BA pilots vote to strike
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Three year freeze on staff travel for strikers (except if you commute, of course). Which is fine because it will take this long before standards improve enough on BA for my family to accept it as a realistic option for our holidays.
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As you say hopefully it’ll get thrown back in.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Finland
Age: 77
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Been there about 23? years ago when, I think, Danair pilots were joining us and BA wanted to introduce a different pay scale at LGW.
Management, and the press, painted the same picture as now - "it is all about greedy, overpaid pilots wanting more pay".
We, as BA pilots, were due to strike the next day or as soon as one returned to base.
Usual threats re staff travel.
I was nightstopping in CPH.
The strike was called off the night before when management decided to settle - I was called by BALPA in the hotel in the evening.
It, sadly, will go to the brink as that is all this kind of management understand.
Perhaps it is what they teach them on their MBAs and Harvard courses.
Good luck and don't give in.
Management, and the press, painted the same picture as now - "it is all about greedy, overpaid pilots wanting more pay".
We, as BA pilots, were due to strike the next day or as soon as one returned to base.
Usual threats re staff travel.
I was nightstopping in CPH.
The strike was called off the night before when management decided to settle - I was called by BALPA in the hotel in the evening.
It, sadly, will go to the brink as that is all this kind of management understand.
Perhaps it is what they teach them on their MBAs and Harvard courses.
Good luck and don't give in.
Join Date: Dec 2014
Location: Uk
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I must stop reading the daily mail with its , “ greedy captains on an average of £167k want more “ . I’d be surprised if that was the average , and to be fair, if any DM “ journalist” is paid more than £167 a week it’s probably too much .
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twiglet1, you appear to be talking almost entirely about long-haul. I have no desire to bring back Flight Engineers, I have never flown with one and the first model of the type that I fly was developed without flight engineers five decades ago (a few year before my career started).
Short-haul is not the same. EASA FTLs permit seven consecutive 'earlies' totalling 60 duty hours, one "extended recovery rest period", then do it all again. Not a 'perception', it is in black-and-white.
Yes, Working Time Directives will 'protect' against the worst of it and this can be by making use of a Pilot's leave to bring those duty hour averages down (i.e. you have the worst of the FTLs thrown at you just before your leave). But how often have crews heard the response to a query about a duty that "it's legal"?
Your experience that "most UK AOC's took a mature stance on EASA FTL" still implies that not all did.
Only a robust Scheduling Agreement or a good fixed-pattern roster are protection against EASA's 'Fatigue Target Limitations'. (I have the protection of an excellent fixed-pattern roster against long-term fatigue.)
wiggy's comment that BA Short Haul "went almost fully EASA" is a worry.
Short-haul is not the same. EASA FTLs permit seven consecutive 'earlies' totalling 60 duty hours, one "extended recovery rest period", then do it all again. Not a 'perception', it is in black-and-white.
Yes, Working Time Directives will 'protect' against the worst of it and this can be by making use of a Pilot's leave to bring those duty hour averages down (i.e. you have the worst of the FTLs thrown at you just before your leave). But how often have crews heard the response to a query about a duty that "it's legal"?
Your experience that "most UK AOC's took a mature stance on EASA FTL" still implies that not all did.
Only a robust Scheduling Agreement or a good fixed-pattern roster are protection against EASA's 'Fatigue Target Limitations'. (I have the protection of an excellent fixed-pattern roster against long-term fatigue.)
wiggy's comment that BA Short Haul "went almost fully EASA" is a worry.
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Planet Earth
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2018
Location: UK
Posts: 23
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would have thought that opens BA up to a constructive dismissal case, even if one has to tick a box stating ST is non contractual, funnily enough added after the last staff strike . What a bunch of charmers we work for .
Last edited by hunterboy; 8th Sep 2019 at 19:36. Reason: spelling....
Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Centre of Universe
Posts: 370
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Twiglet1, you appear to be talking almost entirely about long-haul. I have no desire to bring back Flight Engineers, I have never flown with one and the first model of the type that I fly was developed without flight engineers five decades ago (a few year before my career started).
Short-haul is not the same. EASA FTLs permit seven consecutive 'earlies' totalling 60 duty hours, one "extended recovery rest period", then do it all again. Not a 'perception', it is in black-and-white.
Yes, Working Time Directives will 'protect' against the worst of it and this can be by making use of a Pilot's leave to bring those duty hour averages down (i.e. you have the worst of the FTLs thrown at you just before your leave). But how often have crews heard the response to a query about a duty that "it's legal"?
Your experience that "most UK AOC's took a mature stance on EASA FTL" still implies that not all did.
Only a robust Scheduling Agreement or a good fixed-pattern roster are protection against EASA's 'Fatigue Target Limitations'. (I have the protection of an excellent fixed-pattern roster against long-term fatigue.)
wiggy's comment that BA Short Haul "went almost fully EASA" is a worry.
Short-haul is not the same. EASA FTLs permit seven consecutive 'earlies' totalling 60 duty hours, one "extended recovery rest period", then do it all again. Not a 'perception', it is in black-and-white.
Yes, Working Time Directives will 'protect' against the worst of it and this can be by making use of a Pilot's leave to bring those duty hour averages down (i.e. you have the worst of the FTLs thrown at you just before your leave). But how often have crews heard the response to a query about a duty that "it's legal"?
Your experience that "most UK AOC's took a mature stance on EASA FTL" still implies that not all did.
Only a robust Scheduling Agreement or a good fixed-pattern roster are protection against EASA's 'Fatigue Target Limitations'. (I have the protection of an excellent fixed-pattern roster against long-term fatigue.)
wiggy's comment that BA Short Haul "went almost fully EASA" is a worry.
Join Date: Feb 2018
Location: London
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Noel - The CAA had plenty of meeting's in the run up with the major AOC's (and BALPA were there) and most of them had scheduling agreements managing the excesses, or their FRMS managed it. I personally don't know any AOC's that work 7 E/L/N to the excess of EU FTL - I stand to be corrected however. In my experience the biggest change to Pilots with EU FTL is whereas under CAP371 if they sold days off they would likely get these days off replaced to manage the 7/14/28/84 day limits - not the case now with the ERRP.
7 earlies all possible, including the time change to local time. (12 hour duty on day 2 with a hotel pick up of 4am UK time).
My present BA relative says pissing off the pilots costs money in the long run. Crews already refusing Duty extension and loading extra fuel, cost a lot on an A380.
Was Cruz on the BBC this morning seriously suggesting that the average BA pilot earns £167,000?!
Last edited by Dannyboy39; 9th Sep 2019 at 07:33. Reason: He said 167 not 157 :o
As an outsider looking in, I thought the BBC R4 report on the strike this morning was well-balanced with Balpa giving every opportunity to give their side of the argument. Average salary quoted as £100k not as reported elsewhere. If the pilots at BA believe that standards in the Company have reduced to an unacceptable level then I would agree with them; travel with the 'worlds favourite airline' may be fine and dandy in First Class but in economy it is quite dreadful and I would always choose an alternative carrier if one were a available on a given route. Management arrogance is not unique to BA, cost-cutting rules the day everywhere and in most airlines pilots have long since realised that they are just numbers and in no way a special case as far as the Board are concerned.
There was someone from the BALPA union on the BBC this morning (R4) stating that BA (Management) had chosen to cancel all flights today.
Well, they weren't left with much choice, were they, if BALPA instructed all the pilots to refuse to fly planes by going on strike.
It appears to me that the confrontation is coming from both sides, not a good way to run any company, let alone an airline
Well, they weren't left with much choice, were they, if BALPA instructed all the pilots to refuse to fly planes by going on strike.
It appears to me that the confrontation is coming from both sides, not a good way to run any company, let alone an airline