BA plan could slash staff pensions by a third
 

http://www.uk-airport-news.info/heat...ws-190206c.htm

British Airways is said to have tabled plans to slash staff pensions by more than a third. It is feared that the move, aimed at plugging BA's £1.4bn pension black hole, could trigger a forth summer of strikes for the airline.

The proposal was discussed in briefings with staff and union representatives last week, The Business newspaper claims. A final decision will be put to BA's workforce next month.
The airline also mooted equally unpopular proposals in the meetings, which include making staff work longer or requiring them to pay more towards their pensions.

The whole workforce will be affected by the changes, from pilots and cabin crew to check-in staff. For their part, union representatives have said they will do 'whatever it takes' to block any reduction in payments for BA staff.

The airline is seeking to tackle a £1.4bn deficit in one of its main pension schemes, which has 34,500 members. Proposals under consideration include recalculating pension payments to reflect average salary over the length of a career rather than final salary. This could reduce pensions by 36% in some cases, and would particularly hit pilots, who start on a low salary but typically retire on around £100,000.

Balpa, the pilots' union, said it would resist any moves to cut pensions. A spokesman said: 'We will defend our position whatever it takes.' Balpa says it does not accept that changes to BA's pension scheme are inevitable.

It said: 'Pensions are your future, your family's future, and a promise from the company. BA's massive communications exercise gives the impression that the future of your pension is precarious and major changes are required. We do not accept that.'

The GMB union, which represents check-in and administrative staff, said any proposal to cut pensions by more than a third would not be acceptable. The GMB has 5000 members in the BA pension scheme.

BA insisted that no decisions have been taken. A spokesman said that possibilities such as the shift to 'career average' pensions were examples of action contemplated by other FTSE 100 companies, rather than hard and fast measures. He said: 'With some of these companies, the answers tabled hadn't been lasting solutions. We're really looking for lasting solutions.'

I think they'll have a fight on their hands. The pilots seem quite organised and ready to fight:

http://www.bacanaffordtopay.com

http://www.befairba.org

Strange how we don't hear this sort of response from BALPA when airlines other than BA slash pensions.

WHat you have to remember is that BALPA are just a group of pilots elected to represent their community. In BA, the community are prepared to defend their pension and the reps are carrying that out. The fact that other BALPA constituencies may not do so reflects more of those communities than on BALPA the organisation.

Topbunk

Sadly that is not necessarily the case. Anecdotal evidence demonstrates that the amount of support given by BALPA to the Company Councils of "other" airlines, is vastly inferior to that given to BA, on equally important issues.

That you suggest Pilots in other companies are less determined to defend their pensions is a sad indictment of your ignorance, or indeed arrogance.

The vast majority of work involved in the BA pensions campaign is done by BA pilots, not by BALPA staff. If you want a similar type of campaign all you've got to do is find a dozen of your pilots who'll give up any semblance of a normal life outside work to spend virtually every spare moment campaigning, lobbying, programming, cajoling, publishing and a whole load of other ancillary tasks. Once you've got all of those you should speak to Jim McAuslan, who is a very affable man, and ask him for the professional support you think that you need to fight your campaign The key is that it is your campaign, not BALPAs. They are there to provide the financial, legal and public relations expertise needed to run a campaign, the onus is on the pilots to organise the campaign themselves

X11

What utter rubbish!

BTW I think you'll find that BA pilots now represent only about 35-40% of BALPA members, and that the BALPA staff spend less than 35-40% of their resources on the BA pilot community, in part because of the efficiencies of scale.

As Hand Solo says, this campaign is being run predominantely by BA pilots.

Not for one minute do I believe that BALPA are prepared to offer the same support, especially financially, to other Airlines as they would do to BA. Many years ago I remember a video being produced, by BALPA, for the BA Pilots in regards to the new allowance structure. This at the time was still in the proposal stage. How much did it cost to produce & provide every pilot in BA with that? Did the cost come from the Airline's Company Council? Did it hell. It was from the BALPA budget that we ALL contribute towards. If we were all treated equal then I guess I should have received a nice glossy video when I was informed of no pay rise that year. But then again I was working for one of the charters so a piece of paper would suffice!

Can't have been cheap but they probably saved a fair bit of cash by not providing it for every pilot. This one and a few others I could name didn't get one.

[quote=BYMONEK]Not for one minute do I believe that BALPA are prepared to offer the same support, especially financially, to other Airlines as they would do to BA. :mad:

i fly with ex city flyer capts who have balpa to thank for ending up on 744 with protected capt's pay. along with their fellow cityflyer fo's they recieved free bids onto a fleet that displaced senior ba pilots/balpa members from acheiving their pref bid! whilst it is old news balpa negotiated in favour of the city flyer pilots on all fronts except seniority, and only then because they knew it would have precipitated a strike. despite rob halls assurances, rob then a 737 capt now a ba sen manager, that no ba pilot would be worse off the fact was that 737x commands and 744 fo slots were lost to ba pilots who would have achieved valid bids that year.

since this is the last time that balpa were faced with a direct clash of 2 pilot groups interests i think it would be difficult to say balpa sided with the ba groups interests!

not to mention the fact that we are the single biggest source of the money in the pot and this pot is used for the benifit of all members are u not being a tad narrow minded?

the day someone less lazy than myself starts a ba pilots assoc i'm sure your pot will get smaller and we'll get on with protecting our t&c's. then all the BA hating wannabees who are prepared to work for peanuts and at the whim of monkeys can keep on undermining the status and professional respect that their peers earned for them without us having to give a dam or give money to the organisation that represents them.

only a couple of days ago some clown was bleating how he would do 'anything' to fly a 757 for first choice!:{

since this is the last time that balpa were faced with a direct clash of 2 pilot groups interests i think it would be difficult to say balpa sided with the ba groups interests!

Yeah, right!!!!!:*
Try telling that to the BRAL/BACX/BACON pilots who were in the same position as the CityFlyer guys.
Try mentioning their pensions - a much much smaller deficit, (less than 1% I understand) of the NAPS deficit, but did we or do we or will we get any advice or assistance?
[That question was rhetorical by the way, responses by HandSolo and Twinrotor head will be predictable, these so-called colleagues like so many mainliners are only interested in themselves, and their union.]

We shall all sink or swim together on this one, and by not supporting their , oh let's get it right, "Wholly owned Company" colleagues. They will reap what they sow.:cool:

I've found BALPA to be like BA's customer service. I've seen good and bad come out, mainly good in my case, but all FC have to stick together, any division will be leapt upon by BA Mgmt. I thought Mr Hall flew 777's before he jumped onto the Operations gravy train called OPIP. That 'initative' has crashed and burned without any success or improvements except of course for certain peoples career's.

Rumour control from the ground is that they will NOT be strike action, but a 'Work - to - Rule', which could be even more disruptive than a strike given the ancient agreements for the Ramp staff. I joke not.:rolleyes:

Certainly, if some staff did work to rule they might find themselves working harder :E

Must fly....

:confused:
'Yeah, right!!!!!:*
Try telling that to the BRAL/BACX/BACON pilots who were in the same position as the CityFlyer guys.'

sorry chap, your not in the same position as the cityflyer guys.

it was BA's decision to integrate cityflyer into the mainline operation and not balpa's! once BA decided to integrate balpa did a very good job in getting the cityflyer boys a very good deal, a feeling which most of the boys i've flown with seem to hold.

your position at bral/bacx/bacon is very different. the company would appear to have no interest in bringing the regional ops into the mainline company. since ba bought your operations with the intention of running low cost regional ops, to replace the existing BA regional ops, exactly what would you expect balpa and your fellow balpa members to do about it?

i applied and was interviewed by ba and signed a contract that contained certain t&c's. i can only assume that whatever contract you signed is being honoured by your employer.

i am heading into a dispute because my t&c's look like they are about to be drastically changed. i DO NOT expect atr pilots in manchester to be supporting me, nor do i expect them to be moaning that i'm not interested in involving myself in a dispute that has nothing to do with me.

i hope that all pilot groups, in whatever company, with whatever background fight like tigers to protect their t&c's. i'll be fighting for mine and for those of my colleagues at BA.

Heavy

I don't have an axe to grind with BA. My issue is with BALPA. So please don't get all defensive and assume that we're all BA wannabes because that makes you appear very arrogant and i'm sure you're not at all! As for me being narrow minded, i'd like to think not with 20+ years and several Airlines behind me but i'm always prepared to listen and learn.;)

Not good form by the way to mention individual names on Pprune.

p.s What's wrong with wanting to fly a B757 with First Choice? Didn't we all start off prepared to sell our right arm to get into Aviation!

BYMONEK - I can buy blank DVDs for about 20p a shot, so if BALPA bought them bulk I reckon they could get them down to 2p each. A bit of video work costs barely a few hundred quid and if BALPA are paying more then I can recommend somebody who'll do the job cheaper. All in all BA pilots provide proportionally far more funds to BALPA than their memberships numbers represent so whats the big deal about them getting a DVD/newsletter/free bookmark etc etc.

Corelli - You're clearly entrenched in your viewpoint, but as has been pointed out countless times before, BACX was not the same as CFE. You were given two bases, 16 aircraft, lots of routes and direct seniority list access to BA for anyone on the RJ100 with the only concession asked being some BA pilots on the RJ. Your company council turned it down. You want to kick up a stink about your pension deficit? Then ask your company council what they are doing about. I think your days would be a lot easier if you dropped the idea that because your company is owned by BA then the BA pilots are responsible for sorting out all your woes.

[quote=BYMONEK]Heavy

I don't have an axe to grind with BA. My issue is with BALPA. So please don't get all defensive and assume that we're all BA wannabes because that makes you appear very arrogant.

bymonek,

re-read my post. did not mention ba wannabee's, my quote was ba hating wannabees. their seem to be a lot of them about. hate ba for no obvious reason but desperate to climb the slippery pole by any means possible.

as for you 'not good to mention names on pprune'. point taken but don't think i've exactly unmasked an unknown as his name was on every balpa document we recieved for several years.

i agree that a drive to suceed is required to achieve a career in aviation. my point is that as the mol's and ww's (hope that's discreet enough for u)of this world attempt to drive down t&c's, 170hr flying school graduates who are willing to do anything for a job scare me. i for one was not prepared to sell my right arm for my first job. if the raf had told me i wasn't up to it i would have tried for a sponsorship, if that failed i would have used my degree in a career i was more suited to.

if u believe that the demise of the airlines fully sponsored schemes and the reduction in manpower from the forces has caused an increase in the standard of pilot applying to the airlines then u and i are talking to very different recruiters.

if u believe that the t&c's being offered to new entrants at any airline are being offered in the hope of attracting the best pilots and not the cheapest pilots then may i humbly suggest that your being niave, even with 20yrs+.

so is it a suprise that as the airline management have worked out that jar-ops and the caa will let them put 170hr pilots in jets and those pilots seem prepared to workk for almost nothing to get experience that those of us, u included, 15-20 years down the line find the t&c's we thought we'd signed up for are now in danger?

don't get me wrong many of the folks i fly with where 170hr pilots on joining ba and are very capable and able bunch of aviators. probably why they passed a very difficult selection process. the vast majority of them would have had no chance, like me, of raising the 60k for their atpl and thus would have found jobs elsewhere.

so as i said my biggest fear is a chap with a new f atpl who's dream is to fly a 757 for a charter company and is willing to do it for almost nothing and dosen't see that 10 years down the road there may be a guy willing to do it for free.

Hand Solo
Give me a break! I'm not talking about DVD's, i'm refering to VIDEOS. Videos that were produced around 6 years ago and sent to many a Pilot's home via the Royal Mail. A video that was professionally produced and edited and sent to over 2000 BALPA members. BA BALPA members.

I'd also like to know how "BA Pilots provide proportionally more funds to BALPA than their memberships numbers represent" Do you pay more than 1%? Not only do your maths not add up but now you're implying that a BA's Pilot 1% is worth more than the 1% of a non BA pilot. Explain how that works then? If anything, it's the reverse. Due to good allowances and flight pay structure, Pilots in BA will contribute to BALPA a lower percentage of their final nett pay than most other Airlines' Pilots who's pay is predominantly based on basic with few extras.

If BA do decide to reduce your retirement benefits and I sincerely hope they don't, then I recommend you put together a far better reasoned and factual argument to fight your case than simply treating dissenters as idiots.

Hand Solo - orator extraordinaire, if one doesn't like the subject, change the facts.
 

HandSolo won't give anyone a break - he has his line in specialist dialectic and sloganeering, just like his buddy tandemrotor. Ignoring his line, my point at present relates to pensions. I and a few others asked BALPA and BA on here and directly at the time for support in opposing the closure of the BRAL scheme to new members. We pointed out that presumably owning a Company counts for something, ie BA should not count BACX as equivalent to Monarch or Emerald or whoever you like, because BACX and BA mainline were owned by the same shareholders, however you like to describe it. We also pointed out that if closure of the BRAL scheme to new members went ahead without opposition, then mainline would be next. It is obvious to all that a small outfit like BRAL had virtually no industrial clout compared to mainline, but mainline CC were determined to show how sophisticated and superior they were to the newcomers, and basically Solo and his mates and BALPA provided no assistance at all, and the scheme was closed. One of the irritating things about BA generally is that when it suits them, we are part of BA (ie dumping their wannabe Captains on us - we had no voice or choice in that, which screwed up many longer serving BRALs who were relocated because mainline FOs had pinched their seats) We are also very much BA when it comes to be overcharged by BA for services, handling etc etc, not to mention being turned into a lossmaking enterprise because of their inept management - and very much separate when it comes to any benefits for our workforce. Any GSS pilots reading this will identify exactly with what I mean - British Airways Line Pilot's Association sadly, that is what it is, and always will be about.
However, let's stick to pensions. Sad to say, we were proved right, and the BA pension scheme was also closed to new members (you will note the HUGE amount of opposition to this closure by both BALPA and Solo and his friends - yet once again a case of "I'm all right Nigel" - yes yes, I'm sure they sympathised......now, just as we forecast, their scheme, like ours, is faced with some tough choices, and because, FINALLY, their own back pocket is threatened, we get all the hot air and froth and threats of a strike. Interesting to wonder whether had they looked down from their Ivory tower [with swampy foundations] earlier, both pensions schemes might still be open to new members - but never let anyone accuse them of foresight, common sense, or anything except selfish and greedy self-interest.
Conclusion - even now, working together might just save both schemes, not to mention being a shot in the arm for the sad and sorry remnants of what was a highly profitably regional operation before BA imported their managers and techniques. I don't expect it to happen though, Solo and Co have allowed themselves to be manipulated by Willie in exactly the way Scargill was manipulated by Maggie - in this case, the public are sick to death of BA industrial action, usually wildcat and usually in the summer. Do you think they will have any sympathy for Solo and co - I doubt it.:(
Do you think the public will want to hear about pensions of a group who can be presented as earning hugely in excess of 100K pa (because that's how Willie will present it). I'm sure the rebuttals of my post will once again traipse over the justification for not allowing BRAL pilots into the seniority list, I'm sure it will once again be all our fault, with talk of what we brought to the party compared to Chippy Fryer, (what exactly are BA doing with the 2200 prime time LHR slots they got from us????; how DO those slots compare in value to a few obsolescent RJs???) but hey, let's stick to the issue. BALPA might do well to remember what happened to the Miners Union..............:yuk:

Not taking sides but 2200 slots - where do they all come from? Thats more than three days continuous or are we talking about 6 slots a day?

But I'm sure Hand Solo & co will not care about the public, they will be sorry that they are being inconvenienced, but will consider that their employer reneging on their contracts deserves action in the strongest possible terms.

I must say Harvard Business School do a wonderful job - here we all are, at each other's throats whilst ALL management groups create the worst set of terms and conditions they can for their pilot employees. This is how they are TAUGHT to engineer outcomes, particularly through the use of a myriad of sub-companies and the creation of as many anomalies and unfairnesses as possible.

I think we would ALL do well to remember this as we air our personal grievances.

I see BALPA within companies as driven by the Company Councils and the membership's support to them. How can it be any other way with secondary action, i.e. support of one contracted group by another on a different contract being against the law? Would BALPA head office deny support to a CC that balloted for a strike over pension closure? Is that what you are saying happened, Captain Correlli? Or are you saying BA contracted members didn't ballot for a strike to support you, because if you are you are talking about the legally impossible.

Meanwhile, fortunate as I am to be in BA, our employer is setting about a reduction in my overall remuneration package of circa 40% if you factor in the productivity for no pay sought in bidline "changes". I am not going to accept this, and the membership wont accept this. I really dont care what the world thinks - we all saw the Daily Mail at the time of a previous strike ballot, (remember Mr Torr@de's article anyone - lies, spin and envy all rolled into one hate-laden package?). This is between our employer and ourselves and we have every right to fight it.

Meanwhile, BA is shambolic and demoralised to boot, whilst the subsidiaries like Cpt Correlli's employer are handed a poisoned chalice of excessive overhead and lousy people management. WW would do well to sort that out before setting out on a raid on our salaries THAT DIRECTLY ENRICHES HIMSELF. We should all try and stick together, and support our CC's to the hilt. I am certain BALPA is working for ALL our benefits. Heaven help us all without it.

I suppose what I'm saying is that I (along with many many others, including ex Dan-Air employees, GSS, the list is long and distinguished) am dismayed and disgusted by the totally selfish attitude of BA mainline pilots to anyone not in their cosy little club. I am well aware that there was and is no legal obligation upon any mainline pilot to support anyone but themselves, however it has beggared belief how deliberately obstructive and deliberately unhelpful and arrogant they have been from the beginning of our (BRAL/Brymon) relationship with them.
The pension is really just the endgame. As a very newly recognised BALPA organisation, our guys, although keen, were neophytes to the game of negotiating with Mainline management and mainline pilots. At least mainline mangement, cr@p though they are and were, acknowledged they were involved with us. Not so the mainline pilots. It would have hurt no-one had BRAL/Brymon people been added to the very bottom of the BA seniority list, but mainline actually opposed the issue, and managed through some slick presentation to force BRAL cc to reject a completely unacceptable offer. The point is, as with the pensions issue, they cared not one jot ethically or personally for a Company which had just been bought, and asset stripped of nearly 2200 LHR slots per year. OK, they didn't HAVE to, but the point is, they were not interested in looking outside their own cosy little pool. I'm not going to dredge all that back up again, it's been explained by better people than me, and refuted by, er, well, Solo, Top Bunk and Tandem Rotor. Water under the bridge - my point is that the present pensions crisis was completely avoidable, because if BA CC had listened to their poorer cousins some years ago, we might not be here today. That is what is so annoying - it's bad enough being shafted by BA management, it's far far worse being shafted selfishly and deliberately by fellow (ha ha) pilots. Don't expect me to hoot in support as I pass the picket line, I'm more likely to be giving an expose to a friendly journalist about the ridiculous unjustifiable BA salaries, and explaining why they should not expect any help or support any more than they handed out.
:eek:

WW has a head start on the path to conquer - he has already divided.

No.....BALPA has divided!

By not leading!

All this "CC does all the work" and "BALPA is only as good as it's membership" is such total, complete and utter cop-out bull***t. BALPA have been spouting that drivel for as long as I've known them! It's an excuse to take the money and do nothing in return, the sad thing being that people keep subscribing despite knowing that!

......unless you're in BA.

:*

Hear hear, Captain Correlli; BACC/BALPAs disgusting, pompous conduct has created immense ill feeling towards BA pilots amongst BACon and GSS pilots. It doesn't manifest itself on an individual basis, but don't be surprised if they laugh their bloody heads off at every misfortune of BA pilots.

I'm not convinced BARP members will offer substantive support either when push comes to shove - Of course they say they will when a final salary Captain asks them their opinion on the flight deck, but reality is likely to be somewhat different. So mainline pilots have been divided too when FS pilots turned the other way and the B scale was created - You could have fought this together.

So all round, BALPA and its BA membership has done a pretty good job of alienating quite a lot of people.

This was so predictable............... BA pilots only have themselves to blame, If you had stood togther in the past and said no to shutting the pension to new entrants then you may have had a united pilot force, by raping other airlines workforces instead of insisting on a united force ie bringing them into the fold, you have no outside support, in fact i do think the knives will be out for you from other airlines because of your history of bully boy behaviour.

United you stood a chance....... divided you will fall........ so sad to see this as our once proud national airline :-(

And before you all assume i have an axe to grind , i dont, i do not work for BA or any of the raped airlines. also i have never ever applied to BA and been turned down! Just an outsiders observation.

There is a bright side to the industry loosing its final salary pensions, although a defined contribution scheme cannot predict to provide for the future as well as a defined benefit scheme, it does take away the golden handcuffs that final salary schemes put on their members. In the long term future this should allow a much greater freedom for the workforce to move from job to job and take their "pot" with them thus putting pressure on the airlines to provide better pay to attract experienced pilots.

Which merely serves to confirm that you really don't know what you are talking about and should refrain from spouting such rubbish.

So tell me, what proportion of BA pilots do you think are new entrants and how much support do you think BA pilots need from other airlines for a strike? I'm guessing you work for KLM in which case you will be an expert on 'raping' other airlines such as AirUK!

Hand Solo........ i have read over the past few years loads of tripe and drivel posted by yourself, mainly self centered and elitist. If i worked for KLM i would agree with you, but i dont...... and yes they are just if not more guilty than the BA pilots of over rating their importance in the world and stealing other airlines (airuk is a very good example) jobs etc and giving nothing. BUT they have a big shock coming to them in the future when Air France rapes them!! you reap what you plant! :)

by the way i am ex airuk, klmuk, so do have an axe to grind there, however i have monitored the BA . GSS, BAconnect history with interest and have been deeply saddened to watch my own countrymen do unto them as KLM did to airuk.

To answer your question about new entrants, about 300 at a guess but continually growing in number, even if you win any action that you take now your position will be weaker and weaker as the years go on, so when the next attack on your pensions happens your support will be less and less. The best line of defence you have now i guess is to come to an arrangement with the company to secure your pensions that includes the new entrants thus protecting your future, perhaps even inviting the BA connect pilots to join as well in a common scheme? prob too late for that kind of stance but it would give you long term security when or if it comes to future attacks.

Stealing others jobs and giving nothing huh? GSS exists solely solely to serve BA. They have no other customers. It is only because of the efforts of BALPA that the contract is flown by European pilots on European registered aircraft instead of the N reg Atlas aircraft that used to do it.

BACX had no jobs 'stolen' from them. The only BACX aircraft with BA pilots on them are the RJ100s, which were owned by BA at the time of the handover and were used to replace 737s/A319s at BA bases flown by BA pilots on BA routes. Had BACX not received those aircraft from BA then BACX would have been looking at many more displaced or even redundant pilots.

Do at least try to get your facts right. I have read over the years lots of tripe and drivel posted by people such as yourself who see conspiracy theories everywhere and imagine the big bad flag carrier Goliaths are out to crush poor little David in the small airline. Frankly its as tiresome as it is wrong. Now this is a pension thread so let me point out some information to you. Firstly, less than 10% of the pilot workforce in BA are in the new pension scheme and they are all FOs. We don't expect them to strike in support of us and we won't ask them to (take note Joe le Taxi). I'd be delighted if we could bring them all into NAPS, but I live in the real world, not cloud cuckoo land and I know that that particular battle with BA is unwinnable. The BARPs pilots at least had the opportunity to choose whether to join BA or not. Over 80% of the pilot workforce are in the threatened NAPS scheme. The remainder are in APS and a proportion of them support the NAPS campaign. If that is your opinion of a divided workforce then you should be working for BA management. Secondly we need no support from any other airline or pilot workforce to bring BA to a grinding halt. None whatsoever. Take note Captain Corelli. Feel free not to hoot in support as you pass the picket line and I'll feel free show equal disinterest when WW winds up BACon in two years. Perhaps you'll find a more sympathetic response from some of your former BACX colleagues who seem to overcome the manifest hatred for BA pilots you believe you all share to join the company through the current recruitment process.

Dear solo.
i edited my post before i saw your reply so i take it you did not see my thoughts on the future.
As for "going through the selection procedure" that is elitist rubbish, perhaps the BACX pilots should have insisted that the BA secondees should have gone through their selection process before being allowed to fly the aircraft on their AOC? or is that beneath you? You cannot dismiss the fact that if when BA had taken over BRAL and you had welcomed their pilots into your fold then life would be alot better for all now, it would not have affected your career one bit but you would have been one united force to fight for a future.
I agree the GSS contract was a direct attack on BA terms and conditions, they were flying your routes with your cargo' a very dangerous situation to be allowed to continue. However if you had insisted that all the pilots be bought into BA on BA terms and conditions then again you would be united and stronger.
The managment are laughing all the way to the bank here until you change your attitude.

By the way mr solo you were very quick to point the finger at KLM over the airuk fiasco but cant see the same thing happening in your own back yard.

I thought they voted not to join us, or was that BACX?

Human Factor

Yes you are right they did vote not to join as only a select few, ie the pilots flying the RJ (146) were invited, they took a stance that it should be for all or nothing , a united stance that i do admire even if it did cost a few.

A few facts -

It was the IPA, not BALPA that put their foot down over Americans flying BA freight. However, BALPA and the BA pilots are now seemingly quite content to let BA extend the wet lease of the Atlas 747 freighter for the third time running with no punitave actions on them; only on the European pilots at GSS, (see the CAAs airline licensing notices - BA's Atlas application in the system right now as it happens). There would be more sympathy if the very first contract with GSS had laid out that 2/3 of commands would be taken by secondees, but the disgraceful imposition of this after over 50 first officers had been recruited materially affected people to the tune of taking about £1000 per month out of their pockets and it totally changed the career progression structure they had joined for. This affects people; its not just a question of principles. Whats more, absolutely nothing was accorded to GSS pilots as recompense.

I think you are mistaken if you believe the only support you need is that of people who are willing to join you on a strike - The PR impact of thousands of UK pilots who just think, "**** 'em" may be more significant than you think.

Joe, bluepilot, acbus1, may I totally agree with what you have said, particularly with your summary of Solo's replies. One does not need to be a rocket scientist to note how he never responds to the basic human issues, ie the ones relating to normal human ethical and principled behaviour. He won't explain why BA pilots can come and go and pick seats in their subsidiaries, without any equivalence for the subsidiary pilots. As someone mentioned, he won't comment on the rights and wrongs of BA cadets superceding BRAL pilots on BRAL aircraft - NOT THE RJ - and doing so whilst BRAL were having their scheme closed to new members so that the displaced guys missed the opportunity of a DB scheme. Everyone was told this applied to the BA cadets as well, but then 18 months later, apparently there had been a "mistake" and it turned out that the cadets had been wrongly (Ha) entered into the BA scheme anyway. Meanwhile a dozen or so BRAL guys missed their chance of the BRAL scheme - mind you, maybe they're better off at that! Solo doesn't care to comment on the business of Company asset stripping to benefit himself and his colleagues. In short, he is a fascist - "God is on the side of the big battalions" - "All power comes out of the barrel of a gun" - "How many divisions has the pope" etc and clearly on the side of similar statements which imply that might is right and has no responsibilities. He should remember how much sympathy that won for the authors of those statements when it all went wrong.

Yes yes, I know this is a pensions thread, but as I originally pointed out, it's also about the BRAL BACX pension and the history of the two companys. If Solo really believes that BRAL guys say what they REALLY think to mainline guys, any more than BARP FOs do to their skippers, he shows the same loose grip on reality as his inherent contradiction pointed out by bluepilot - ie criticise KLM, but justify the same actions from BA.

This will not end to anyone's profit but Willie's, and Solo and his ilk will be directly responsible for the total lack of sympathy when their effective T and C cut happens; they are also in large part responsible for the current situation by being more interested in shafting those who would be their friends than by looking ahead and listening to those who saw it all coming before they did!

It's very interesting to wonder what Solo's action might have been had he been faced with the stitch up offer allowing just a few onto the seniority list - I would wager that his position would neither have been ethically driven nor principled, unlike the BRAL personnel. BA have now got a boss even less principled than the pilot workforce, what goes around......comes around.:D
As for showing any disinterest when WW winds up BACON, (yes, highly probably given the huge overheads and inept management he foists on us) - well let's face it, to show any less interest or support than you have displayed so far would be impossible, so I doubt we'll notice the difference!
By the way, it's not a hatred of or for BA pilots, it's disbelief and disgust at the blatant ongoing ignorant self interest. I doubt you would recognise an ethic or a principle if one bit you on the @rse - and before you accuse me of theory, these principles and ethics affect peoples' LIVES, their careers, their families - and all Solo can do is prate blindly about BALPA, "our" aeroplanes, "our" work - pity BRAL didn't take the same view of "their" slots!!!

Nah Correlli, I just dont buy it - you hate us BECAUSE we are in BA. You hate us because we HAVE a FSS. At least we do now! You hate us because, like it or not, you did not join mainline BA.

I saw BA take on a "lets buy everything we can get our hands on policy" at great cost to US the employees - where did the company's historic debt level come from? BA bought, at great expense, cr@p. Deutche BA, Air Liberty, etc etc. It also took over swathes of the UK domestic market it did not operate itself and in doing so took once proud efficient companies and wrecked them with overhead adduced to them from BA's total cost base, and lousy management that destroyed efficiency and morale.

But I as a BA pilot employee who signed a BA contract did not do that. I signed a contract with a FSS deal AND I WILL DEFEND IT, WE ALL WILL, and no, ultimately I dont care what the heck you do or dont think about us. Get this BA - the airline will CEASE TO EXIST if BA close the FSS. The airline will cease to function if they rip-up BIDLINE. That was the contract I signed and by Lord, we are keeping it.

Correlli, if you think you are going to expunge your hatred of us by taking over our jobs - FORGET IT! It WILL NOT HAPPEN, not in your dreams or anyone's reality. Neither the insurers nor the trainers will let it happen.

As to the rest - this industry is just so much cr@p. Wannabe's, dont join. You'll get more respect owning your own trucking firm. BA treats everyone with contempt, and leads us to the point where the sorry thread we see here is played out. I am sick to be a part of it, but that doesn't get rid of my disbelief - hey, guess what Correlli, I hate yer back - all you whining snipers on the fringe. Fight your own damn battle and we'll fight ours. Organise properly within your company and fight it through the CC - surprise yourself with what you may achieve. I dont give a flying you know what what you think of us - this industry has become so much cr@p and your anger is but one more part of the whole sad dung heap. I'm angry too - a career devoted to the farce that BA has become led by a shameless profiteer who stands to make millions from the loss of our pensions - I'll see BA in the dust before that happens, and I am not alone. Bring on the summer of the destruction of the national airline - that will put a smile on your sad face, wont it Correlli. Just you carry on chasing your tail into the dust - or you could quit whining and plan a way out. Why do I think that that is so unlikely? Meanwhile, stop blaming BALPA and BA pilots for actions that BA management took that the average line pilot in BA had no part in.

ShortFinalFred - very well said my man! Isn't it funny how we never get this sort of nonsense from the guys at Virgin, bmi, Britannia, Easyjet.

Corelli - I'll discuss BA cadets superceding BRAL pilots on BRAL aircraft. Were, or were not, BRAL short of pilots. Do BRAL have less pilots now than they did when the cadets started? Which do you think would be the better option for BRAL: put ex-BA cadets on BRAL aircraft to meet the shortfall knowing they can be packed off to BA without compensation, or hiring experienced pilots to fill the gap then laying them off with redundancy packages when the company contracted?

Now on the subject of the BARPS FOs, I don't know what they say to their Captains but they are quite willing to say on the BA BALPA forum, without the protection of anonymity, that they will not be striking to support NAPS. Their position is fully understood. If you think we are in for some sort of a surprise from the guys then you are the one who is sadly mistaken. I say again, we do not require or expect the support of the BARPS pilots. I'd also suggest you refrain from associating your views with those of the former BACX pilots who've recently joined BA. Somehow I doubt they'd have joined the company if they shared your vehement hatred of BA pilots.

Sympathy? Well you know where to find that in the dictionary. You clearly believe that somehow the support of BACX pilots is necessary for BA pilots to succeed. It isn't.

What would I have done had I been faced with the position of just a few being permitted access to the seniority list? First thing I would have done would have been to take a good long look at my own negotiating position. Was I coming to the table with absolutely nothing to offer? Did I stand to gain new bases, new aircraft, a career lifeline for those who otherwise would be collecting their P45s? Would my company council be making an arse of itself by gaining all these tangible benefits yet adopting a negotiation strategy of refusing to negotiate unless even more was offered? For all the personal loyalty you may have had to your reps, they lost you an awful lot with their poor understanding of the business reality and their even worse negotiating tactics, which were described to me by a member of the BA negotiating team as saying "Give me what I want or I'll shoot myself"! With that sort of approach is it any wonder your management repeatedly walk over you?

By the way, you omitted to include the usual retort that BRAL was a successful, profitable company before BA started to interfere (conveniently forgetting to mention that Easyjet et al didn't exist last time BRAL made any money).

Quod Erat Demonstrandum
 

I think that I may rest my case. As I mentioned earlier, Solo doesn't let the facts get in the way of a good rant.

1. Easyjet existed for the last three years (and before in fact) of Manx BRAL. I only mention the last three because they were the three that we made increasing record profits year on year. Prior to those three, we just made profits - none of which were somehow achievable on the same routes, with the same aircraft and crews after being saddled with BA ownership - hmmm, funny old thing, but nonetheless, let's just concentrate on the usual misinformation from Mr Solo.

2. Your quote - "Corelli - I'll discuss BA cadets superceding BRAL pilots on BRAL aircraft. Were, or were not, BRAL short of pilots. Do BRAL have less pilots now than they did when the cadets started? Which do you think would be the better option for BRAL: put ex-BA cadets on BRAL aircraft to meet the shortfall knowing they can be packed off to BA without compensation, or hiring experienced pilots to fill the gap then laying them off with redundancy packages when the company contracted?" As ever, (you clearly went to a good secondary modern) you comment on the fact rather than debate it, which I rather feel proves my point.

3. Your quote "Sympathy? Well you know where to find that in the dictionary. You clearly believe that somehow the support of BACX pilots is necessary for BA pilots to succeed. It isn't." Again, may I recommend you reread my post - do you actually understand the meaning of the word CONTEXT" ??????

4. Your quote "What would I have done had I been faced with the position of just a few being permitted access to the seniority list? First thing I would have done would have been to take a good long look at my own negotiating position. Was I coming to the table with absolutely nothing to offer? Did I stand to gain new bases, new aircraft, a career lifeline for those who otherwise would be collecting their P45s? Would my company council be making an arse of itself by gaining all these tangible benefits yet adopting a negotiation strategy of refusing to negotiate unless even more was offered? For all the personal loyalty you may have had to your reps, they lost you an awful lot with their poor understanding of the business reality and their even worse negotiating tactics, which were described to me by a member of the BA negotiating team as saying "Give me what I want or I'll shoot myself"! With that sort of approach is it any wonder your management repeatedly walk over you?" I was there and involved Mr Solo, you were not. I know exactly what happened thank you, and your version is skewed, biased, and the normal misinformation that can be relied upon from BA, be it line pilots, BALPA or management (that's always assuming that the two are actually different - thank you Rob!!).

4. Sympathy eh? If you reread my post (again!) you will find that at no point did I infer that somehow the support of BACX pilots is necessary for BA pilots to succeed. It isn't. What I suggested was that working together made for a stronger approach than working apart - however you vocalise very explicitly the 'broad church' that BA line pilots feel themselves part of. I'm sure that will be noted by the rest of the industry. I must say you seem to feel that self-justification takes precedence over logical debate - is that part of the BA cloning process?

5. At no point, anywhere, did I suggest my views were matched or expressed by former BACX pilots now in mainline. I do know what they have said to me personally regarding standards (lol) and attitudes, (greater lol). However, since you seem to inhabit cloud cuckoo land, I suppose you believe that like the BARP guys, they all say exactly what you want to hear all the time.

What else - oh yes, still no mention of those slots.......funny old thing eh!

1. So tell me Corelli. Given the paradigm shift in the British air travel market do you really believe that BRAL would be operating today as an effective, profitable rival to Easyjet if BA had left them alone? I think you'd have gone the way of Maersk/Duo.

2. Now you're getting into semantics. To my mind the cadet placement was a winning situation both for the cadets (who were not BA employees) and BACX. So why don't you answer my questions? Would you have preferred BACX to hire experienced pilots then make them redundant? If not, what's your beef?

3. I understand the meaning of the word context. I simply fail to see why you think that your sympathy is desired, needed or remotely relevant to this thread. BA doesn't give a stuff about sympathy from other groups and even if they had been minded to, BACX pilots would be unable to offer any support in terms of industrial action to striking BA pilots.

4. My information came from a trusted and reliable source, engaged in the negotiations between BACC and BA. You were not party to those. If my information is incorrect then tell me what BACX were bringing to the table, because it still looks like nothing to me. I await your response to this one with baited breath.

4. (Again) Working together, as you put it, is rather difficult to achieve when BACX has at least two pension schemes and BA has three. Any action to defend NAPS has to be taken by NAPS members alone. There is minimal scope for overlap when it comes to defending management attacks on specific schemes. All that can be done is raise awareness on a national scale of what is taking place in other companies and how the attacks have been dealt with. This months BALPA Log has a summary of that on page 4.

5. Well I can tell you the disdain of your ex-BACX colleagues towards the standards in mainline are matched by the disdain of the mainline pilots towards the general standard of BACX ops on the RJ, so make of that what you will. I know times were hard in BACX but we don't have thought police in BA yet. If the ex-BACX guys want to slag BA off over a beer they are more than welcome to. Most of them simply seem content to have more money and a stable rostering system. Of course they could simply be harbouring a fanatical hatred of all things BA which they keep concealed beneath a facade of joviality, but I think that unlikely. I've encountered some downright unpleasant attitudes amongst BACX pilots in my time too, do you think I should tar you all with the same brush in that respect?

LHR slots? Before my time at LHR so I'm no expert on that. But perhaps it would make you happier if BA paid you an equivalent sum to that which Virgin paid for LHR slots. That should cover BACX losses for a couple more years. Naturally the owners of BRAL gave away the LHR slots for a pittance and didn't extract payment for the additional value they gave to BRAL from BA. Daft, weren't they.

I think the term is "bated" breath old chap.....though the general level of your 'factoids' is somewhat intellectually equivalent to your spelling.

1. Irrelevant - you were the one who brought up the Easyjet query - don't try and move the goalposts just because you were caught out again. After all, I believe even BA made more profit back then!

2. As we both know, the cadets WERE and ARE BA employees - who on earth do you think believes such blatant cr@p???

3. Semantics - moi??? Your reply demonstrates you cannot contextualise at all!

4. I was actually on the CC at the time, so quite possibly I may know firstly what I am talking about, and secondly that you don't!

4 - again. Irrelevant - I was referring to general support, and back before there was such a high level (finally) of employee awareness, as I have said several times.

5. No, you don't have thought police, you don't need them, lol, you've got FCOs!! Seems to me you have already 'tarred' anyone who is either not mainline or who disagrees with you anyway!

6. PRESS ANNOUNCEMENT - GLOBAL SHOCK HORROR - IT APPEARS THERE ACTUALLY IS SOMETHING ON WHICH HAND SOLO IS NOT AN EXPERT - GOVERNMENT RESIGNS, UN CALLED IN, BA BOARD OFFERS 25% PAY RISE, SOLO OFFERED PROMOTION TO CABIN CREW.......:}

Spelling aside, allow me to correct some of your 'factoids'

1. Hardly caught out. Easy were small, Ryanair were hardly players, GO weren't in existence, Maersk were doing rather well. Few of the ex-Brymon drivers I've met believe their company would be in existence today as a standalone entity. BRAL would be the same. ATPs and 145s in a 737 dominated regional market? Pull the other one.

2. Sadly old bean you are wrong.

3. Semantics again.

4. I didn't dispute you were on the CC. I merely pointed out you were only party to a small part of the overall negotiations. My information came from parties involved in all the negotiations. Perhaps that explains what was considered a rather bizarre attempt to veto BA pilots flying the RJ when that had already been negotiated between the BACC and BA as part of the price BA paid for transferring the aircraft out of mainline.

5.Plenty of shades of grey in FCOs, you just need to know where to look. Frankly I've shared too many pints with BACX crews in GLA and at home base to tar them all with the same brush, but I've seen enough to know that you've got your weirdos too.

6. You asked, I responded. My humble apologies for being unable to match your omniscience. Perhaps you learned that at CFS.