LGW BA lite
Dingleberry Handpump
You are talking nonsense.
The BA company council section of BALPA has been engaged in discussions with BA, not BALPA.
The BACC has secured modest improvements and reballoted BA's pilots. BA's BALPA pilots overwhelmingly voted in favour of the new operation at LGW. They did so to ensure that BA branded work from LGW was performed by BA pilots on the Master Seniority List with this work open to those BA pilots who BA had "let go" over a year ago. You would be surprised at the huge number of LHR pilots who were concerned at the plight of those former BA pilots who were now unemployed and who voted in favour to offer them the opportunity to return to BA work
BA's LGW pilots will be on different T&Cs to those at LHR as has been the case for many years. It could be argued that these LGW pilots will be working harder than those based at LHR and therefore should be paid MORE than LHR pilots but airline life is not like that - a unit's income determines what expenditure can be afforded and not who works hardest.
Once the "let go pilots' have been absorbed into LGW or LHR, recruitment to LGW will be open to all; successful candidates will then join the BA MSL. If the BACC had not secured an agreement acceptable to both BA and BA's BALPA members then the LGW work would have been lost for ever to BA pilots and the slots would have been used - probably by Vueling - or sold to probably Wizz.
IMO, the BACC have done well in the negotiations but I expect the BALPA knockers to think otherwise.
You are talking nonsense.
The BA company council section of BALPA has been engaged in discussions with BA, not BALPA.
The BACC has secured modest improvements and reballoted BA's pilots. BA's BALPA pilots overwhelmingly voted in favour of the new operation at LGW. They did so to ensure that BA branded work from LGW was performed by BA pilots on the Master Seniority List with this work open to those BA pilots who BA had "let go" over a year ago. You would be surprised at the huge number of LHR pilots who were concerned at the plight of those former BA pilots who were now unemployed and who voted in favour to offer them the opportunity to return to BA work
BA's LGW pilots will be on different T&Cs to those at LHR as has been the case for many years. It could be argued that these LGW pilots will be working harder than those based at LHR and therefore should be paid MORE than LHR pilots but airline life is not like that - a unit's income determines what expenditure can be afforded and not who works hardest.
Once the "let go pilots' have been absorbed into LGW or LHR, recruitment to LGW will be open to all; successful candidates will then join the BA MSL. If the BACC had not secured an agreement acceptable to both BA and BA's BALPA members then the LGW work would have been lost for ever to BA pilots and the slots would have been used - probably by Vueling - or sold to probably Wizz.
IMO, the BACC have done well in the negotiations but I expect the BALPA knockers to think otherwise.
Join Date: Oct 2021
Location: London
Posts: 22
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, BACC my heroes. Orchestrated the deal to get us out the door and now claiming the glory for bringing us back on £20k a year less.
And my former BA colleagues - "concerned at our plight". Shame they weren't that concerned 12 months ago. Especially the captains getting demoted and keeping their full captain pay. Or the technically redundant 747 brigade getting their 66.6% pay and then getting other jobs flying cargo. Or the 63 year olds receiving full pensions and opting to take 787 type ratings. Or the spineless BACC in their attempts to get us on the JRS. What about the "787/350" pilots in the door for 5 minutes keeping their jobs.
This is the opportunity a lot have been waiting for but please don't dress this lot up in unwarranted glory.
Don't get me wrong. A lot of very good eggs in BA but don't give me the **** that this is being done for the sake of the PRP.
And my former BA colleagues - "concerned at our plight". Shame they weren't that concerned 12 months ago. Especially the captains getting demoted and keeping their full captain pay. Or the technically redundant 747 brigade getting their 66.6% pay and then getting other jobs flying cargo. Or the 63 year olds receiving full pensions and opting to take 787 type ratings. Or the spineless BACC in their attempts to get us on the JRS. What about the "787/350" pilots in the door for 5 minutes keeping their jobs.
This is the opportunity a lot have been waiting for but please don't dress this lot up in unwarranted glory.
Don't get me wrong. A lot of very good eggs in BA but don't give me the **** that this is being done for the sake of the PRP.
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BAreject, as a fully paid up member of the PRP, I share your anger and frustration and I’m as pissed off about the whole situation now as I was a year ago.
That said, your anger towards all our former BA pilot colleagues is misplaced. With such a large group of people, you can’t generalise and say all of them didn’t care, the fact is the vast majority did and the selfish behaviour you’ve cited was in a small minority. I don’t agree with it either but it’s a fact of life that some people will just look out for themselves. Plenty of pilots wanted to make the CR numbers zero and would have done almost anything to achieve that.
The fact is, the BACCs hands were tied and BA wanted to make a point to all departments that no one was safe and so, a few of us pilots lost our jobs. It was politics, plain and simple and a possible fallout of the 2019 strikes. The various mechanisms BA used in order to make some CR happen doesn’t matter now, it was always inevitable once the management has decided as such.
You also can’t moan about the CRS being on 66% pay and getting cargo jobs. The CRS was funded from the existing pilot’s pay and is nothing to do with us in the PRP or BA for that matter. I will concede the 787/350 pilot thing was a real kick in the balls but again BA decided to save them, not the BACC at the expense of people further up the MSL.
FWIW, I think the LGW newco thing is both good and bad. It’s gets people out of the CRS and PRP in the short term but may well erode T&Cs in the long term. You may or may not agree with that, but don’t tar all our former pilot colleagues with the same callous brush because it’s not true.
That said, your anger towards all our former BA pilot colleagues is misplaced. With such a large group of people, you can’t generalise and say all of them didn’t care, the fact is the vast majority did and the selfish behaviour you’ve cited was in a small minority. I don’t agree with it either but it’s a fact of life that some people will just look out for themselves. Plenty of pilots wanted to make the CR numbers zero and would have done almost anything to achieve that.
The fact is, the BACCs hands were tied and BA wanted to make a point to all departments that no one was safe and so, a few of us pilots lost our jobs. It was politics, plain and simple and a possible fallout of the 2019 strikes. The various mechanisms BA used in order to make some CR happen doesn’t matter now, it was always inevitable once the management has decided as such.
You also can’t moan about the CRS being on 66% pay and getting cargo jobs. The CRS was funded from the existing pilot’s pay and is nothing to do with us in the PRP or BA for that matter. I will concede the 787/350 pilot thing was a real kick in the balls but again BA decided to save them, not the BACC at the expense of people further up the MSL.
FWIW, I think the LGW newco thing is both good and bad. It’s gets people out of the CRS and PRP in the short term but may well erode T&Cs in the long term. You may or may not agree with that, but don’t tar all our former pilot colleagues with the same callous brush because it’s not true.
Join Date: Oct 2016
Location: UK
Posts: 33
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not sure how well this goes down with the BA, Easy and Ryr guys from Balpa…pilot shortage?
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...retire-change/
https://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/202...retire-change/
Join Date: Jan 2019
Location: FL390
Posts: 24
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
nothing but the media trying to create chaos again but using the word shortage in another field given the recent events in the U.K. Hopefully people start panic buying holidays.