IAG: BA restructuring may cost 12,000 jobs

[777JRM]

Originally Posted by TOM100

Sounds familiar......

BBC News | ARTS | Aer Lingus sells artwork

Indeed. The same PR job. One-trick pony.

[777JRM]

Originally Posted by NoelEvans

A 'final salary' pension scheme that was a British Airways responsibility less than 15 years ago will be paying out 35% less to existing pensioners from August this year.

Be very worried if you are in an underfunded final salary pension scheme within the 'BA realm'.

This may be nonsense.
What is your source?

I believe that once in payment, the pension is safe.
Also, I believe legally safe, is the ring-fenced NAPS pension.

Ironically, the amount saved from closing NAPS almost exactly equates to the ‘special dividend’ paid out to shareholders last year.

[GS-Alpha]

Originally Posted by 777JRM

This may be nonsense.
What is your source?

I believe that once in payment, the pension is safe.
Also, I believe legally safe, is the ring-fenced NAPS pension.

Ironically, the amount saved from closing NAPS almost exactly equates to the ‘special dividend’ paid out to shareholders last year.

I think Noel might be talking about the BMI scheme, and the sequence of events which ultimately led to it entering the PPF?

[king surf]

I have just been on my NAPS website and there is no mention of this 35%cut . I always thought that one you were drawing a pension it was safe. Who knows these days!

[Private jet]

As I understand it, once a pension is in payment then it is protected for life and paid in accordance with the rules of the scheme, even if that means cannibalizing the future pensions of those not yet drawing them. (Doesn't seem very fair to me, but when was anything to do with finance ever "fair"?) However I understand that the company is legally obliged to make up the shortfall, if it can... What I was highlighting is the fact that if BA doesn't make money in future and can't pay their £300 million a year "fill in" then the black hole shortfall will persist and at some point the pensions for those taking them in the future will have to be cut. There must be plenty of NAPS members still in the employ of BA who will stand to lose a lot of money if BA does not "thrive" in future and to a lesser extent deferred members like myself. So salary cut now or smaller pension later?

[TURIN]

There is only a shortfall if all the liabilities have to be payed. They don't and never have done. The billion pound shortfall was and is nonsense. It makes so many assumptions its laughable. When NAPS was closed, the argument used to say it was unsustainable was based on all members having a life expectancy of 93 (women) and 92 (men). The actual life expectancy is a lot lower. Funny that. ONS Life Expectancy UK

[NoelEvans]

Originally Posted by 777JRM

This may be nonsense.
...

NOT nonsense. (Received in 'black and white' through the post.)

Originally Posted by 777JRM

...
What is your source?
...

BRAL Final Salary Pension Scheme. Effective from August 2020 payments.

[TURIN]

You're right. IoM not covered by the PPS.

https://www.pensionsage.com/pa/Flybe...protection.php

Disgraceful!

[777JRM]

Originally Posted by 66 and retired

What NoelEvans wrote. My letter didn’t even include my name! 35% reduction for an in-payment member. I understand that those not yet in payment may lose it all.

Disgraceful.
Was it still a ‘live’ scheme, or closed (ring-fenced) up to a certain date?

[NoelEvans]

It was under BA's wing (excuse the pun) from March 2001 to March 2007.

I don't think that it was fully funded at any stage during that time (can someone correct me on that?).

Don't get too excited about what PPS can do.

[ILS27LEFT]

Shareholders and control

Originally Posted by TURIN

You're right. IoM not covered by the PPS.



Disgraceful!

Shareholders must have full control however it needs to be a fair system,.
Example: Nationwide (The Building Society) regularly asks member to vote for decisions but we all know that 99.9% of members just select the "quick vote" option so all remuneration packages are approved by members. There is no alternative anyway. At the top they know this is a trick and it works very well.
This type of system needs to change.
Employees must be shareholders and control their Senior Management otherwise greed will destroy the industry.
The entire BA saga is a joke: greed vs common sense (including social responsibility, environmental impact. human beings well-being/personal health etc.), greed seems to always win under the present rules, this needs to change.
Let's not forget that greed alone is a false economy even for tax payers as the public costs associated to excessive unregulated greed is immense for society ranging from mental health to work-related stress --->NHS additional costs. social impact and more implications.
There is no point in being a very stressed and over-worked young pilot on 50-80K p.a. when in a few years we will end up all highly stressed/ill and surrounded by millions of unemployed without homes ready to riot against us. We have just seen it happening somewhere else and it could have easily got out of control.
I am not a socialist at all, rather the opposite to be honest, however I strongly believe that this unprecedented crisis s proving that we must change the rules of unregulated greedy capitalism or it we all will end up in a very uncomfortable situation.
Many of us would love to go part time, yes less money but much happier & healthy in the end. Much safer too. This concept should apply to all, including WW and AC,.

[hec7or]

BRAL (British Regional Airlines Limited) pension problems won't affect most BA employees

[Longtimer]

Re pensions and how they are funded. It varies from country to country so one size does not fit all. If the fund is fully funded and the company folds, that is one senario, If on the other hand the fund is not fully funded then the pay out could be reduced or the fund might have first rights on the breakup value of the airline or be left sucking the hind tit. Again it all depends upon the laws of the country in which the pension / funds are vested.

[Albert Hall]

Prepare for a day of BA across the media headlines tomorrow as the Transport Select Committee publishes a pretty brutal report, so I'm told.

[Jet II]

Published on a Saturday?

[PC767]

Mr Merriman was very certain that the report would be finalised and published prior to the 15th of June. That day being the initial proposed day of redundancy and contract change.

[Chris2303]

Bad news is usually published at the weekend.

If it's really bad it is published early on Sunday evening

[Albert Hall]

Draft report and press statement was issued to the media last night with a reporting restriction until midnight tonight when the report will be published. I imagine the BA press office has been a very busy place today.

[Raph737]

Fair play to the cabin crew, their Union’s nuclear response may force BA to engage after all, MP’s from all sides have been tweeting about the report. The pilots owe their colleagues an apology, should have fought this together.

I’m not surprised at this government lack of resolve and completely shambolic response to this crisis, I’m just surprised that so many pilots and crew still support the Tories when they were ALWAYS pro corporations. I still remember David Cameron telling Cabin crew to get back to work in the 2010 strikes, completely undermining the effort. Naïveté to Believe Boris gives a dam about the average worker...

I hope they win this or find some sort of compromise, for my friends who are about to lose their jobs!

[CaptainSox]

[QUOTE=Raph737;10809614]Fair play to the cabin crew, their Union’s nuclear response may force BA to engage after all, MP’s from all sides have been tweeting about the report. The pilots owe their colleagues an apology, should have fought this together.

All the pilots I know back cabin crew, long serving professionals who make BA. Pilots have been following in accordance with the union. To suggest flight deck owe cabin crew an apology is unfounded and leads to more division.