Is BALPA fit for purpose

[Artic Monkey]

Trossie

Don't come on here barking about what Flybe did to other airlines and then say we should think long and hard. Who the hell do you think you are? It's what's called business, survival of the fittest. Do you think we have a direct impact on the way the company does business? Is it our fault we pushed Air South West off the NQY-LGW routes? Is it our fault that they lost their jobs? Is it our fault that we are losing our jobs? I'm sorry they lost their jobs, I'm sorry we're losing our jobs but don't sit there implying we didn't give a . Not one person I have ever flown with have said they don't care about others losing their jobs, pathetic.

[captplaystation]

Trossie, if your main interest here is to gloat at the misfortune of others, merely because the company that employs them screwed your company over, I suggest your presence here is both unwelcome & inutile.

Don't know where you get the impression I spend my time building sandcastles , I spent 6 mths in the Sahara (on & off) some years ago, but am more likely to do igloos now.

The 2649 (+ a few deleted by myself & various mods ) posts are since 2002, so, plenty other ways to occupy myself thanks.

[Trossie]

...because the company that employs them screwed your company over...

Simply not true. But I have watched closely from the sidelines as others have been affected.

If "...what's called business, survival of the fittest" means that one fleet and its pilots survive, then that's just life. JB007 and Set 1013 have been the most realistic here.

And for those 'gloating' from afar about British employment practices, your comments here are surely an irritant to all affected.

Back to the topic though: Pilots must stop sitting back without getting involved then complaining like hell when 'someone else' doesn't do what they want for their own individual benefit. If BALPA is not fit for your purpose, what have you done to become involved in what BALPA has done up to now? Quit trying to blame someone else for your problems when you have not done anything yourself. If BALPA keeps some pilots in jobs at Flybe then they are 'fit for purpose'; if they insist on outdated practices that the airline can't afford and it pulls that airline down so that all the pilots there lose their jobs, then BALPA would not be 'fit for purpose'. Full stop.

[captplaystation]

gloat
gləʊt/
verb
gerund or present participle: gloating
1.
dwell on one's own success or another's misfortune with smugness or malignant pleasure.
"his enemies gloated over his death"
synonyms: delight in, relish, take great pleasure in, enjoy greatly, revel in, rejoice in, glory in, exult in, triumph over, crow over; More



What I said

When I read this thread & (some of ) the attitudes therein (never mind the totally "unfit for purpose" industrial legislation) I am so glad I p1ssed off from the UK 21 years ago.


What you said


Now to all of you Flybe pilots who are complaining about losing your bases/jobs, etc., just think very carefully about all the other pilots out there who lost their bases/jobs because of Flybe undercutting their airlines and making their routes and bases unviable when they had got by quite happily for years before that. It's that undercutting that has made Flybe unviable and causing your problems, but you didn't complain about it at the time. (To make it worse, Flybe now pulling off any of those routes will be adding insult to injury for any of those pilots who lost out to Flybe's predatory but unsustainable past practices.)



Well, I won't say "pot/kettle/black" because really, life is too short for handbags at dawn. As I said, glad to be out of it, highly recommend others to do the same if the chance arises, & I think telling soon to be redundant folks to remember what their company (their company mind, not THEM) may have done in the past, whilst not "gloating" per se, is certainly a little bit "up-yours", is it not ? Hopefully wherever they end up will have more welcoming souls than thee, who won't harbour irrational grudges against fellow professionals merely doing/needing a job. Like I said, so glad I left this twee/sick mentality behind 21 years ago.

Enjoy your fog


Now, "that" is gloating

[seniortarget]

When you read all the other posts on terms of endearment, you begin to realise that this is just another chink in the armour of the UK pilots terms and conditions. Those at the bottom of the seniority list are keen to see the top 30% go so they can keep their jobs and to be honest who can blame them. If I was in their position I might be guilty of doing the same.
The sad thing is that by doing this they just allow another chink in the very thing that they have spent a lot of time and money investing in. 25 years from now when they are a Capt. of a large jet in a large airline and are told that the company needs to save money, so you and your fleet are going here's statuary redundancy of 10k for your loyalty, they won't even remember what happened 25 years previously.
We are our own worst enemy.

[exeng]

Tend to agree to Seniortarget here.

I have no axe to grind as I am quite well past my sell by date (although still flying overseas).

LIFO on its own as a redundancy process is by law it seems not acceptable.

However the acceptable 'new' legal process seems to favour business accountants in finding the most profitable route from redundancies.

Morally correct - I think not.

P.S. in the company I fly with they sack or decide to keep people at their own will - there are laws but nobody complies with them - Africa!

[slowjet]

Having come up through the sponsored route, I was terribly pleased with myself and terribly grateful to my sponsor to whom I was happy to pledge the rest of my career. I felt that good management means that there is no need for a union. I can hear the howls now ; "Good Management ?" ! I was not a member of BALPA but was constantly urged to join. I thought my management team were doing a great job and I had no need to be part of a Union.BALPA sent funds to the Labour party as a registered union and I really objected to that as a staunch Conservative ! But the "Teamster" types started to pressure . Even the company stated to me that they were a BALPA company & that since BALPA negotiated my terms & agreements, I should join or, at least , send my potential BALPA subscriptions to my fave charity. I argued that I was capable of negotiating my own terms & conditions & would pay myself the subscription. There was general laughter but the Company admitted that I might wind up with better conditions than the members had negotiated.

I later joined a non-union company. The Management were a dream and actually told us that there would never be a need for union activity. Bad management leads to people feeling that they need to "unite". We were all , of course, free to join BAPLA but the Company decided that they would not negotiate terms & conditions with BALPA.

The Union has undoubtedly done very well in all sorts of areas and the feeling that one should have to unite in order to secure deals lies purely at the feet of the bad management companies. Of course, the rotters are there to make money rather than employ pilots & they will , with or without BALPA.

Like my colleague, catplaystation, I headed out of the UK as quick as I could get my hands on a useful rating & never returned,professionally , taking my career destiny within my own shaping. I think I did rather well. Never found the need to unite and dealt only with sensible management.

Is BALPA fit for purpose. I think they are, really, but there will always be areas where they have little, if any effect.

Good luck to all who face the awful spectre of unemployment, especially at this heady time of year

[Ancient Observer]

No Union anywhere has magic wands.
A TU is, and can only be, what its members want it to be.

Like the rest of us, any TU has to work within the Employment laws that Mr Blair and Mr Brown gave us.

Any UK based Pilot slagging off BALPA is effectively slagging themsleves off.

[Itch]

This question goes out to the legal brains reading this thread.

If we forget for a moment that Flybe have a global workforce, not a base, based, workforce. Policy, custom and practise of LIFO, regardsless of seat fleet or base.
In pure employment law where do we stand on the 3 different scenarios that are proposed in Flybe's redundancy program?

1. Complete base closure
2. Complete removal of one type of aircraft at a mixed fleet base.
3. Reduction in number of one aircraft type at a mixed fleet base.




To answer a few questions asked previously

I think this issue effects the majority of UK pilots. If you look at the 3 scenarios above it tests most of the available options. So I believe this forum is more appropriate than a Flybe specific forum.

I agree that for a wider (than Flybe) audience polisy F and some more detail would be useful. I'm pretty stretched at the moment, can any one help with that?

[Tags]

Ancient Observer
A TU is, and can only be, what its members want it to be.

Not officially true. 97% of the Virgin Atlantic members gave BALPA very clear instructions a couple of years ago. It was ignored, with no real explanation or justification to this day.

Any UK based Pilot slagging off BALPA is effectively slagging themsleves off.

I'd disagree. Following on from the above, the majority of Virgin Atlantic members joined a brand new association, and terminating their membership of BALPA.

Back to the topic, Flybe members pay a lot of money to BALPA; ensure they act in your collective interest & not their own.

[mad_jock]

itch

1. they can make everyone on the base redundant and there is plenty of case law on that one with other company's both airline and other.

They can keep critical skills if they so wish ie if they want to keep a TRE they can do but if there is more than one with the same skill set there has to be some sort of matrix about which who stays and seniority can be one of the criteria.

2. Again the whole fleet can go and any that are held onto the matrix has to be applied to. But they can't just get rid of everyone else and keep a few without a valid selection matrix.

3. This is the difficult one and it all depends on the matrix used for selection and if its deemed legal or not.

The matrix could be.

1. Base
2. Fleet type
3. TRE/TRI
4. disciplinary recorded.
5. Seniority.

But they can move the items around as they and there lawyers see fit. The base and fleet redundancy is pretty sound in my opinion. They shouldn't have much problem with keeping the training team if they so wish but there is no requirement to.

The selection away amongst the rest is the hard bit. It can depend if you contract is for a pilot or its defined by your seat ie is their a FO's contract and when the upgrade they get a Captains contract. If its like that it might not be possible to slide people back into the RHS. Because the different seats would be defined as different jobs. Where as if the contract was just for pilot the seat allocation wouldn't be part of the job description.

But what ever happens that job has to be vacant for a year. Then using other bases on a route I don't think has been tested yet. ie if they completely get rid of one base and serve the same route from another base using the same aircraft type. Then within that year they expand the new base up by say filling it with cadets and upgrading FO's to LHS. But I doubt they would be stupid enough to try that. They will just wait a year and then they can expand at will.

But this is just the opinion of another pilot that's done the managers employment law basic course not the HR one which is 4 weeks. And had experience of redundancy's outside aviation.

[Alan Fresco]

I whole-heatedly agree with SeniorTarget!!
Genius!!

[captplaystation]

Would it be a "Saturday Night over -generalisation" to say that it is all a crock of ?

At these moments we find that words such as loyalty/ability/professionalism/ trust/flexibility. . are totally one-sided & readily cast aside as the victims of expedient profiteering on the back of (slightly) difficult commercial rationalisation.

I have already put a nose (or two ) out of joint on this thread, and, I really, have no dog in this fight, so will sign out by wishing all affected the best of luck (and don't ignore my advice in my previous posts to get the hell out of that damp little island if you can )

[seniortarget]

Thanks Alan.
Ok Captplaystation, I'll bite. Genuinely interested to know where would you recommend ?

[Trossie]

Now that that self-opinionated git has disappeared back to his igloo to freeze his nuts off, those who know what they are talking about can continue without irritating interruptions.

Itch, some 'case history' on the base/fleet reductions: about a decade ago an airline now Connected to yours (there's a clue there) got rid of two entire fleets and a whole lot of bases in one fell swoop. Pilots were laid off, although in many cases with back-hand deals with another airline to take a select few. There was a tribunal case where it appears to have been made clear that if your base or fleet was going you were at risk, regardless of any 'seniority' system. Going on that it appears that the answer to your points 1. & 2. are that you are at risk. Your point 3. would be a bit more of a problem where some system, acceptable to employment law, would need to be used to select who goes. That all fits in with mad_jock's comments. One point is that any system for selecting people for redundancy should be set up before there is any risk of redundancies to be looked at very favourably by any tribunal. Selection processes that are cobbled up as the threat for redundancy occurs are likely to be picked to pieces by any tribunal. Maybe that is why the straight fleet/base system is being used in your case: it is straightforward and unlikely to be picked to pieces if there is any tribunal.

BALPA's role? It should have been to ensure that a viable selection process was in place well before the threat of redundancies and that that process would be financially viable, i.e. it wouldn't cost so much to carry out that process that it would drain on the airline's resources to the point that they'd have to get rid of a greater number of pilots to 'fund' the costs incurred by the redundancy selection process (e.g. if lots of pilots need to be retrained onto other fleets or transferred to other bases at the airline's expense). When redundancies are threatened, BALPA should be looking at ways of reducing the number at threat by helping the airline to keep people. In BMI they appear to have helped save several jobs by getting all pilots to agree an effective pay reduction in order to fund the retention of those pilots at risk. Have they been working on either of these in your airline? Also, the effectiveness of BALPA in your airline will only be as good as the effectiveness of your reps. If you're a member you could have stood to be a rep and you most certainly should have voted for candidates. Often there are reps who are only in it for themselves, it is up to you as members to see that and stop them. So, BALPA is only as effective as its members. So, are its members 'fit for purpose'?

And as for those that complain about the downward trend in Ts &Cs, well when the money runs out, so do the Ts & Cs. If you were working for any other type of business and you saw poor business practices, the sensible thing to do would be to jump ship early and get a job with another (competitor?) employer that seemed to have his corporate business head screwed on the right way. However, too many in the airline world are shackled from moving by that curse called 'The Seniority List'.

[captplaystation]

The Black Sheep Brewery, Masham North Yorkshire

Can't expect too much "couthness" from a Yorkshˇreman I guess. . . . it's OK, igloos are only for nightstops. Home is cool at nights now, but normally 20c for Xmas. Base is min 22c all year round, considerably more in the South of the island .

Didn't leave that wet damp patch of land for somewhere even less agreeable.

Then again, based on your "posting history", maybe this takes precedence over Yorkshireness

You Tube

[Leg]

Some post there Trossie, you managed to get everything you said spectacularly wrong, must be a first on pprune!

Oh and one other thing, flybe pilots did vote for a pay cut to save jobs, look where that bright idea got us.

You are an embarrassment to this forum.

Itch, good luck.

Captplaystation, fair enough and I see where you are coming from,
but some really want to stay in this 'damp little island', hence why
they joined this bunch in the first place! (Or the other bunch before
the sell off/take over)

[captplaystation]

seniortarget,

sorry I missed your post there (probably due to the slagging off that followed it)

I am not very au fait with opportunities on Embraer (or are you a Dash man ? ) but it seems Emb time is quite acceptable to get you into a Bus/ Boeing, so perhaps you have to look at a type change (hopefully not involving SSTR, but maybe a bond ? )
Q400 Commanders have recently gone into Sun Express as DEC on B738, so it seems that the market for experienced Commanders is fairly buoyant at least on a global scale.

In terms of location, well, difficult to recommend Turkey, but you may have to accept a period of cr@p involving commuting until experience on a new type gets you back home. Not fun I know (only too well) but you have to look a couple of years down the line.

It is purely personal opinion, but my experience of these scenarios tells me that the time to move is NOW, so that you jump, rather than are pushed. It is easier to find opportunities & to stand out in a pile of C.Vs if the pile is not chock a block with your peers all applying for the same thing at the same time.
If you truly feel that your demise is likely, difficult as it may be , the time to act is now.

We all have different ties/priorities but my UK company opening a French base ,coincident with an impending divorce on my part, was the best thing that happened to me in terms of quality of life 21 years ago.

12 years in France 9 in Spain, I cannot think of circumstances that would tempt me back.
Different strokes/Different folks & all that, but most colleagues who have left the UK (excluding those that commute back on days off) don't seem in a rush to go back. The World is a big place, our island is quite small(minded)in the grand scheme of things. Great to visit once in a while, that way you only see the good stuff.

[Trossie]

The playstation kid has discovered Google! A bit out of date though, why didn't you find Hunt still on for nice South African? They seem as easy a 'wind up' target as you! Divorced? There's no surprise!

Leg, what exactly was 'spectacularly wrong'? You are quite right to want to stay in a country that you enjoy. Problem is that you have to keep a lot more than half and eye on the viability of your employer and be ready to move if it becomes too questionable. No 'schedules' to agreements count for anything when the money runs out. And that doesn't just apply to where you now live and would like to stay, wherever you are when the money runs out so do the Ts & Cs. Maybe you did vote for a paycut to try to save the situation, but maybe it was already too late? Maybe without it the layoffs now would be higher? People who constantly try to blame 'someone else' are those who should be embarrassed.

Back to the topic: BALPA is fit for purpose, it's just that some people have distorted ideas of what they think the purpose should be.

[captplaystation]

Ha Ha, well, we have to laugh at ourselves no ? Divorced ? Hell Yeah, I am Scottish & she was English (although not from Yorkshire ) WHAT was I thinking about .

To deviate (briefly) back to the original thread. . . . if you want decent employment law, you have to live somewhere that has been a bit Commie in the past, disregarded the meddlings of the rest of the world, and is probably doomed to go down the drain like the rest of Europe once their protectionist regime is scuppered for the greater good (?) by the Brussels Bully Boys. . . Vive la France (except it is probably too late. . . regretably)