Is BALPA fit for purpose

[Itch]

Thanks for all of your responses so far and lets keep this going!

Lets go back to basics and the reason for having a union in the first place.

Flybe's CEO and its management team are motivated by one thing and one thing only. MONEY. They don't care if they are in the aviation industry or a hedge fund or making rubber dog . They will do what ever they can to make the most money.

Unions are there to ensure that employees are not exploited in the managements relentless desire to make more money.

Flybe's management have indentified what they believe is the most cost effective method of reducing excess capacity "Close small bases, Get rid of the Jets, Get rid of the people in the small bases and those who fly the jets" Nice and simple, yes? Well yes! In fact there is an unexpected bonus! All of the people who fly the jets are also on the highest salaries.
Why? Because Flybe claim to desire loyalty from their staff which is why they encourage loyalty by giving extra money to them for every year they stay with the company and free flights even a free pen after 10 years! Oh yes and they also have promised to reward that loyalty by showing loyalty back to those loyal employees by operating a LIFO system where those that have chosen to forgo higher salaries better t&c's etc are promised that most important perk JOB SECURITY! Number one on the seniority list knows that everyone else has to be made redundant before he is!

It really is that simple. Its all in black and white.

I'm no lawyer but I know there is such a thing as a verbal contract! Well flybe's policies are all published! If that does not give Balpa the mandate to take Flybe to court then I don't know what does! So Balpa may loose, I accept that. But if Balpa one of the richest unions around don't fight this in court then I and every other Balpa member will know that they are not fit for purpose!

I am not asking people to with hold subscriptions but I am asking them to make their voices heard and tell Balpa what they think should be done!

To my colleagues in Flybe who are not currently effected I urge you to ask yourself one question. When you are old and unlikely to be re-employed, when you have a family to support do you think you will desire your employer to honour its published policies? If the answer is yes you need to support Balpa in fighting this, even if it costs you your present job!

Short term, selfish behaviour is why the career choice of pilot has already become second rate. Lets change it!

[captplaystation]

Trossie,

Other countries have it "far better" when these things happen. . . .if I could mention France & Scandinavia to begin with, but I am sure there are many others.

UK was Donald Ducked after Maggie for this type of scenario. . . . . .

[Boing7117]

I remember pilots in MAN and NCL asking the same questions of their colleagues back in January this year when these two bases (and GCI?) we're put at risk by the last useless management.

I remember BALPA fighting damn hard to keep Policy F the official route for this kind of reduction in operation.

I also remember far too many 'colleagues' in other bases wishing people in affected bases good luck for 'their' situation.

I cannot forget far too many colleagues voting AGAINST the BALPA vote to use Policy F because doing that would cost others their job.

Itch, when you've got an airline where some (relatively well paid / comfortable) flight crew treat this job as their 'career' for life, having built up many years of seniority and with it, pay increments / seniority in base etc VERSUS the brand new, fresh FO's who want to rack up hours and move on to the next thing (and even those like me, who would like to make a career here but know that there isn't a defined career path) then you're going to have a massive imbalance of people fighting for the same cause - because they simply don't want the same thing.

The company will do whatever they want and BALPA to a large degree are powerless to prevent it. Next year, when flight deck have been made redundant, if BALPA feel there is a case, then they may try take Flybe to the cleaners, and they'll probably get a settlement. But that's next year, and right now Flybe want to cut costs now and they'll worry about employment tribunals later.

[mad_jock]

So BALPA are going to get 175 jet pilots pilots saying take them to court.

Then they are going to get the same again if not more saying take them to court I have been unfairly dismissed. If they don't do anything that's them not going to get any low seniority pilots joining.

BALPA is stuffed either way.

Also if they do take it to court and loose there is a precedent set, that's it for everyone. And they have far larger membership base in other airlines which could be affected. It would basically make it possible for BA to torch one of the old long haul fleets and get shot of a lot of its old timers on the old wage scales. I am not saying they would do it mind.

They are going to be getting pressure from all sides and I can't see them having any chance of coming out clean.

And those 175 are a conservative 15 million pounds of wage bill a year unless I have got my number of zero's screwed up even if its 1.5 its still significant. That pays for a whole heap of lawyers.

I hope the crew rooms at the mixed fleet bases aren't to hostile.

How many days are left for the consultation period? I presume some of the routes won't finish until LGW closes as a destination using the jet.

[Artic Monkey]

Itch, of course they're in it for money, why else are they in business? If anyone thinks the management gives a toss about you or I then you are very much mistaken. To quote a famous film with Arnie in it, we are expendable assets, nothing more and nothing less.
It doesn't matter what Flybe's policies are, it's irrelevant. If they don't conform to employment law then they are not worth the paper they are written on.

Boeing7117, what did you expect people to do? Vote themselves out of a job? You're deluded if you think people would do this, and you wouldn't have done this either would you. If you're based in MAN right now and you are effectively safe are you prepared to put something to a vote that means your job is untenable? Get real. It's human nature to protect your own back yard, you would be no different. Don't forget that everyone took a financial hit to save jobs, probably including yours. I'm at risk at the moment, I'm not whinging about it, if my number's up then my number's up, I'm not going to moan that others are safe and I'm not, I'm not expecting others to vote themselves out of a job to save me, I'm not expecting others to take a pay cut to save my job either, why should they? I'll take it on the chin and walk away.

[Trossie]

Quantify

have it "far better"

Is this the France where British airlines (Eastern) are operating domestic routes within the country (maybe because the 'social' costs of employing pilots are less in Britain so that it is easier to employ them?).
Is this the Scandinavia where British airlines (Flybe and BMIR) are operating routes within Scandinavia (maybe again that it is easier to employ pilots in Britain?).

What is better, having 'gold plated' agreements and Ts&Cs but being heaved on the dole or having far from the best Ts&Cs but having a job?

Maybe the problem at Flybe is that the structure is giving the 'bean counters' the excuse to select the way that they have: if everyone earned the same there would be no financial reason to 'cull' the top group because they were expensive to retain? Seniority lists are turning out worthless and the next thing to look at is 'pay scales'. Just have a 'flat' pay as most modern airlines have, then there would be no reason for the 'bean counters' to target those at the top. (After all, does a '10 year' pilot fly that much more efficiently than a '2 year' pilot that he deserves to be paid a whole lot more?)

People must remember that the sole purpose of any enterprise is to make money. So don't criticise your bosses if that is what they are trying to do: if they are doing it properly they will keep you in a job and if they aren't then, the same as in any other enterprise out there, it might be time to think of leaving before things go wrong. But if you are trapped because of your precious place on that 'seniority list' and if 'seniority lists' elsewhere mean that you'll have to swallow all your experience and expertise and start again at the bottom then you will probably be forced to stay until you present outfit sinks. Remember that you're part of an outfit that is trying to make money to stay afloat and keep you in jobs, good old capitalist style. Socialism may sound very nice but , to quote 'Maggie', "the problem with socialism is that eventually you run out of other peoples' money".

Hopefully others can pick up some of the business that Flybe hasn't managed to run properly and hopefully those others can employ as many of the pilots who are being laid off by Flybe as possible.

BALPA's job isn't to try to flog a dead horse, in fact if BALPA have promoted some of the inefficient policies within Flybe that have caused these problems, then they might have played a part in killing that horse. BALPA's job now is to try to ensure that those pilots are able to get jobs related to their experience, etc., elsewhere. Ensuring that other airlines don't have 'seniority list' penalties for those pilots looking for work would be a good start. That's what the real work outside the airlines is like, it is now time for the airline world, and their unions, to catch up with that real world.

[bad bear]

informed debate?

hi, can anyone post the sections of the contract that allows redundancy by base and the section "F" so people know what the facts are? Are turbo prop captains being laid off, if so at which bases? Are any captains being demoted?
I guess everyone knew there were potentially problems with schedule "F" but did anyone ask BAPLA to open the can of worms and negotiate a new agreement based on more age friendly legislation?
Has the number of redundancies been reduced as the number of routes being cut has reduced ( 60 mentioned but 40 announced)

[Boing7117]

I am not asking people to with hold subscriptions but I am asking them to make their voices heard and tell Balpa what they think should be done!

To my colleagues in Flybe who are not currently effected I urge you to ask yourself one question. When you are old and unlikely to be re-employed, when you have a family to support do you think you will desire your employer to honour its published policies? If the answer is yes you need to support Balpa in fighting this, even if it costs you your present job!

Arctic - this is what Itch is saying. Let's all stand together and be counted.

Just like in January?

And your response clarifies my point exactly.

And to clarify my position further, I will support any action BALPA sees fit in order to preserve jobs, where jobs are unfairly highlighted for redundancy.

Would I take a pay cut? Yes. Absolutely. Would I lose my own job to preserve somebody else's? If it was clear that me keeping my job was absolutely unfair then yes and I would back any vote / mandate to ensure my position is in the mix. Why? Because it's the right thing to do.

But we know this situation is entirely different to January. If a BASE is closing then there's nothing we can do to help prevent that. If the base closes, the job in that base is redundant.

If the fleet in base is closed then again, as above, there's nothing we can do to prevent that either.

Can we follow 'our' plane. No, because somebody somewhere is already in a job somewhere else and can do the work required.

The difficulty is when a partial reduction in base occurs. How is that decided - that's the part that could be unfair and that's part of this unpleasant situation that I will vote accordingly and be vocal about as and when it happens.

[mad_jock]

http://www.pprune.org/nordic-forum/5...redundant.html

Seems it isn't much different in Scandinavia.

you have two separate issues going on.

1. One fleet getting disposed of

2. The other fleet being reduced.

To me Number 1 is pretty clear cut.

Number 2 is going to be the difficult one and they can't just choose the most expensive pilots to go.

[bad bear]

Boing7117

Why? Because it's the right thing to do.

I totally agree, as a UNION we need to what is right rather than what is good for the individual. Loosing a job when a new F/O is hard but loosing a Command and a large number of increments is so much worse. I have been made redundant as a F/O and been at risk later in my career and know when I would rather loose my job.

Does the FLYBE contract allow for redundancy by base and fleet, if so where does it say so in the contract which pilots have made their career choices? or only LIFO (schedule "F")?
If pilots are to be at risk by taking a fleet or base at a weak station they should know in advance what the rules are and have the opportunity to turn down the posting. Why would a senior F/O at a secure base take the risk of accepting a command at an outstation where the route is vulnerable? If pilots refuse to take postings at "risky" bases or fleets the company would have to rethink its policy

[Set 1013]

Well said Artic Monkey

Itch - It doesn't matter if Flybe's policy's are verbal or published. If they don't conform to current employment laws they are worthless. Policy F is old, outdated and unfit for purpose, it is not worth the paper it's written on!

[Han 1st Solo]

LIFO isn't the issue here. The company matrix uses seniority as the majority factor so in effect LIFO is been used. The issue is how the company applies the matrix, if it chose to apply the matrix to a global pool (i.e. the entire seniority list) then we wouldn't have an issue, the problem is it's choosing to create pools within specific bases, fleets and seats, which flies in the face of what policy f says should be applied. Despite been safe this time around I wasn't in Jan and may well be the next time the company decides to make redundancies which is why everybody should support the application of policy f. It's a rubbish situation and I really hope there's a happy ending however unlikely that appears to be at the moment.

[RexBanner]

In response to the suggestion that Flybe pilots should just be transferred to easyJet, that is all very nice in theory but what easyJet want in a pilot may be different to what Flybe wants and some may not be right for the company. Plus you have the guys (myself included) who worked hard at easyJet recruitment this year and were initially welcomed into the company but are now sitting in the hold pool nervously hoping for a start date before they drown. Is it really a fair suggestion that they should be usurped by Flybe pilots who have not even sat an assessment just because their job is at risk?

Don't think I'm not sympathising because I was in the very same position at Flybe earlier this year and know exactly how they feel. But I would not have wanted to jump the queue ahead of someone in the pool, regardless if they had a job. There will be jobs at the places the easyJet 'poolers leave though and if there are still jobs available at easy then perfect. Good luck to everyone at Flybe, the professionalism on view earlier this year and still now when you listen to the R/T is outstanding.

[mad_jock]

what easyJet want in a pilot may be different to what Flybe wants

cheap as hell and legal?

[seniortarget]

Saad Hammad (FlyBe CEO) is a very clever man. He knew he had to make some drastic changes to FlyBe in order for it to survive.

First and foremost he needs to get rid of the very people that got FlyBe into this mess in the first place - the upper management....Tick.

Next he needs to address airport , handling , A/C lease, and other non staff related operational costs and get a better deal than the previous management.....Tick

Next came the staff costs - the most expensive being the pilots - hmm, this one's tricky as they have a union. If he just instigates a cut across both pilot fleets/rank he could increase the strength of BALPA and have a mutiny on his hands. How can he save a large sum of money and keep the rest of the workforce sweet ?
Having taken the time to talk to his staff, he then discovers an answer. The Dash crews are fed up with the fact that they do more sectors than the Jet crews and get paid 10% less for it. As many of the Jet crews are still (although more senior) relatively young, they also feel that their prospects of getting on a Jet is a long way into the future.
Hmm, Saad thinks....If I ground most of the Jet fleet, make most of the Jet pilots redundant, that would solve my salary saving problem. I could also put the word out to the Dash crew that the company is in big trouble (even though we made a profit last year) and is close to going bust. That way the Dash crews will be fearful of their jobs and BALPA would have to accept it. I could also give the impression that after these cuts and after the company gets back on its feet we will be expanding - possibly with new routes, new bases and new Jets. Now that we have got rid of most of the Jet guys and with them the Dash pilots barrier for career progression, they could be flying a nice shiny Jet much quicker than they thought.
So the Dash guys - although feeling a little guilty for their more senior colleagues, accept that this is best for them. They keep their heads down and allow it to happen, after all if they fight for Policy F they may put themselves at risk as well. The UNION between the pilots is dead.....TICK

And now the future.

Once the dust has settled, Saad needs to make even more cuts to make even more money...after all his reputation is at stake here !

The pilots that have survived the cuts have proved that seniority is dead, the Union is dead and the contract isn't worth the paper it's written on, therefore lets have no seniority list....TICK
Next without seniority and loyalty we don't need a loyalty pay...time to get rid of increments ....that saves a lot TICK
Next without a higher jet salary to compare themselves to, the Dash crews are left with comparing themselves to other European operators....but wait Saad thinks, they are the highest paid turboprop pilots in Europe....Hmmmm........ Mowaa ha haaa
TICK
TICK
TICK
BOOM

[Mr Angry from Purley]

A 25% cut in Pilots is an aweful lot, how many aircraft are going?
Any Flybe Pilot should be looking to get out. No doubt Flybe will do a deal and keep a few more but end up short of crews.

[Itch]

I don't think anyone has disagreed with the fact that management are financially motivated to find the least cost solution. So the question is

Have Flybe management chosen the correct path.

Consider what I shall be seeking compensation for.

I will go from a Captains salary of £80,000 to a first officers salary of £50,000 and will be on that for lets say 5 years but it could easily be 10 years if I follow the companies guidance and am lucky enough to get a job with Monarch. That's a loss of earnings of between £150,000 to £300,000 and that's assuming I get a job straight away.

When I moved house a couple of years ago it cost about £40,000. Chances are I will have to relocate.

Then there is my wife's job, she has a good job but may not be able to do it if I have to relocate.

Then there is the stress that we are all being, unfairly, subjected to now. I for one have not had more than 5 hours sleep a night since this started!

And last but definitely not least are the court costs.

Multiply that lot by 150 and it adds up to............ A LOT

Now compare that to the costs involved in following the policy

Well to be fair we need to see the retraining and relocation costs from the company but many of us have Dash ratings already and as for published relocation costs, they are no way near what I shall be seeking compensation for!

Then lets look at the people who would be made redundant.

Most will be First Officers at the beginning of their careers. they will have read the redundancy policy and could not really claim to be surprised that the company followed the policy.

They will probably get a better if not similarly paid job else where so little or no lost earnings

They are probably in rented accommodation as they like to move around progressing their careers so moving costs are minimal.

They will probably get a job more quickly too. I guess most employers looking for First Officers would favour experienced FO's over experienced Captains.

They too will suffer the stress, I know that, I lost my FO's position and it sucked! But looking back I was lucky not to have a mortgage, wife and kids and an elderly parent to support!

Then there is the question of whether they would want to take the company to court. Its a small industry and when your working your way up do you want the trouble maker label? Some will and some will not.

As for me, my blood is boiling as are many of my colleagues. I'm prepared to fight this all the way, even if it costs me my career!

To those that say "If company policy doesn't match the law it's not worth the paper it's written on" I disagree.
If it were that simple there would not be a legal industry!
There are issues over custom and practise, the fact that LIFO was applied in January this year and age discrimination to mention just a few.
On age discrimination, bear in mind, new pilots are of all ages thanks to age discrimination legislation, not so for the most senior.

So are 150 senior pilot tribunals, through Balpa or privately, really going to be cheaper than following the written policies? I think not!
In fact I think the management's present course is taking a hell of a risk with share holders money!

[drivez]

The only way LIFO would ever work is if everyone earns the same increment. That's what we should be campaigning for, a better basic salary with fewer increments. Otherwise the "bean counters" will always find some way to eliminate LIFO. The harsh reality will always be a year 1 Captain/ FO can do the job of flying passengers from A to B just as effectively as a year 17 Captain/ FO yet the more experienced crew earn far more. In their mind it's like having two machines that produce exactly the same thing, just one costs a lot more than the other.

Can't express how sorry I feel for those Flybe guys at the top of the list facing redundancy, also really hope there is some hope at winning this and putting a bit if job security back out there. If it all fails best of luck finding new jobs, it's not much but at least you have some hours.

[captplaystation]

seniortarget,

that is all so horribly machivellian/divisive/twisted that I feel sure you are probably 100% correct.

Itch,

what you are saying is a "fair", & "common sense" solution, but. . . . how often have you seen/heard airline management (or high-flying businessmen in general ) respecting either of these two principals.

[mad_jock]

There is a cap of 87k compensation for unfair dismissal.

And the last company I worked for that did redundancy's employed special lawyers to deal with it which included insurance for any compensation claims resulting from the redundancy. This was none airline though..

Acas - New compensation limits for dismissals set for 2013