BA f/os Wanting GSS commands
Join Date: May 2001
Posts: 85
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hand,
The fact is, I keep suggesting a win/win situation. You keep suggesting win/maybe win/loose situation. Do I want to see pilots wages undermined? No. Do I want to see pilots terms and conditions undermined? No. Are all BACX pilots happy to see BA pilots loose out? No. Are all BA pilots happy to see BACX pilots loose out? No. But scope certainly made it feel like that should have been a yes.
We can let the idea of BAR or BACX making a profit drop. If you have a BA news that says BAR made £12M profit, then I do not disagree, however, as I said before it depends who you talk to. Perhaps I did talk to people who didn't check their facts properly, so you can have that one.
I am afraid the opposite is true. You are letting yourself down by believing the propaganda. The base that I flew from (now shut) had only one route with a competing low cost. The other routes were unique to us and were profitable for many years. While it is true that BACX has made a loss, and that they just 'gave up' in competition with the low costs on some routes (notably Cardiff), you cannot justify the shutting of bases which were profitable for many years until BACX came along. Now we all know that whether an airline is profitable or not is not really down to the pilots, although we can make a difference, so all this 'we are better than you' rubbish is childish. The management of a given pilots airline is nothing to do with him/her, so he/she shouldn't be punished for it. Do you think the pilots in BACX wanted to give up in the face of competiton and a 'soft' maket, or do you think they were professionals like all the rest of us?
Indeed, which is why BALPA should keep us fully informed and not pitch one airline against another. Do you think if BALPA had sent us information on WHAT WAS ACTUALLY happening, rather than newsletters complaining about the other bunch, that any of this arguing would be going on? Do you think that if we worked together and had proposals from a combined pilot community that we would have had more power, or do you belive that BACC is all powerful?
What a pathetic response! Is your glass half full or half empty when you are facing redundancy and being moved about the county like a lorry?
So the direct loss of 20 commands (demotions, rather than opportunities dissapearing) is an advantage is it? And splitting the workforce into two lots is progress? I am glad the BA secondees are well paid and so they should be. If we had worked together in the first place, then BA may well not have lost any command positions at all. BA BALPA could well have said no to BACX RJ flying, but also, they could have said no to undermining other peoples jobs - but they chose not to. They chose to support one lot and undermine the other. There were win/win solutions available, but they were not considered (certainly not publicly).
To make myself absolutely clear:
1. I do not support undermining of peopes T+C's and wages.
2. I similarly do not support BALPA undermining another airlines T+C's and wages, or forcing demotions on another airline.
3. I do support us working TOGETHER.
4. I do support us having the facts by which to judge what is going on, rather than opinion.
Why can't people like you realise that people like me are arguing for better things for ALL of us, not better for some and worse for others.
Ornithopter if you must post then lets stick to FACT, not RUMOUR
We can let the idea of BAR or BACX making a profit drop. If you have a BA news that says BAR made £12M profit, then I do not disagree, however, as I said before it depends who you talk to. Perhaps I did talk to people who didn't check their facts properly, so you can have that one.
Now you're really letting yourself down with this one. Do you think Ryanair or Easy sell all their seats at £1? Of course they don't so I'll say no more. Its easy to charge £300 when you have a monopoly, not so easy when the low costs start to compete though, as BACX found.
Well we saw it differently. It was a straight transfer of 200 jobs from BA mainline to BACX, a move the BACC was absolutely right to oppose. Hardly all the same jobs when one has substantially poorer terms and conditions.
Is something better than nothing? Is your glass half full or empty? Thats for BACX to decide, not us.
Perhaps, but which way is the advantage going in this scenario? BACX now have access to plenty of RJ commands and jet flying they previously did not. Whilst the BA secondees are now well paid, the opportunity to bid for those commands is very restricted and BA pilots have effectively lost a significant number of command opportunities. BA BALPA could have said no to any BACX RJ flying if they'd wanted, would that have been a better solution for you?
To make myself absolutely clear:
1. I do not support undermining of peopes T+C's and wages.
2. I similarly do not support BALPA undermining another airlines T+C's and wages, or forcing demotions on another airline.
3. I do support us working TOGETHER.
4. I do support us having the facts by which to judge what is going on, rather than opinion.
Why can't people like you realise that people like me are arguing for better things for ALL of us, not better for some and worse for others.
Well said Ornithopter. As a fellow BACX pilot I fully support the points raised in your last post.
Both the Mainline and BACX guys need to be presented with all the facts. Having recently completed the RJ100 sim with an ex 777 guy (who was a joy to fly with!), it is apparent that very little is known about the situation in BACX by the mainline guys. Likewise I'm sure that most BACX guys (myself included) are far from seeing the big picture in mainline. What we all need are facts to form a valid opinion on.
No-one wants to see anyone's terms an conditions eroded or their job security threatened. So guys, lets wipe the slate clean and try and work togther on this one, instead of dragging up the past and look to how we can protect everyone's future!
Both the Mainline and BACX guys need to be presented with all the facts. Having recently completed the RJ100 sim with an ex 777 guy (who was a joy to fly with!), it is apparent that very little is known about the situation in BACX by the mainline guys. Likewise I'm sure that most BACX guys (myself included) are far from seeing the big picture in mainline. What we all need are facts to form a valid opinion on.
No-one wants to see anyone's terms an conditions eroded or their job security threatened. So guys, lets wipe the slate clean and try and work togther on this one, instead of dragging up the past and look to how we can protect everyone's future!
Last edited by FlyboyUK; 26th Aug 2003 at 20:46.
Latest Developments?
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Abroad
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the risk of stirring up a hornets´nest again, may I offer a view on this? As BA F/O I do feel let down , by both BA and BALPA, for having non BA pilots flying BA work (cargo) I´m sure other pilots would feel the same if they were sent home on half pay (or no pay) and suddenly a lower cost operator brought in to fly the work. BALPA´s solution of inserting BA pilots into GSS, i feel has only undermined our position. BALPA now recognise the going rate for a BA pilot (on secondment) is a lot less than flying the same -400 in BA. We haven´t protected opportunities at all, merely driven the wedge in deeper. Of course BA are going to say "Fly for GSS", we´ve just reduced their costs for them!
What BALPA should have insisted on, is the opportunities to fly for GSS, and BA "top up" the GSS pay to a similar widebody command in BA. That would be an opportunity.
What BALPA should have insisted on, is the opportunities to fly for GSS, and BA "top up" the GSS pay to a similar widebody command in BA. That would be an opportunity.
Suspect many of the non type-rated 'volunteers' are taking advantage of the early 744 rating from BA, (i.e. mainline 744 job out of seniority), with absolutely no intention of going on to work for GSS when their time comes.
As for the few, (some surprisingly senior), 744 rated guys putting their name forward I believe most are 'no-hopers' as far as LHS suitability is concerned. Remember the interviews involved for selection!
Apologies to any well intentioned non type-rated and qualified peeps genuinely going for it. Commiserations to the GSS FO's being affected. Shame on BALPA for signing up for the deal!
As for the few, (some surprisingly senior), 744 rated guys putting their name forward I believe most are 'no-hopers' as far as LHS suitability is concerned. Remember the interviews involved for selection!
Apologies to any well intentioned non type-rated and qualified peeps genuinely going for it. Commiserations to the GSS FO's being affected. Shame on BALPA for signing up for the deal!
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Europe/US
Posts: 346
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As BA lost the plot long ago, wouldn't it be great for GSS to compete directly against BA for new tenders, then all the Nigel wannabee DEC's can go lick their lollipops with all the Mandy's!
Join Date: Jul 2000
Location: Nova
Posts: 1,242
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh but Farty, you miss the point.
Nobody here can stop BA pilots (who said they were all F/Os?) "GETTING" gss commands!
So, in a rather endearing gesture, by juvenile intimidation, they hope to stop them "WANTING" the job.
Are you getting the hang of this yet?
Nobody here can stop BA pilots (who said they were all F/Os?) "GETTING" gss commands!
So, in a rather endearing gesture, by juvenile intimidation, they hope to stop them "WANTING" the job.
Are you getting the hang of this yet?
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: UK
Posts: 5
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not sure why helipolarbear (a corporate hleicopter pilot) decided to revive this thread after two months, particularly as, despite the title, it is mainly about BACX.
It may interest you to know that every year GSS pilots attend a one day CRM refresher. This year they are concentrating on the first item in the JAA NOTECHs, ie 'Co-operation', and in particular how it relates to the BA secodment issue. Whatever the views expressed on this forum, the GSS management are taking their responsibilities seriously.
Compare this to the attitude of the BA management, supported by some on this forum. This must be the only time that the BA pilots have agreed with the P of D. Having shown him what you are prepared to accept to captain a 744, I hope that he doesn't use it against you in the future. Please keep on telling us to bend over and take it tandemrotor. It supports our views about bullying and intimidation.
It may interest you to know that every year GSS pilots attend a one day CRM refresher. This year they are concentrating on the first item in the JAA NOTECHs, ie 'Co-operation', and in particular how it relates to the BA secodment issue. Whatever the views expressed on this forum, the GSS management are taking their responsibilities seriously.
Compare this to the attitude of the BA management, supported by some on this forum. This must be the only time that the BA pilots have agreed with the P of D. Having shown him what you are prepared to accept to captain a 744, I hope that he doesn't use it against you in the future. Please keep on telling us to bend over and take it tandemrotor. It supports our views about bullying and intimidation.
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: Abroad
Posts: 520
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Oh dear, this isn't getting us anywhere. I do hope that this alleged intimidation doesn't put off the normal, average line bloke. Why? Because some of the more "extreme" people on the edge of Briggs-Myers will be applying anyway, and if you're not careful, GSS will be full of these guys running the show.They may only be 0.1% of the BA pilot work force, but they will be up to 33odd % of your Captains. I would think twice at what you are trying to achieve here.
Join Date: Sep 2003
Location: here and there but mostly lgw
Posts: 166
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think i'm getting the hang of this now. Is GSS the acceptable incarnation of Atlas, which had a recruiting boycott for a while as the work was all going to US types? If so i know of a couple of F/Os ( maybe more i dont know) at Gss who had no compunction ignoring the boycott to look after no1,and later their applications were processed by Gss. IN other words "lie low boys til we sort out these pesky unions " .So i dont see the problem in that Gss are being strongarmed by the people who created them. What goes around comes around.
Gss is not an independant operator , its a wholly dependant operator. If they want the freedom to promote the toy throwers then dont fly ba cargo other than tendering for it on the open market.
It is being stangled by the very loophole that atlas first tred to exploit......ERM i think.
Actually i dont care too much, just that the irony crossed my mind
Gss is not an independant operator , its a wholly dependant operator. If they want the freedom to promote the toy throwers then dont fly ba cargo other than tendering for it on the open market.
It is being stangled by the very loophole that atlas first tred to exploit......ERM i think.
Actually i dont care too much, just that the irony crossed my mind
Join Date: Mar 2001
Location: At work!
Posts: 10
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Tandemrotor
'So, in a rather endearing gesture, by juvenile intimidation, they hope to stop them "WANTING" the job.'
Well I wonder how long it has taken for you to come to that conclusion?
Of course the 'intimidation' used by the BACC and subsequently by BA Flight Ops, to force GSS to accept BA secondees as Captains, is perfectly acceptable I suppose. Bullying is 'OK behaviour' in New Road, is it?
It goes something like this:-
1/ BACC conclude the agreement with BA without consulting GSS
2/ BACC pressurises BA to implement the agreement
3/ BA threatens to ruin GSS commercially if they do not accept their F/Os as Captains in GSS
4/ BA F/Os now take 2/3rds of commands in GSS
And GSS F/Os are supposed to lie down and accept this - I don't think so!
Bullies always lose in the end.
What has concerned GSS is that the BACC may have failed to provide their pilots with the real story concerning how this shabby deal was concluded. We fail to understand why any BA F/O would want to take a command in GSS, undertake a pay cut, work for vastly inferior terms and conditions, knowingly STEAL that command from a fellow BALPA member and then spend three years in a small airline where he will be most unwelcome - a pariah!
Is that fourth ring really worth that much? How sad!
'So, in a rather endearing gesture, by juvenile intimidation, they hope to stop them "WANTING" the job.'
Well I wonder how long it has taken for you to come to that conclusion?
Of course the 'intimidation' used by the BACC and subsequently by BA Flight Ops, to force GSS to accept BA secondees as Captains, is perfectly acceptable I suppose. Bullying is 'OK behaviour' in New Road, is it?
It goes something like this:-
1/ BACC conclude the agreement with BA without consulting GSS
2/ BACC pressurises BA to implement the agreement
3/ BA threatens to ruin GSS commercially if they do not accept their F/Os as Captains in GSS
4/ BA F/Os now take 2/3rds of commands in GSS
And GSS F/Os are supposed to lie down and accept this - I don't think so!
Bullies always lose in the end.
What has concerned GSS is that the BACC may have failed to provide their pilots with the real story concerning how this shabby deal was concluded. We fail to understand why any BA F/O would want to take a command in GSS, undertake a pay cut, work for vastly inferior terms and conditions, knowingly STEAL that command from a fellow BALPA member and then spend three years in a small airline where he will be most unwelcome - a pariah!
Is that fourth ring really worth that much? How sad!
Join Date: May 2000
Location: Camp X-Ray
Posts: 2,135
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the contrary I think most BA pilots are very well informed on how the deal was arranged, both in terms of BA managements failure to consult GSS and GSS managements attempts to dodge the outcome. BACC have explained it all very clearly, albeit without the use of the emotive language which appears on this thread.
We fail to understand why any BA F/O would want to take a command in GSS
Command is command, people have their own personal ambitions.
, undertake a pay cut
Not necessarily, and money isn't everything.
.
work for vastly inferior terms and conditions
There's more to life than Bidline rules, and I suspect a number of bidders will have previously worked for organisations that make GSS look rather comfortable. Its not hard to go back to where you came from.
knowingly STEAL that command from a fellow BALPA member
STEAL? No new contract means no third aircraft means no new commands. New contracts means new commands for GSS pilots. It all boils down to whether you think BACC should turn a blind eye to contracting out work or should defend the interests of BACC members. Incidentally, less than 50% of GSS pilots are BALPA members.
then spend three years in a small airline where he will be most unwelcome - a pariah!
I'm sure there are worse things in life. The individuals might be treated like pariahs by a small element of GSS pilots, but I suspect its stretching credulity to claim that the entire GSS pilot body will display open hostility towards the secondees as that would be both immature and unprofessional. Comments like that were rife in the run up to the BACX secondments, yet the reality was that most BACX pilots simply got on with the job like professionals and kept personal animosity out of the flight deck. Those who did indulge themselves in vendettas were seen as rather pathetic by both communities.
Incidentally, as I sit here and look at the details of the GSS secondment it would appear that any co-pilot up to pay point 14 in BA would receive an immediate rise in basic pay by taking up a GSS secondment. The hourly allowances are £2.50 in BA versus £2.00 for GSS plus a £10 per day overseas allowance in BA. Given the profile of the successful bidders within BA I would say that they all stand to pocket a significant pay rise through the move to GSS.
We fail to understand why any BA F/O would want to take a command in GSS
Command is command, people have their own personal ambitions.
, undertake a pay cut
Not necessarily, and money isn't everything.
.
work for vastly inferior terms and conditions
There's more to life than Bidline rules, and I suspect a number of bidders will have previously worked for organisations that make GSS look rather comfortable. Its not hard to go back to where you came from.
knowingly STEAL that command from a fellow BALPA member
STEAL? No new contract means no third aircraft means no new commands. New contracts means new commands for GSS pilots. It all boils down to whether you think BACC should turn a blind eye to contracting out work or should defend the interests of BACC members. Incidentally, less than 50% of GSS pilots are BALPA members.
then spend three years in a small airline where he will be most unwelcome - a pariah!
I'm sure there are worse things in life. The individuals might be treated like pariahs by a small element of GSS pilots, but I suspect its stretching credulity to claim that the entire GSS pilot body will display open hostility towards the secondees as that would be both immature and unprofessional. Comments like that were rife in the run up to the BACX secondments, yet the reality was that most BACX pilots simply got on with the job like professionals and kept personal animosity out of the flight deck. Those who did indulge themselves in vendettas were seen as rather pathetic by both communities.
Incidentally, as I sit here and look at the details of the GSS secondment it would appear that any co-pilot up to pay point 14 in BA would receive an immediate rise in basic pay by taking up a GSS secondment. The hourly allowances are £2.50 in BA versus £2.00 for GSS plus a £10 per day overseas allowance in BA. Given the profile of the successful bidders within BA I would say that they all stand to pocket a significant pay rise through the move to GSS.