BA Direct Entry Pilot.

[Cattivo]

Originally Posted by 99jolegg

CL - compassionate leave
LA - annual leave with wraparound days after x4
LB - annual leave with wraparound days before x3
WR - wrap around days off (workable)
BW - bank withdrawal
SW - not sure off the top of my head
S2, S3, S4, S5 - simulator. The number refers to the time slot. I2, I3, I4, I5 would refer to the instructor’s roster.
NA - non-assignable day associated with DD usually
DD - duty free week associated with NA day at the beginning. Can be worked in if desired.
ZZ - break, usually to denote days off after a trip on reserve
RP - reserve period
PR - protected day off, for a variety of reasons
PL - not sure EDIT: paternity leave
PD - part-time days off
GT - ground training e.g. SEP
GD - ground duty
LFS - Leading Flight Safety course
FDO - fixed days off associated with a reserve period
HSB - HSB associated with a reserve period

Depending on the roster format you’re looking at but you can usually tell by the destinations.

SW = Swap
PL = Parental Leave ie annual allowance, unpaid

[rotordisk]

Originally Posted by CXKA

You should only have a 12 month embargo if you attended one of the stages at Waterside or the Sim Centre and were not successful, the clock starts I believe is from the date of your last stage.

Best of luck

I didn’t attend any stage and I did not even get a response.
The only thing I got was a confirmation that my application had been submitted.

[Jumbo2]

Originally Posted by rotordisk

I didn’t attend any stage and I did not even get a response.
The only thing I got was a confirmation that my application had been submitted.

It might be your application is still in the pipeline to be reviewed. Maybe send recruitment an email or give them a ring. They are a really friendly bunch who are very helpful and understanding.

[rotordisk]

Originally Posted by Jumbo2

It might be your application is still in the pipeline to be reviewed. Maybe send recruitment an email or give them a ring. They are a really friendly bunch who are very helpful and understanding.

thanks
Do you know what the application status should say when I have been rejected? On the BA job website.

[TheAirMission]

Recruitment automatic email FAQs:

I was unsuccessful at a previous British Airways recruitment application, when can I reapply?

If you had stumbled at the initial online application screening stage, you would be eligible to apply again after 6 months. If you attended Waterside for any of the subsequent selection stages, the wait is 12 months from the date of testing, or 6 months from any other stage of application whichever is the greater.

[Mrglass]

Maybe not the ideal thread for this queation, but how will the LHR ULEZ affect BA employees and their ability to park at LHR?

Are BA employees essentially going to have to pay to go to work and park in a private vehicle?

Has this issue been raised internally or by the Union?

Just curious.

Thanks.

[wiggy]

I think you are correct AH....Heathrow media statement here.

As I understand it from other sources those working at the airport will be exempt from the charges.

[Toolonginthisjob]

I heard there has been some mass resignations on B777 recently ?

You we’re misled.

[wiggy]

Originally Posted by red9

I heard there has been some mass resignations on B777 recently ?

As Toolong says it’s definitely “Fake News”, though in various forms it has been circulating for a few days. Don’t know why how or why it started and FWIW yours is the first version where it’s been tagged as being associated with a specific fleet.

[GS-Alpha]

I expect it is a case of Chinese whispers. There are more than a few people looking at other airlines and hoping to leave, which has then morphed into ‘mass resignations’.

[bananaman2]

Originally Posted by GS-Alpha

I expect it is a case of Chinese whispers. There are more than a few people looking at other airlines and hoping to leave, which has then morphed into ‘mass resignations’.

Although you say, ‘Chinese whispers’/rumour or whatever... as someone who has always hoped, considered, been intrigued with working for their national carrier... where would a 777 bod (I accept it was mentioned the rumour was tagged to 777) be potentially looking to go? I get the debate on the 320 vs Easy DEC... but for a longhaul guy/gal who’s living at home you take the rough with the smooth, generally living with the niggles that every company has (there is no perfect company). Not much else going on longhaul in the UK at the moment or is there - Virgin, TUI? Commuting contract overseas? or are these folks young, super junior and being screwed by the bidding system and looking to earn a few bucks wherever they can get it?

[Joe le Taxi]

I hear it can reach 6 trips per month on the 777. That's more than a niggle - I used to just about cope with four, 5 would wipe me out, but six!!! That's really really unhealthy, to the extent I would personally quit flying if I couldn't find something else less damaging.

[Busdriver01]

I’m constantly amazed by the way this industry works. In many ways it’s very safe - we learn from our past and are constantly striving to improve. Why, then, has the industry allowed pilot (and presumably cabin crew) rostering to get to the stage where you are flying 6 long haul trips per month. That HAS to be dangerous.

Will it take a catastrophic hull loss attributed entirely to roster induced fatigue before the industry wakes up and sees how absurd things are getting?

[Captainrawdata]

Advice for initial assessment

Hello,
I'm aware this thread had been going for a while and Ive looked over thtjs thread for the last while.

Is there any recommendations on preparing for the initial stage. On previous attempts I always thought I had prepared enough but apparently not.

thanks in advance

[Tay Cough]

Originally Posted by bananaman2

...where would a 777 bod (I accept it was mentioned the rumour was tagged to 777) be potentially looking to go?

If the rumour was to be believed, the golf course or the Sunseeker.

[FACoff]

Originally Posted by Busdriver01

Will it take a catastrophic hull loss attributed entirely to roster induced fatigue before the industry wakes up and sees how absurd things are getting?

Even if that were to happen, you can guarantee that airlines would simply find a way of pinning the blame on the pilot for reporting for work fatigued in the first place. It's all over the manuals - "pilots should not operate if they suspect they are fatigued". Clearly it's written with about as much sincerity as BA's latest box-ticking email on mental health, but it's something they'll still gladly point to in the event of any fatigue related incident.

Which is why we continue to be our own worst enemy. In BA especially, I have been astounded at how many people relentlessly soldier on through some of the most appalling roster sequences I've ever seen (6/1 and repeat on SH), as if their own health is irrelevant and reporting fatigued isn't even an option. Perhaps if more people told the company where to shove it, things would eventually change - working everyone to the bone would then become counter productive. I've not been in BA long, but I myself have already had far more roster-induced sickness here than my previous airline. The problem however is encouraging more people to say enough is enough. BA have played a blinder by instilling a culture of fear that seemingly dissuades people from doing so.

One would hope of course that eventually companies like BA will acknowledge (forcibly or otherwise) that rostering everyone to the extremes of EASA is unsustainable and ultimately costs more when people finally fall over later down the line. KLM certainly made a step in the right direction when they awarded their pilots a 4% pay increase along with a 4% reduction in work. It's a shame BA still have the blinkers so firmly in place.

[Thegreenmachine]

Originally Posted by FACoff

Even if that were to happen, you can guarantee that airlines would simply find a way of pinning the blame on the pilot for reporting for work fatigued in the first place. It's all over the manuals - "pilots should not operate if they suspect they are fatigued". Clearly it's written with about as much sincerity as BA's latest box-ticking email on mental health, but it's something they'll still gladly point to in the event of any fatigue related incident.

Which is why we continue to be our own worst enemy. In BA especially, I have been astounded at how many people relentlessly soldier on through some of the most appalling roster sequences I've ever seen (6/1 and repeat on SH), as if their own health is irrelevant and reporting fatigued isn't even an option. Perhaps if more people told the company where to shove it, things would eventually change - working everyone to the bone would then become counter productive. I've not been in BA long, but I myself have already had far more roster-induced sickness here than my previous airline. The problem however is encouraging more people to say enough is enough. BA have played a blinder by instilling a culture of fear that seemingly dissuades people from doing so.

One would hope of course that eventually companies like BA will acknowledge (forcibly or otherwise) that rostering everyone to the extremes of EASA is unsustainable and ultimately costs more when people finally fall over later down the line. KLM certainly made a step in the right direction when they awarded their pilots a 4% pay increase along with a 4% reduction in work. It's a shame BA still have the blinkers so firmly in place.

Well said. Also a recent new joiner and have noticed the same mentality of refusing to report fatigued. Some people will work any roster at all and still report.

[VinRouge]

Originally Posted by Thegreenmachine

Well said. Also a recent new joiner and have noticed the same mentality of refusing to report fatigued. Some people will work any roster at all and still report.

Is it not a problem partially of the workforces making though? If you have huge constraints placed on rostering by a seniority based system that has junior guys picking up multiple low credit trips, because those above them are picking out the highly credit dense stuff, leaving the scraps at the bottom?

[wiggy]

Originally Posted by VinRouge

Is it not a problem partially of the workforces making though? If you have huge constraints placed on rostering by a seniority based system that has junior guys picking up multiple low credit trips, because those above them are picking out the highly credit dense stuff, leaving the scraps at the bottom?

Partly that, though that is something that the somewhat controversial JSS inhibitors are meant to mitigate by putting a limit on credit dense trips per individual per month.. ,

As for the resistance to “going fatigued” which has been noted, I think a lot of that is down to historic reasons:

Certainly “in the old days” where your working hours were (possibly, certainly in Long Haul on some fleets) much more likely to be capped by time away from base (I.e. TAFB/4) than flying hours there was a mindset that “no-one gets fatigued under Bidline”/“no-one gets fatigued at BA”. Of course rostering has morphed over the years but that attitude is still very much entrenched in the institutional memory. It is certainly interesting to hear many of the newer DEPs explain how relatively straightforward it was to declare fatigue at their previous operator vs. how difficult it can appear to be at BA.

[VinRouge]

Originally Posted by wiggy

Partly that, though that is something that the somewhat controversial JSS inhibitors are meant to mitigate by putting a limit on credit dense trips per individual per month.. ,

Not sure how limiting to 3 ABV and 3 JFK is supposed to mitigate fatigue though. Needs to be done by limiting the max number of trips operating in the WOCL if fatigue were the target... EASA is unrealistically too focused upon time zone changes that have little to nil effect on fatigue with the time spent away.