Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Flight Deck Forums > Terms and Endearment
Reload this Page >

BA Direct Entry Pilot.

Terms and Endearment The forum the bean counters hoped would never happen. Your news on pay, rostering, allowances, extras and negotiations where you work - scheduled, charter or contract.

BA Direct Entry Pilot.

Old 23rd Nov 2018, 10:41
  #5341 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 1,082
Just FYI, if you join BA on the 747 in 2019 there is a good chance that itíll be as a cruise pilot (initially) due to training capacity.
student88 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2018, 11:08
  #5342 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: Botswana
Posts: 709
Paid the same and because you wonít be doing any two crew stuff youíll have a far easier time of it than if you were bottom of the pile on JSS disaster rosters. Whatís not to like?
RexBanner is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2018, 11:49
  #5343 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,360
Originally Posted by RexBanner View Post
Paid the same and because you wonít be doing any two crew stuff youíll have a far easier time of it than if you were bottom of the pile on JSS disaster rosters. Whatís not to like?
True,, though the destination list might be a bit err, restricted....
wiggy is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2018, 12:52
  #5344 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: N/A
Posts: 1,082
Current three crew trips: CPT, JNB, YVR, LAX, PHX, NBO, SAN, MIA, LAS, DEN, SFO

..all heavy both ways giving you artificially higher seniority because the rest of us will be fighting over the operating seats on routes like CPT, PHX, SAN, SFO etc

So yeah, Iíd be making the most of it too!
student88 is offline  
Old 23rd Nov 2018, 14:54
  #5345 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2018
Location: South of the North pole
Posts: 211
Are DEP getting sent mainly to A320 or does it vary quite a lot between FO and SFO with experience?
Daddy Fantastic is offline  
Old 24th Nov 2018, 09:54
  #5346 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 309
Originally Posted by student88 View Post
Current three crew trips: CPT, JNB, YVR, LAX, PHX, NBO, SAN, MIA, LAS, DEN, SFO
But don't whine about being type frozen.........
The Blu Riband is online now  
Old 26th Nov 2018, 19:20
  #5347 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: Under the table
Posts: 183
Originally Posted by Daddy Fantastic View Post
Are DEP getting sent mainly to A320 or does it vary quite a lot between FO and SFO with experience?
Seems totally random. Flybe DEPS with no jet experience going to 777, ex FR 737-8 going to A320. Just pot luck.

Not sure what you mean by FO and SFO, you'll all start at FO.
Stocious is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 06:25
  #5348 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Originally Posted by Buter View Post
I don't have a problem with DEC's, as long as every BA pilot has had the opportunity to take that command. If there is an eligible, frozen pilot who wants a command and BA hire a DEC, then I got a problem.

I hope that I have c 4,300 pilots who feel the same.

Buter
Amen. Canít imagine there would be many of us who would disagree.

As as has been mentioned elsewhere though, bottom of a very long seniority list on seriously uncompetitive money....who would want it?!
DuctOvht is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 07:03
  #5349 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,360
Originally Posted by Stocious View Post

Not sure what you mean by FO and SFO, you'll all start at FO.
I’m making an assumption here but I read DF’s post as asking if your posting on arrival on BA depended on whether you were coming to BA having been a low hours FO vs. having been a higher hours SFO..

Agree with all in your reply.


wiggy is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 07:07
  #5350 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,360
Originally Posted by The Blu Riband View Post
But don't whine about being type frozen.........
Yep....and with respect to joining another fleet it is really not a good idea to whine about ďtaking one for the teamĒ in the context of doing 3 HKGs in a month...oh the horror.
wiggy is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 09:45
  #5351 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Originally Posted by DuctOvht View Post

As as has been mentioned elsewhere though, bottom of a very long seniority list on seriously uncompetitive money....who would want it?!
Iím one of, if not the most junior taking it. As you asked whoíd want it...

Living within 15 mins of LGW with young children still a while away from school age Iím happy to take it. Iím well aware of life at the bottom at LGW (It wasnít long ago) and it isnít all that bad to be honest. As long as weekends off isnít absolutely paramount things are actually not too bad at all. Very personal decision obviously but while not competitive it is still more money. If I really donít like it I can apply for part time and be in the same financial position as I am now or; 5 years down the line, bid RHS LH.
JulietSierra6 is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 10:29
  #5352 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 562
And that, JS6, is precisely why terms and conditions for the junior end of the command scales will not improve. All the while people are prepared to do the job for below par reward, BA will certainly allow them to do so. I understand your train of thought, that it is more money for you so why not, but at the same time BA are laughing all the way to the bank. It is the same argument people who constantly pick up overtime make. ďI might as well be earning more money for the same work.Ē However, it means BA get away with employing fewer pilots so everyone has to work harder and again, BA are laughing all the way to the bank. We are our own worst enemy. The managers are not stupid.
GS-Alpha is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 10:57
  #5353 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2016
Location: Timba Hold
Posts: 59
Originally Posted by GS-Alpha View Post
We are our own worst enemy. The managers are not stupid.

Couldn't agree more.
MikeAlpha320 is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 11:21
  #5354 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 44
Originally Posted by GS-Alpha View Post
And that, JS6, is precisely why terms and conditions for the junior end of the command scales will not improve. All the while people are prepared to do the job for below par reward, BA will certainly allow them to do so. I understand your train of thought, that it is more money for you so why not, but at the same time BA are laughing all the way to the bank. It is the same argument people who constantly pick up overtime make. ďI might as well be earning more money for the same work.Ē However, it means BA get away with employing fewer pilots so everyone has to work harder and again, BA are laughing all the way to the bank. We are our own worst enemy. The managers are not stupid.
Hang on, I havenít reinvented the pay scales. I and you alike knew what they were when we joined. Where you consider it acceptable to take command (if available) on those scales is personal choice. If a LH command suddenly became very junior would you be accusing them of lowering Tís & Cís for taking it? Out of interest at what pay point does it suddenly become acceptable to take command?

I have made a personal choice for my family and I to be in the seat I want to be in at the base of my choice if (read when) the industry takes a downward turn and the current levels of movement stop.
JulietSierra6 is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 12:24
  #5355 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: London
Posts: 236
Originally Posted by JulietSierra6 View Post


Hang on, I havenít reinvented the pay scales. I and you alike knew what they were when we joined. Where you consider it acceptable to take command (if available) on those scales is personal choice. If a LH command suddenly became very junior would you be accusing them of lowering Tís & Cís for taking it? Out of interest at what pay point does it suddenly become acceptable to take command?

I have made a personal choice for my family and I to be in the seat I want to be in at the base of my choice if (read when) the industry takes a downward turn and the current levels of movement stop.
Agreed and good on you for taking it. The reason nobody wants SH command are clearly not financial because a year 12 SFO would be rewarded very proportionately for taking the job. They donít want it because their lives are too comfortable on LH and they lack motivation to make the change. Donít go blaming Junior guys for taking a job you donít want, espically when they had no influence on determining the pay scales, unlike some!! Are you suggesting someone turns down a 30 percent pay rise to do the same job in a different seat just because EasyJet pilots get paid more? Itís BALPAs job to bargain for the collective not the individuals, unfortunately our union are too distracted by bunk dressings and cockpit cleaning to actually care.

Secondly any attempt by junior guys in increase their pay would almost certainly be met with horror by many within the BA community who have been very vocal on various forums that any attempt to improve their conditions would be blocked because itís ďrobbing Peter to pay PaulĒ! So you wonít let us get improved conditions then shout at us when we pick at the crumbs you guys have left. And for anyone wondering why BA is such a fractured, unpleasant working enviroment there you have it!
Enzo999 is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 13:08
  #5356 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 562
Sorry, my post has clearly come across incorrectly. I am not knocking anyone for the decisions they make. It is acceptable for anyone to take a command whenever they deem it appropriate. It is not my decision to make, and I am not knocking anyone for it, just as I would not tell someone who picks up overtime not to do it. I am simply pointing out that it is good for BA when people choose to do so, and terms and conditions will not improve while it is happening. Just as BA will not hang up on the cost cutting and efficiencies until people are leaving for better pastures. It is all about market forces, and if there are people who will do it, the reward is not going to improve, even if that reward is not as good as at other companies. BALPA cannot pluck improved terms and conditions out of thin air.

Just for a little more education on why senior long haulers do not tend to take short haul commands; it is not quite correct to say things for them on long haul are too good. The biggest thing is the overall reward consideration. A NAPS long hauler has a collosal tax bill upon obtaining their command. It is so large that they are working entirely for free for the first couple of years, and instead handing their wages to the government. The junior guys do not have that bill and so do not work for free for a few years. So the senior long haulers have generally decided the short haul command reward is not appropriate, even though the money BA are handing over is more than for their junior colleagues. ie the market forces are different depending on whether you are NAPS or not. I am in the fortunate position to be senior enough for long haul command within the next couple of years, but I am very much in two minds whether I should even take that when the time comes. I probably will do it, but it certainly will not be for the financial reward because it will benefit the government far more than it will benefit me. I know plenty of people who will not take a BA command, long haul or short haul, because the reward for them is not enough. A far greater number will never take a short haul command because the reward is not great enough. However, BA do not currently need to improve the reward because more junior colleagues who do not have the crazy taxation, consider the reward acceptable.
GS-Alpha is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 15:16
  #5357 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: The Winchester
Posts: 5,360
Originally Posted by Enzo999 View Post
...any attempt by junior guys in increase their pay would almost certainly be met with horror by many within the BA community who have been very vocal on various forums that any attempt to improve their conditions would be blocked because it’s “robbing Peter to pay Paul”! So you won’t let us get improved conditions then shout at us when we pick at the crumbs you guys have left.
I’ll be honest and say I’m struggling with that perception, I think however it has been custom and practise from the company POV for a while to suggest that improvements in one area of T&Cs should be self funded by cuts in others, and as a community we are stuffed if we think that is the way we should proceed.....do you seriously think the senior p/middle ground/ should forgo any improvement in T&Cs in order to fund improvements in T&Cs for the junior at a time when the company is making record profits?

As for “robbing Peter to pay Paul” the last time I literally saw that expression used was in a forum debate about the (dire) Maternity provision for female pilots, where one or two of our well meaning but IMHO naive colleagues suggested the community should forgo an element of next years pay rise in order to improve maternity benefits...again this was seriously being suggested at a time when the company is making over a billion in profits......

We need to be pressurising the company into divvying up some reward across the board for everbodies hard work, not arguing that those on Fleet XXX should be subsiding those on Fleet YYY, or those with a seniority number of less than 2000 should be taking a smaller pay increase to top up the payrise of those with a bigger senority number...

and yes...I do agree with what was mentioned earlier, we at BA can be our own worse enemy...and the management know it.

Last edited by wiggy; 27th Nov 2018 at 15:52.
wiggy is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 15:27
  #5358 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: London
Posts: 236
Originally Posted by GS-Alpha View Post
Sorry, my post has clearly come across incorrectly. I am not knocking anyone for the decisions they make. It is acceptable for anyone to take a command whenever they deem it appropriate. It is not my decision to make, and I am not knocking anyone for it, just as I would not tell someone who picks up overtime not to do it. I am simply pointing out that it is good for BA when people choose to do so, and terms and conditions will not improve while it is happening. Just as BA will not hang up on the cost cutting and efficiencies until people are leaving for better pastures. It is all about market forces, and if there are people who will do it, the reward is not going to improve, even if that reward is not as good as at other companies. BALPA cannot pluck improved terms and conditions out of thin air.

Just for a little more education on why senior long haulers do not tend to take short haul commands; it is not quite correct to say things for them on long haul are too good. The biggest thing is the overall reward consideration. A NAPS long hauler has a collosal tax bill upon obtaining their command. It is so large that they are working entirely for free for the first couple of years, and instead handing their wages to the government. The junior guys do not have that bill and so do not work for free for a few years. So the senior long haulers have generally decided the short haul command reward is not appropriate, even though the money BA are handing over is more than for their junior colleagues. ie the market forces are different depending on whether you are NAPS or not. I am in the fortunate position to be senior enough for long haul command within the next couple of years, but I am very much in two minds whether I should even take that when the time comes. I probably will do it, but it certainly will not be for the financial reward because it will benefit the government far more than it will benefit me. I know plenty of people who will not take a BA command, long haul or short haul, because the reward for them is not enough. A far greater number will never take a short haul command because the reward is not great enough. However, BA do not currently need to improve the reward because more junior colleagues who do not have the crazy taxation, consider the reward acceptable.
I donít find it acceptable but itís whats on offer so what do I do deny myself a pay rise and increased pension payments to do the same job from a different seat? BA have not created this situation but I agree it benefits them massively, in order for it to change there would have to be a desire within the wider workforce and there clearly isnít (far from it). I think itís unfair for you to put the burden of change on to the individual.

Whilst I take your point regarding your tax problem this only exists amongst ex NAPSs members a scheme that closed to new entrants about 15 years ago, so anyone joining since then would not have this tax burden, so I think there are more issues at play than the financial rewards or lack of.
Enzo999 is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 15:30
  #5359 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: London,England
Posts: 1,279
a pay rise and increased pension payments to do the same job from a different seat?
Think you will find you are doing a different job from a different seat.
Max Angle is offline  
Old 27th Nov 2018, 15:48
  #5360 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2010
Location: London
Posts: 236
Originally Posted by wiggy View Post


Iíll be honest and say Iím struggling with that perception, I think however it has been custom and practise from the company POV for a while to suggest that improvements in one area of T&Cs should be self funded, and as a community we are stuffed if we think that is the way we should proceed.....or do you seriously think the senior should forgo any improvement in T&Cs in order to fund improvements in T&Cs for the junior at a time when the company is making record profits?

As for ďrobbing Peter to pay Paul, Last time I literally saw that expression used was in a forum debate about the (dire) Maternity provision for female pilots, where one or two of our well meaning but IMHO naive colleagues suggested the community should forgo an element of next years pay rise in order to improve maternity benefits...again this was seriously being suggested at a time when the company is making over a billion in profits......

We need to be pressurising the company into divvying up some reward across the board for everbodies hard work, not arguing that those on Fleet XXX should be subsiding those on Fleet YYY, or those with a seniority number of less than 2000 should be taking a smaller pay increase to top up the payrise of those with a bigger senority number...

and yes...I do agree with what was mentioned earlier, we at BA can be our own worse enemy...and the management know it.
That expression seems to get used regularly. The idea of scrapping PP34 has been floated several times and each time gets met with outrage mostly because people on PP24 believe that the money for that would result in a lower pay increase for them. I even remember reading a tread entitled something along the lines of ďPP34 reps are coming for your moneyĒ and it attracted a lot of comments.

Imagine if BALPA came back from the pay negotiations and gave the following choices, 1) A global 5% increase for 3 years, or 2) Scrap PP34 and everyone gets 2.5% for 3 years how do you recon that vote would go? Think I can guess.
Enzo999 is offline  

Thread Tools
Search this Thread

Contact Us Archive Advertising Cookie Policy Privacy Statement Terms of Service

Copyright © 2018 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.