IAG: BA restructuring may cost 12,000 jobs
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PC767 - my point exactly, I am guessing there is no recent precedent of consulting (or negotiating) whilst furloughed due to a pandemic. Not all the senior Unite key players are necessarily furloughed and the concept is untested so I guess high risk on both sides.....is it reasonable to say Len McClunky et al could have engaged as head and senior bods at Unite who are not furloughed, do the reps gets employed outside BA by Unite to represent members ? I really don’t know.....am sure both sides are getting expensive legal advice........
Join Date: Apr 2020
Location: Borders
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To play Devil's advocate: in an airline environment where the roles of captain and first officer are clearly defined and require only a minimum standard to be met and maintained, why should a company value loyalty, and why should salaries increase the longer you've been there. Companies in every sector only pay the minimum salary they need to retain staff. I'd suggest that the salaries on offer for pilots are still FAR in excess of what people would accept.
Join Date: Jan 2018
Location: Centre of Universe
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi GS Alpha - a very enlightening post. Just for clarity a part time post is not an MPE (manpower equivalent) it’s a HCE (head count equivalent) a full MPE (how BA measure it) would be a half MPE (part time role) and then, say, paying 2 other people the other equivalent half an MPE to make a whole. So if BA paid two people as 50% PT that is equivalent to 2 x HCE but 1 x MPE i.e the two people = 1 Manpower Equivalent. MPE is usually how they measure overtime etc so if you have 3 people earning lots of OT(3 x HCE) you would still have three people but with the OT costs could be equivalent to 5 people’s salary or 5 x MPE if that makes sense ? Semantics I know but there is a difference.
i also agree they have to attempt to talk and try and consult - no idea (especially as current circumstances unprecedented) how a court would view a blanket refusal to even attempt to consult. BA have filed the S188 as they are legally required so for BASSA to say we won’t talk until you remove it does seem a precarious position to take.
i also agree they have to attempt to talk and try and consult - no idea (especially as current circumstances unprecedented) how a court would view a blanket refusal to even attempt to consult. BA have filed the S188 as they are legally required so for BASSA to say we won’t talk until you remove it does seem a precarious position to take.
@ GS-Alpha
I am not involved, but as I see it the only real questions at the moment are:
1) Is BA's action legal ( short-term) ?
2) What are the effects (medium/long-term ) ?
I am not involved, but as I see it the only real questions at the moment are:
1) Is BA's action legal ( short-term) ?
2) What are the effects (medium/long-term ) ?
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can’t be that strapped for cash...
But in other news they are also playing the "look how strapped for cash we are" card..
https://www.theguardian.com/business...on-coronavirus
https://www.theguardian.com/business...on-coronavirus
Last edited by wiggy; 11th Jun 2020 at 06:38. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: Nowhere
Posts: 655
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But in other news they are also playing the "look how strapped for cash we are" crad..
https://www.theguardian.com/business...on-coronavirus
https://www.theguardian.com/business...on-coronavirus
I’ve seen it all now.
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: North London at last
Posts: 146
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Paisley and Renfrewshire North MP Gavin Newlands is bringing forward an emergency bill to the House of Commons which, if passed, will prevent companies from dismissing staff and rehiring them on contracts with worse terms.
Probably won't get parliamentary support, but if it does ???? Greater number of overall pilot redundancies out of revenge and because it will mainly be cheaper LIFO sacrifices ?
Probably won't get parliamentary support, but if it does ???? Greater number of overall pilot redundancies out of revenge and because it will mainly be cheaper LIFO sacrifices ?
I left 22 years ago, but one thing that has not been mentioned is the billion pound "black hole" in NAPS. I appreciate that has been closed to new contributions and accruals for some time, but there must be quite a few crew on all "teams" that have a big vested interest in ensuring BA keep paying into the scheme to fill the black hole? Was £300 million a year afaik before Corona. Even a 10% reduction of pension over a potential 20+ year retirement (even in this day and age) equates to a lot of cash.
Last edited by Private jet; 11th Jun 2020 at 12:54.
Join Date: Sep 2018
Location: Yorkshire
Posts: 256
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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'.
Be very worried if you are in an underfunded final salary pension scheme within the 'BA realm'.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: united kingdom
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
[QUOTE=NoelEvans;10808186]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'.[/QUOT
what is the source for this 35% drop!!
Be very worried if you are in an underfunded final salary pension scheme within the 'BA realm'.[/QUOT
what is the source for this 35% drop!!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 309
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This might not help the dynamics of the relationship (not that there is much of one anyway).
https://www.travelweekly.co.uk/artic...-of-air-europa
https://www.travelweekly.co.uk/artic...-of-air-europa
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Indeed. The same PR job. One-trick pony.
Join Date: Mar 2014
Location: UK
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 740
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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.
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.
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: united kingdom
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
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!
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?