BA f/os Wanting GSS commands
Thread Starter
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: uk
Posts: 2
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA f/os Wanting GSS commands
To all BA f/os thinking about bidding for GSS commands. THINK AGAIN!!! Do you realise what you are getting into.
Firstly be aware that all in GSS from the management down, do not want direct entry captains because of the problems involved. (Similar to those that would be involved if BA had to take on direct entry captains).
Balpa has done much muscle flexing but little brain flexing in this matter. Both BA and Balpa are keen to impose this on GSS. It may well turn out to be illegal but thats not the main point.
If you accept a command on less money than you would get at BA think what message this sends out. BA management would love the chance to argue that f/os will accept commands for less pay. This will totally undermine future pay negotiations and suprisingly Balpa have been duped into supporting it. Also it will totally undermine the fight to have BA cargo completely in house, if BA staff are working on the cheap for GSS.
Secondly you will be sitting next to a guy whose job you have just taken, you will be working in a potentially hostile environment. The potential for CRM nightmares is high. Even the ex BA staff at GSS are completely against the idea. So don't make yourself an outcast from BA a parriah at GSS and a pawn for low pay with GSS management, all with one stupid bid. Think
Firstly be aware that all in GSS from the management down, do not want direct entry captains because of the problems involved. (Similar to those that would be involved if BA had to take on direct entry captains).
Balpa has done much muscle flexing but little brain flexing in this matter. Both BA and Balpa are keen to impose this on GSS. It may well turn out to be illegal but thats not the main point.
If you accept a command on less money than you would get at BA think what message this sends out. BA management would love the chance to argue that f/os will accept commands for less pay. This will totally undermine future pay negotiations and suprisingly Balpa have been duped into supporting it. Also it will totally undermine the fight to have BA cargo completely in house, if BA staff are working on the cheap for GSS.
Secondly you will be sitting next to a guy whose job you have just taken, you will be working in a potentially hostile environment. The potential for CRM nightmares is high. Even the ex BA staff at GSS are completely against the idea. So don't make yourself an outcast from BA a parriah at GSS and a pawn for low pay with GSS management, all with one stupid bid. Think
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: wiltshire
Posts: 80
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spencer,
You may not like it, but veiled threats and attempts at intimidation will not work. grow up.
I wasn't going to bid for one of OUR 744F commands, but having read your foolish post, I think that I just might, The notice is due out any day and the money is not too bad.
I quite like the idea of a 'holiday' flying around the world on a freighter. It's better than unpaid leave 'cos whilst I'm doing it i still get paid. And then i can nip back into BA and be replaced by another BA colleague.
Spencer,
you started this rubbish mate, so a few facts (just for you 'cos i'm sure that the rest of your colleagues are all professionals and would have nothing to do with what appears to be a veiled threat)
1. this is BA work
2. this is BA work
3. this is BA work
get the message?
this is work which has been taken from BA pilots, and now we are going to get a crack at it. One day i hope that it will return into the proper BA pilot community where it really belongs.
Be careful about making threats spencer - you wouldn't want to be accused of making a threat on board an a/c when we fly together would you?
You may not like it, but veiled threats and attempts at intimidation will not work. grow up.
I wasn't going to bid for one of OUR 744F commands, but having read your foolish post, I think that I just might, The notice is due out any day and the money is not too bad.
I quite like the idea of a 'holiday' flying around the world on a freighter. It's better than unpaid leave 'cos whilst I'm doing it i still get paid. And then i can nip back into BA and be replaced by another BA colleague.
Spencer,
you started this rubbish mate, so a few facts (just for you 'cos i'm sure that the rest of your colleagues are all professionals and would have nothing to do with what appears to be a veiled threat)
1. this is BA work
2. this is BA work
3. this is BA work
get the message?
this is work which has been taken from BA pilots, and now we are going to get a crack at it. One day i hope that it will return into the proper BA pilot community where it really belongs.
Be careful about making threats spencer - you wouldn't want to be accused of making a threat on board an a/c when we fly together would you?
Join Date: Mar 2000
Location: Arizona USA
Posts: 8,571
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hmmm, looks like the BA head shed has discovered B scale.
CX did likewise much to the flight crews dismay.
Shareholders/management must be smiling....all the way to the bank.
Also suspect BALPA hasn't got a clue...
CX did likewise much to the flight crews dismay.
Shareholders/management must be smiling....all the way to the bank.
Also suspect BALPA hasn't got a clue...
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: A PC!
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Maybe a more serious issue is the one of parachuting CityExpress AVRO RJ Capatins into mainline BA shorthaul commands in contravention of the previous agreement. The whole process is being conducted in a fashion that makes the workings of the North Korean communist party look open and above board.
Just arrived from pub therefore slightly cerebrally challenged.
Are GSS F/Os BALPA members?
Try to get BA crew onside - i.e. don't alienate them.
Make it a 'BA vs crew' issue rather than a 'GSS F/O vs BA F/O' issue.
Looking at it from the outside you have points on both sides AND (unlike Cathay's probs over the last 10 yrs) you are in Europe with UK/EU labour laws and union representation.
Look at the law - e.g. why can't BA sub their freight if they wish?
GSS FOs - where does it say that your company can't employ DE captains? Did you have a promised command clause in your contract? (most 'promised commands' don't)
BA FOs - do you wish to help create a B-scale cargo subsidiary?
Please don't consider any of the foregoing to be adverse criticism; merely food for thought based on a few years in the biz.
I'm going to see what's on the tele
Are GSS F/Os BALPA members?
Try to get BA crew onside - i.e. don't alienate them.
Make it a 'BA vs crew' issue rather than a 'GSS F/O vs BA F/O' issue.
Looking at it from the outside you have points on both sides AND (unlike Cathay's probs over the last 10 yrs) you are in Europe with UK/EU labour laws and union representation.
Look at the law - e.g. why can't BA sub their freight if they wish?
GSS FOs - where does it say that your company can't employ DE captains? Did you have a promised command clause in your contract? (most 'promised commands' don't)
BA FOs - do you wish to help create a B-scale cargo subsidiary?
Please don't consider any of the foregoing to be adverse criticism; merely food for thought based on a few years in the biz.
I'm going to see what's on the tele
Join Date: Feb 2001
Location: A PC!
Posts: 594
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
youwererobbed
apologies- I meant LGW. However, the scheme is a touch naughty if
a) you promise it will only exist for 1 year and it is now in it's second
b) you don't tell the guys who are bidding for commands at LGW
Example: I know of a 777 FO who wanted a command and liked LGW (his house is there) and really did not want to wait 7-9 years for the left seat on his 777. So, after looking at the slots available and the seniority he bids for 737 command at LGW and Airbus command at LHR.
All looks well - as the bids close he is number 8 on the list for 24 737 commands. So, imagine his surprise when 2 days later he has dropped off the bottom of the list because of the citiexpress chaps being parachuted in.
Now, if the process had been open (i.e. BA had said that this was what they planned to do) then he could have saved his time bidding for LGW and bid for BHX/MAN where he didn't really want to go but may have had a better chance of success because of the effects of the citiexpress deal being restricted to LGW.
apologies- I meant LGW. However, the scheme is a touch naughty if
a) you promise it will only exist for 1 year and it is now in it's second
b) you don't tell the guys who are bidding for commands at LGW
Example: I know of a 777 FO who wanted a command and liked LGW (his house is there) and really did not want to wait 7-9 years for the left seat on his 777. So, after looking at the slots available and the seniority he bids for 737 command at LGW and Airbus command at LHR.
All looks well - as the bids close he is number 8 on the list for 24 737 commands. So, imagine his surprise when 2 days later he has dropped off the bottom of the list because of the citiexpress chaps being parachuted in.
Now, if the process had been open (i.e. BA had said that this was what they planned to do) then he could have saved his time bidding for LGW and bid for BHX/MAN where he didn't really want to go but may have had a better chance of success because of the effects of the citiexpress deal being restricted to LGW.
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: no idea
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CityFlyer Express
moggie,
I believe they are ex CityFlyer Express pilots you refer to, not BA CitiExpress pilots. Gawd knows why the newer company was given an almost identical name to the now defunct company which used to operate exactly the same aircraft at LGW...
One thing's for sure, the old company was a damn sight more successful than its newer almost-namesake...!
I believe they are ex CityFlyer Express pilots you refer to, not BA CitiExpress pilots. Gawd knows why the newer company was given an almost identical name to the now defunct company which used to operate exactly the same aircraft at LGW...
One thing's for sure, the old company was a damn sight more successful than its newer almost-namesake...!
Join Date: Mar 2000
Posts: 113
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Spencer are you on drugs? You half inch our jobs and then preach solidarity. Well the boots on the other foot mate. There's a load of FO's who have shafted recently out of command by direct entry kids from Crawley Councils Airbourne division. I quite fancy not having to bother with punters for a few years.
GSS
PSYCOBFH,
What did you say???? BA work, BA work, BA work......
If you guys in BA can do the work for the same cost, why aren't you doing it?????
I am sure BA management would have prefered to get a couple of 400F and give the work to you clowns, don't you think????
Maybe the cost is to high and BA could not make any money....
Well if you want to bid for a position into GSS go ahead, but GSS IS NOT BA.........
Cheers
PS: I don't work for GSS
What did you say???? BA work, BA work, BA work......
If you guys in BA can do the work for the same cost, why aren't you doing it?????
I am sure BA management would have prefered to get a couple of 400F and give the work to you clowns, don't you think????
Maybe the cost is to high and BA could not make any money....
Well if you want to bid for a position into GSS go ahead, but GSS IS NOT BA.........
Cheers
PS: I don't work for GSS
Join Date: Jul 2002
Location: London
Posts: 171
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
my, my, we are a bit sensitive! I was just pointing out they did have the livery at one time-no big deal.
If the BA guys have the right to bid for it (which they do, as you can see from the agreement in an earlier post) then they shouldn't be prevented from doing so. Like you say, things change!
If the BA guys have the right to bid for it (which they do, as you can see from the agreement in an earlier post) then they shouldn't be prevented from doing so. Like you say, things change!
I you look closely, I that 400F has an N reg. that is because it was an Atlas aircraft - hence the Atlas logo under the cockpit. Atlas used to operate the BAWC contract and painted an aircraft in the colours just as they do with their 2 400Fs operated for and on behalf of Emirates. The current GSS scheme is actually Atlas' scheme with a few mods - Atlas own the aircraft. The GSS aircaft do have a small BA logo on the forward fuselage.
Atlas ceased to operate the BAWC contract due to pressure from the CAA thanks to a campaign against flagging out from the IPA. The jobs only became British on formation of GSS due to this pressure and there was a lot of anger from the American pilots who believed their jobs were being taken away from them.
I'm not going to comment on who's jobs I think they are, but I do feel sorry for the GSS FOs who have had the carrot of a command dangled to see it whipped away. Also 411A has a good point that if the operation does get integrated, BA management will have successfuly managed to introduce a B scale. Beware!
Atlas ceased to operate the BAWC contract due to pressure from the CAA thanks to a campaign against flagging out from the IPA. The jobs only became British on formation of GSS due to this pressure and there was a lot of anger from the American pilots who believed their jobs were being taken away from them.
I'm not going to comment on who's jobs I think they are, but I do feel sorry for the GSS FOs who have had the carrot of a command dangled to see it whipped away. Also 411A has a good point that if the operation does get integrated, BA management will have successfuly managed to introduce a B scale. Beware!
<<Sorry to ask, but what/who is GSS?>>
A company, 49% owned by Atlas, to which BA outsourced its cargo work.
Congratulations to the BA pilots' reps for starting to put an end to the outsourcing of BA pilots' work. Now get to work on the Franchisees.
A company, 49% owned by Atlas, to which BA outsourced its cargo work.
Congratulations to the BA pilots' reps for starting to put an end to the outsourcing of BA pilots' work. Now get to work on the Franchisees.