jobs the attitude comes across as "Screw everyone else as long as I get to keep my precious little place on a seniority list"!
"Sums up your attitude adequately I suppose. Screw everyone else as long as I get what I feel to be justice."
I'm an outsider here, I won't get anything out of anything that happens or doesn't happen. Just the toddler bickering that comes across here doesn't put many of you in a good light. And some of you probably need to be treated like toddlers!
Jockster:
"If he leaves a load of rubbish in the garage." The Baby and regional guys are just going to love you for this comment, aren't they?!!
Some of the crass "I'm alright" attitudes that come across here are disgusting. When people are losing their jobs the attitude comes across as "Screw everyone else as long as I get to keep my precious little place on a seniority list"!
Last edited by Trossie; 30th May 2012 at 22:55.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: N/A
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I understand that BA plan to take 12 of the Baby B737s as they are in better nick than the BA B737s at LGW.
So why are the Baby pilots being discarded by BA? It doesn't seem to make sense given that BA need to recruit large numbers of pilots over the next few years. Whilst BA have been consistent from the first in expressing their intention to dispose of Baby if there were no buyer - is this a case of throwing out the pilots with the Baby?
I believe this is a line that BALPA are exploring in an effort to mitigate redundancies at Baby.
So why are the Baby pilots being discarded by BA? It doesn't seem to make sense given that BA need to recruit large numbers of pilots over the next few years. Whilst BA have been consistent from the first in expressing their intention to dispose of Baby if there were no buyer - is this a case of throwing out the pilots with the Baby?
I believe this is a line that BALPA are exploring in an effort to mitigate redundancies at Baby.
Last edited by Looker; 31st May 2012 at 13:35.
Join Date: Aug 2004
Location: N/A
Posts: 167
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I further understand that the aircraft leases were paid up by Lufthansa - so BA are effectively getting 12 aircraft for free.
When you consider the timing of the Flybe announcement of starting domestic routes out of EMA (Baby had kept them out of EMA for years) - there doesn't seem to be as much benefit to BA if Baby had been sold.
If business is business why pay out large amounts of redundancy when recruiting Baby pilots into BA would improve the bottom line? BA may also get a better press by doing so.
When you consider the timing of the Flybe announcement of starting domestic routes out of EMA (Baby had kept them out of EMA for years) - there doesn't seem to be as much benefit to BA if Baby had been sold.
If business is business why pay out large amounts of redundancy when recruiting Baby pilots into BA would improve the bottom line? BA may also get a better press by doing so.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Whilst BA may need the pilots in the future, it appears they do not need them now. If BA are taking the baby frames then it will be a one for one swap for their dinosaurs. Recruitment was suspended at BA in March and I am led to believe they are slightly over-crewed after the mainline integration. They have in the region of 80 bods in their hold pool who have been told to expect nothing for the rest of this year. I think the best the baby guys may get is first refusal on assessments when recruitment reopens. IAG have no legal obligation to the Baby pilots, in the same way they don't see an obligation to the 1500 other people who will loose/have lost jobs due to the merger.
Last edited by Callsign Kilo; 31st May 2012 at 15:21.
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Another airport hotel
Posts: 181
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If business is business why pay out large amounts of redundancy when recruiting Baby pilots into BA would improve the bottom line?
Last edited by spider_man; 31st May 2012 at 15:21.
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Cloud Cookoo Land
Posts: 1,270
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I don't see it as absorbing the baby fleet. It won't be for expansion circumstances, merely replacement. This will most likely happen when baby ceases operations. As the airline no longer exists and this point, I don't see a consequence. BA are simply using aircraft that IAG would otherwise had to pay storage on and in the process replacing aircraft that are required to have major overhauls in the not so distant future. It has nothing to do with personnel in my opinion.
Last edited by Callsign Kilo; 31st May 2012 at 15:36.
