bmi Bid Forms combined thread
Guest
Posts: n/a
I thought that the CC had issued a letter to all BALPA members describing how to bid , and that one of the instructions was to IGNORE THE ALLOCATION TABLE on the bid form .
I suggest that you all don't trust a confirmation on here--- but CHECK WITH A CC MEMBER !
(by the way , if you're not in BALPA then you DESERVE CAP 371 and all the other potential horrors ! )
I suggest that you all don't trust a confirmation on here--- but CHECK WITH A CC MEMBER !
(by the way , if you're not in BALPA then you DESERVE CAP 371 and all the other potential horrors ! )
Join Date: May 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 156
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I feel sorry for you guys. BM management excel again at making life very difficult, when there are better ways available.
However, do not rely on the AFS or any agreement you think you have with the company. Dan-Air pilots had a long standing formal agreement with the Company concerning seniority and first in last out in the event of downsizing or fleet/base closure. When the redundancies were announced (at the same time as BA bought the company for £1) the only pilots to keep their jobs were those on 737CFM LGW based. (BA indemnified the Dan Air directors from legal claims arising from this decision, which Dan-Air directors were reluctant to make). The most junior pilot in Dan-Air is now in BA, and the most senior was made redundant. Balpa was ( or chose?) to be impotent, and because of the costs of fighting the case the courts were of limited help.
Stick together, ensure the Balpa reps do their job with full back up from Frohnsdorf and others. You can't do much about the commercial realities of life with the recession and 9/11. You have to present the management with an acceptable solution to their problem, because they appear incapable of doing it themselves. Hopefully they will see how a committed workforce will be good for the long term future of BM.
Good luck.
However, do not rely on the AFS or any agreement you think you have with the company. Dan-Air pilots had a long standing formal agreement with the Company concerning seniority and first in last out in the event of downsizing or fleet/base closure. When the redundancies were announced (at the same time as BA bought the company for £1) the only pilots to keep their jobs were those on 737CFM LGW based. (BA indemnified the Dan Air directors from legal claims arising from this decision, which Dan-Air directors were reluctant to make). The most junior pilot in Dan-Air is now in BA, and the most senior was made redundant. Balpa was ( or chose?) to be impotent, and because of the costs of fighting the case the courts were of limited help.
Stick together, ensure the Balpa reps do their job with full back up from Frohnsdorf and others. You can't do much about the commercial realities of life with the recession and 9/11. You have to present the management with an acceptable solution to their problem, because they appear incapable of doing it themselves. Hopefully they will see how a committed workforce will be good for the long term future of BM.
Good luck.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Ref fiftyfour's comments , "The acceptable solution to the problem , which we should present to the management" is , would you believe , the CURRENT AFS , is'nt it ?
If the company can't make efficient use of the CURRENT AFS that's not our fault , nor should we suffer for it !
So that's the message we ALL , AS INDIVIDUALS need to make sure BALPA has got loud and clear , is'nt it ! The only way to do that is to write to BALPA telling them that that is what YOU , AS AN INDIVIDUAL , want . Dead easy , except for getting motivated enough to find a pen , paper , envelope and stamp . Oh dear , such obstacles ! You'll do it tomorrow -- I know . Someone else will do it -- I know . It won't make any difference -- I know . Were all doomed -- I know . My wrist hurts too much to write -- no comment !
(Sorry to deviate from the start topic , got a bit excited there .)
If the company can't make efficient use of the CURRENT AFS that's not our fault , nor should we suffer for it !
So that's the message we ALL , AS INDIVIDUALS need to make sure BALPA has got loud and clear , is'nt it ! The only way to do that is to write to BALPA telling them that that is what YOU , AS AN INDIVIDUAL , want . Dead easy , except for getting motivated enough to find a pen , paper , envelope and stamp . Oh dear , such obstacles ! You'll do it tomorrow -- I know . Someone else will do it -- I know . It won't make any difference -- I know . Were all doomed -- I know . My wrist hurts too much to write -- no comment !
(Sorry to deviate from the start topic , got a bit excited there .)
Uncle Pete
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Frodsham Cheshire
Posts: 915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Boxcar Wilhomena,
I lost my Class 1 again for two reasons, one of which was to have a sub mucosal resection of my septum (nose job) on the company BUPA. This worked very well but the other problem prevented my return to work.
I took enhanced early retirement on the 28th February this year.
If you want the full info e-mail me privately, phone a friend or ask the audience.
MP
I lost my Class 1 again for two reasons, one of which was to have a sub mucosal resection of my septum (nose job) on the company BUPA. This worked very well but the other problem prevented my return to work.
I took enhanced early retirement on the 28th February this year.
If you want the full info e-mail me privately, phone a friend or ask the audience.
MP
Uncle Pete
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Frodsham Cheshire
Posts: 915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What started out as a bit of advice has developed into an interesting thread.
Now just two questions:-
1. Is the bid form you have been sent the same as in the AFS?
2. Has the CC agreed with the company to these "minor" changes
in format?
If the answer to both is NO the company is outside the AFS and you don't have to return your bid form
MP
Now just two questions:-
1. Is the bid form you have been sent the same as in the AFS?
2. Has the CC agreed with the company to these "minor" changes
in format?
If the answer to both is NO the company is outside the AFS and you don't have to return your bid form
MP
Guest
Posts: n/a
( The erroneous interpretation which I refer to below was later removed for some reason , but the comments given below are still very relevant)
BY MY UNDERSTANDING , an erroneous interpretation of the fleet allocation procedures has been posted herein , which cannot go unchallenged.
If you're 737 based LHR , then you are designated as being on a declining fleet and have ABSOLUTE PRIORITY BIDDING RIGHTS OVER ANYONE ELSE .
In addition , if you make a bid and there are too many pilots to allow you onto your fleet of choice , then pilots at the VERY BOTTOM of the COMPANY seniority list are made redundant in order to make a vacancy for you . (There is nothing you could do to save a colleague from redundancy in this case even if you wanted to -- too many pilots = some must go ) .
To assume that you must bid for baby CWL on the basis of there being nothing else is TOTALLY INCORRECT . This error was my main concern .
Suggest a check with a CC member if you doubt this .
I thought that I MUST raise this point if only to encourage a double check by everyone -- it could otherwise have had serious consequences .
By the way , there is an exchange of views regarding CWL on Terms and Endearment under "bmi bid form" which may be relevant .
BY MY UNDERSTANDING , an erroneous interpretation of the fleet allocation procedures has been posted herein , which cannot go unchallenged.
If you're 737 based LHR , then you are designated as being on a declining fleet and have ABSOLUTE PRIORITY BIDDING RIGHTS OVER ANYONE ELSE .
In addition , if you make a bid and there are too many pilots to allow you onto your fleet of choice , then pilots at the VERY BOTTOM of the COMPANY seniority list are made redundant in order to make a vacancy for you . (There is nothing you could do to save a colleague from redundancy in this case even if you wanted to -- too many pilots = some must go ) .
To assume that you must bid for baby CWL on the basis of there being nothing else is TOTALLY INCORRECT . This error was my main concern .
Suggest a check with a CC member if you doubt this .
I thought that I MUST raise this point if only to encourage a double check by everyone -- it could otherwise have had serious consequences .
By the way , there is an exchange of views regarding CWL on Terms and Endearment under "bmi bid form" which may be relevant .
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 101
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For what it's worth I live in sunny Cardiff. Lovely place. Unfortunately the airline I moved here for MANY moons ago went bust and no-one else seems to be able to make a go of the base. So for the last 14-and-a-half years I seem to have spent my life on motorways various. NOT recommended. And as for being welcomed with open arms at BRS with a 737 rating/command.........forget it.
Guest
Posts: n/a
luddite
You start your post with "For what it's worth...."
Feedback like this from real life victims such as you is worth a heck of a lot , and certainly much more than any of our predictions/fears/worries .
I totally agree with every aspect of your post , and have suggested as much further back in this thread .
I must disagree with one thing though , if you'll forgive me.........
CARDIFF-----SUNNY ??????
---or do you mean between the raindrops ?
My family and I once abandoned a holiday in Wales because it NEVER stopped raining !
My sympathies with your predicament , especially being stuck with it for so long -- must be horrendous .
You start your post with "For what it's worth...."
Feedback like this from real life victims such as you is worth a heck of a lot , and certainly much more than any of our predictions/fears/worries .
I totally agree with every aspect of your post , and have suggested as much further back in this thread .
I must disagree with one thing though , if you'll forgive me.........
CARDIFF-----SUNNY ??????
---or do you mean between the raindrops ?
My family and I once abandoned a holiday in Wales because it NEVER stopped raining !
My sympathies with your predicament , especially being stuck with it for so long -- must be horrendous .
Join Date: Jul 1999
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The AFS has always been there as 'guidance', and represents a utopian ideal, which is patently not achievable. Never has been, never will be.
Sorry to have to add such value to this debate !
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: underground
Posts: 227
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Good old flappless, jumps in with both feet as usual, enlightening us all with his erudite opinion.
Obviously can't see a 'tongue-in-cheek' post if it jammed in his flaptrack fairing.
Obviously can't see a 'tongue-in-cheek' post if it jammed in his flaptrack fairing.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: In the flight deck
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maximum Pete.
Please leave it up to BALPA to sort this mess out! Get on with your retirement and stop bashing Midland! There is a correct place to discuss this, and that's the bmi Balpa web site where only THOSE who are involved can discuss it.
I used to like PPRuNe, I thought that the 'P' stood for professional, now it's just a forum for whingers!
Please leave it up to BALPA to sort this mess out! Get on with your retirement and stop bashing Midland! There is a correct place to discuss this, and that's the bmi Balpa web site where only THOSE who are involved can discuss it.
I used to like PPRuNe, I thought that the 'P' stood for professional, now it's just a forum for whingers!
Just a numbered other
Roger Millar says
But don't forget that this won't apply to those off to the playground, where there is no relocation package.
'Trailers for sale or rent
Rooms to rent fifty cents'
Yep, that's Cardiff
Any bids requiring relocation will have to include the current 'relocation package' as part of the deal. I believe the company have agreed to this.
'Trailers for sale or rent
Rooms to rent fifty cents'
Yep, that's Cardiff
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: over the hill
Posts: 57
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
just a few points:-
I am no expert on the AFS, but in my humble opinion the rules (as they stand 'til april 2003)would allow more 737 LHR -> AIRBUS LHR fleet transfers than is being quoted here.
Kingoftheroad:- assuming AnthonyCarn's "FLEET CONTRACTION" statement is adhered to by the company-(as it should be)-Ref. AFS 1.11-G.1 ,then assuming every 737LHR pilot bid for AIRBUS LHR-there ought to be 80 places available to the 80 most senior 737 pilots,capts. OR f/os. :-The 40 most senior getting their places as per company requirement on the bid form,and the next 40 by displacing any outstation bids.-(total AIRBUS places LHR=80 according to bid form).
Next should be the FKR places (17 I think), at LHR. These should also be offered to 737LHR pilots to fill the co.req'mt.
Then comes the disruptive bit:-
Assuming no FKR EMA pilots want to transfer to Baby, then they, I assume,would displace pilots from the bottom of the list in accordance with seniority.
Also,the 45-odd 737 pilots in-between would be without aircraft or base and would potentially be made redundant.
As we all know there are many variables in this:-
1)Several pilots will (or already have) decided that playing ball for all these years does not grant immunity from the bat being shoved up your *rse,and will be making plans elsewhere.
2)Several pilots in the aforementioned 80 will be happy to give the Baby option a go-particularly if they are single/young,etc or are close to retirement.
3)Quite a few FKR pilots from the outstations will probably go down the baby route,even if they are senior enough to displace some of those from the bottom of the list.
4)The company (in theory) will be bound by the AFS 'til APR 03.Any fule kno that the level of training required in the above scenario will be far in excess of the company ideal,so,come next APR, will we have any protection against being screwed still further?BALPA take note*.
This is my own personal view on the situation,and I apologise if I've missed something obvious.
Best of luck everybody,keep in there BALPA,
SKIP.RAT
Kingoftheroad:- assuming AnthonyCarn's "FLEET CONTRACTION" statement is adhered to by the company-(as it should be)-Ref. AFS 1.11-G.1 ,then assuming every 737LHR pilot bid for AIRBUS LHR-there ought to be 80 places available to the 80 most senior 737 pilots,capts. OR f/os. :-The 40 most senior getting their places as per company requirement on the bid form,and the next 40 by displacing any outstation bids.-(total AIRBUS places LHR=80 according to bid form).
Next should be the FKR places (17 I think), at LHR. These should also be offered to 737LHR pilots to fill the co.req'mt.
Then comes the disruptive bit:-
Assuming no FKR EMA pilots want to transfer to Baby, then they, I assume,would displace pilots from the bottom of the list in accordance with seniority.
Also,the 45-odd 737 pilots in-between would be without aircraft or base and would potentially be made redundant.
As we all know there are many variables in this:-
1)Several pilots will (or already have) decided that playing ball for all these years does not grant immunity from the bat being shoved up your *rse,and will be making plans elsewhere.
2)Several pilots in the aforementioned 80 will be happy to give the Baby option a go-particularly if they are single/young,etc or are close to retirement.
3)Quite a few FKR pilots from the outstations will probably go down the baby route,even if they are senior enough to displace some of those from the bottom of the list.
4)The company (in theory) will be bound by the AFS 'til APR 03.Any fule kno that the level of training required in the above scenario will be far in excess of the company ideal,so,come next APR, will we have any protection against being screwed still further?BALPA take note*.
This is my own personal view on the situation,and I apologise if I've missed something obvious.
Best of luck everybody,keep in there BALPA,
SKIP.RAT
Guest
Posts: n/a
( In my post below , I refer to what I interpreted as being a misleading statement by another member . The misleading statement has subsequently been removed . My post is still very relevant . )
All of the following is based upon my understanding .
Sorry to repeat myself , but the main point here is that you can't be made redundant solely on the basis of your current fleet .
Redundancies start at the bottom of the company seniority list and work upwards one by one without skipping anyone .
My main point in the original post (above) was to challenge a VERY misleading statement on the thread , along the lines that if a 737 pilot could'nt be found a place on the Airbus or the Fokker , then all that would be left would be baby --- THIS IS SIMPLY NOT CORRECT AND COULD LEAD TO SOME DISASTEROUS DECISIONS .
If you are on the 737 , then you , quite simply , MUST REPEAT MUST be found a position on the Airbus or Fokker , even if it means displacing someone else less senior ( unless , as I've just said , you are at the very bottom of the company seniority list , in which case you are the first in line if there are redundancies , and would be first in line , anyway , regardless of your fleet ) .
The answer , can I suggest , is "don't sign anything" until you've spoken to a CC member and are VERY clear about your bid decisions . (If you're not in BALPA , then you can only expect to be in the dark !)
I'm attempting to prevent disasters due to misunderstandings . However , I'd be mortified if I've got it wrong somewhere and cause any career problems , so please check with BALPA , I beg .
And that definitely applies big time to some of the other posts herein ! (no offence) .
By the way , when the Fokker goes in 18 months or whenever , for "737" in the above ramble , just replace with "Fokker" as the aircraft going , and for the fleet you MUST REPEAT MUST be found a position on just replace "Airbus or Fokker" with "Airbus" . (unless we get something in addition to the Airbus etc. etc.)
All of the following is based upon my understanding .
Sorry to repeat myself , but the main point here is that you can't be made redundant solely on the basis of your current fleet .
Redundancies start at the bottom of the company seniority list and work upwards one by one without skipping anyone .
My main point in the original post (above) was to challenge a VERY misleading statement on the thread , along the lines that if a 737 pilot could'nt be found a place on the Airbus or the Fokker , then all that would be left would be baby --- THIS IS SIMPLY NOT CORRECT AND COULD LEAD TO SOME DISASTEROUS DECISIONS .
If you are on the 737 , then you , quite simply , MUST REPEAT MUST be found a position on the Airbus or Fokker , even if it means displacing someone else less senior ( unless , as I've just said , you are at the very bottom of the company seniority list , in which case you are the first in line if there are redundancies , and would be first in line , anyway , regardless of your fleet ) .
The answer , can I suggest , is "don't sign anything" until you've spoken to a CC member and are VERY clear about your bid decisions . (If you're not in BALPA , then you can only expect to be in the dark !)
I'm attempting to prevent disasters due to misunderstandings . However , I'd be mortified if I've got it wrong somewhere and cause any career problems , so please check with BALPA , I beg .
And that definitely applies big time to some of the other posts herein ! (no offence) .
By the way , when the Fokker goes in 18 months or whenever , for "737" in the above ramble , just replace with "Fokker" as the aircraft going , and for the fleet you MUST REPEAT MUST be found a position on just replace "Airbus or Fokker" with "Airbus" . (unless we get something in addition to the Airbus etc. etc.)
Uncle Pete
Join Date: Jul 1999
Location: Frodsham Cheshire
Posts: 915
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
J and J
I see you have registered today to make a personal attack.
Fine, 'cos that is your right.
Such a shame you don't feel able to use your proper name or your regular pprune name.
Contrary to your belief I am enjoying my retirement and am fortunate enough to continue flying light aircraft. My concerns are purely for my ex-colleagues.
What would be my reasons for having a go at bmi?
No doubt you can enlighten us all.
Bemused MP
I see you have registered today to make a personal attack.
Fine, 'cos that is your right.
Such a shame you don't feel able to use your proper name or your regular pprune name.
Contrary to your belief I am enjoying my retirement and am fortunate enough to continue flying light aircraft. My concerns are purely for my ex-colleagues.
What would be my reasons for having a go at bmi?
No doubt you can enlighten us all.
Bemused MP
Guest
Posts: n/a
(the post which prompted the response below has been removed for some reason , but my response below is still relevant)
BoxcarWhilomena / everyone .
I have a copy of a letter from BALPA . which states "disregard the latter part of vacancies ref who's eligible: bid for what YOU want........" . In other words the table of how many vacancies are available on each fleet should be ignored when bidding .
Regardless of how many vacancies are available on each fleet , you are guaranteed a position on one of them , unless there are'nt enough vacancies for everyone , then obviously redundancies are going to be required , which will start at the bottom of the company seniority list and work upwards .
Trying to outguess the company regarding the numbers required on each fleet is to some extent futile . What we ideally need to know is the total pilot numbers required , plus how many are going to baby , then knowing what we've got now we could deduce who might go where and if any redundancies will occur . Trying to work this out is also futile . We don't have enough info . The company won't even know the final picture until all bids are counted . So guessing is pointless , is'nt it ?
BoxcarWhilomena / everyone .
I have a copy of a letter from BALPA . which states "disregard the latter part of vacancies ref who's eligible: bid for what YOU want........" . In other words the table of how many vacancies are available on each fleet should be ignored when bidding .
Regardless of how many vacancies are available on each fleet , you are guaranteed a position on one of them , unless there are'nt enough vacancies for everyone , then obviously redundancies are going to be required , which will start at the bottom of the company seniority list and work upwards .
Trying to outguess the company regarding the numbers required on each fleet is to some extent futile . What we ideally need to know is the total pilot numbers required , plus how many are going to baby , then knowing what we've got now we could deduce who might go where and if any redundancies will occur . Trying to work this out is also futile . We don't have enough info . The company won't even know the final picture until all bids are counted . So guessing is pointless , is'nt it ?