Have BA and BALPA already agreed on EU 757 Pilots?
 

Hi
A very strong rumour (ok from 1 person) circulating is that British Airways and Balpa have already agreed on the crewing of the EU based 757 Open Skies flights to the US. As far as I knew, things hadn't progressed that far yet. My source informs me that BA and Balpa have 'agreed' to use non mainline flight crew, and some members of Balpa are trying to convince the members that BA pilots are the most costly and least efficient in Europe!!
I hope it's not true but sounds very worrying that there seems to be a lot of talk from within Balpa about how costly we are. Perhaps by trying this 'spin', when the company does announce that the 757's will be crewed by non mainline pilots, the union will say ' hey guys, what do you expect, we just cost too much'
Perhaps i'm paranoid:rolleyes:

Bloody right we do.:ok:

Compared to other airlines, we get lots of money and lots of time off. If this wasn't the case then I'd work for someone else.

mainline crew will operate the new routes....keeps it simple,easy to integrate and substitute when necessary.crewing costs not an issue as loads of money to be made from the open skies so long as we get in quickly.any delay due to crewing of pilots or cabin crew would be a disaster.easy to integrate..i.e.....LHR/JFK/FRA/EWR/LHR...lets start raking in the $$$$$ sss asap

It makes sense to use local crews - eliminating hotels and positioning.

Just set it up as Manchester used to be, and ensure that no London routes are outsourced. Not an issue.

How can this at all be an issue when living and working from a lower-cost city than London logically means a lower salary?!

So logically if you live in Birmingham and work out of LHR then you should earn less money than if you live in London and work out of LHR. Hmmmm.:hmm:

Live where you choose - Birmingham and Manchester bases worked fine.

Not swallowing any of that. I hope BALPA will fight very hard indeed to set up bases with mainline crews. That's what they're paid for.

I think BALPA's point about BA pilots being at the top of the benchmark is more to do with encouraging us to support the union and recognise that it is BALPA that has achieved that benchmark. We should be positive about it.

After all, we are not well paid because BA have said "lets pay our pilots a bloody good wage because they deserve it", they would however say "lets start a second airline and undermine the bloody good wage of existing pilots." BALPA are currently fighting off attacks from all angles and need the support of every pilot. If we can't see the wood from the trees there is a tendancy to blame BALPA rather than BA.

I think BALPA are trying to address the culture of "moaning Nigel", and change it into "winning Nigel". Because if you don't recognise you've got something worth fighting for, and an effective union, you're not going to fight for it.

Air Lingus pilots have got the back bone to stand up for themselves, see Aldergrove strike 21/22nd August. They know they're at the top of the benchmark, they support their union, they saw off WW long ago and they will win. :D

I hope so as well XRJ, but it seems the company will want to source it with non mainline pilots because it will be cheaper, according to them. So at some point it will be a fight between Balpa and BA over who should crew these flights. I think it's already been decided, but if it hasn't then it will be interesting to see how Balpa play their hand.

BA pilots are not the top of the tree, yet Balpa seem to be preaching that we are. Air France and Iberia have better pay/conditions to name but 2 airlines. It's nothing about supporting Balpa, but more to do with something brewing between BA and Balpa.

Let's wait and see to see Balpa's direction with the first test, the work coverage talks

Are you sure about those Air France/Iberia conditions? Air France perhaps, but that is a partially state owned and state protected airline. The IB guys I've spoken to don't score themselves quite as highly as you do. I'm not really buying the BALPA submission line, particularly as one of the vice-chairmen is regularly hinting that they might need to call on members support over this issue in the near future. I suspect whoever is spreading the rumour of capitulation is closely associated with the dark side and indulging in some deliberate rumour-mongering.

Air France has been a private company for some time now.

Have the French government sold their 19% stake in the merged business?

Yes I am. The Iberia pilots that you met, did they disclose any information about hours flown/year, pension, benifits etc. Both mainline Air France and Iberia pilots have a better package than ourselves. Some Balpa reps seem to think this is not the case, however suprise suprise their figures have not been made public to the members:= Why is this I ask? They seem to harp on about it.

I don't know if it is Hand Solo, but that is not the point I am trying to make.
My point is that we are being fed 'spin' by being told we are the best paid. Where are the numbers?? Make them public to the members please if that is what you believe, and compare like with like.

The Iberia pilot I spoke to was an A340 pilot flying similar hours (at the time) but making less money than an equivalent BA pilot would be. I am afraid it is up to you Angryfool to prove your information is correct. There are enough reps in the BACC to sound the alarm if BALPAs benchmarking figures were being deliberately doctored. If you have hard evidence to prove that other airlines are doing better than us then show us so we have something to aim towards. If you have the numbers then make them public and blow BALPA out of the water for us.

If BA does start to base permanantly base crews at european bases they will encounter the same problems as Easyjet (and others) concerning local employment laws and taxation rules.
As always nothing is as straight forward as it initialy looks.

I'd rather imagine the BA would prefer to set the operation up with New York based pilots rather than European bases. Either way, hotel accommodation will be required somewhere.

It is the resolve of BA pilots and BALPA to ensure that the pilots are actually existing BA pilots and to find a way with BA of making the costing work.

AngryFool, are you a BALPA member? If so, go on the BALPA forum and ask directly the question. I'm sure the reps would be more than willing to answer your question directly. If you're not, then you you have no right to criticise BALPA or even be asking the question. I don't think spreading rumours like this in public is helpful to BA pilots, or BALPA who I'm sure are doing their upmost to address this issue. It just undermines their position. I know this is a rumour network but there are over 3000 people's careers which could be affected by this issue and I think you should consider this more before posting unfounded rumours on a public forum. Rant over!! :)

Once again it seems to be something that is not thought out fully. Indeed there is business to be gained from this operation but many others are already doing it and doing it well. For BA to set up yet again another offshot may well prove to be a failure. At BA we presently have more than a few serious problems that need to be rectified without been diverted on another scheme.

Propellerhead, I am indeed a Balpa member, and I think you will find the question has been asked directly and indirectly. Are the Reps answering the question? Has any Rep posted the other EU airlines pay scales even though they have been asked to provide evidence for their comments? Well as far as I know the answer to the latter question is NO, and the reason, well it's too confidential to be posted on the forum. Give me a break! If a Rep comes out with a comment like, oh BA pilots are the best paid etc, then show the research to the BALPA members and don't hide behind the usual you people don't understand or it's confidential information.

The basis for this rumour is a BA manager, and yes, he might be lying and stirring it up, then maybe perhaps not. But it's strange how several BA managers have now said this, and around the same time, Balpa start talking about how costly we are. Why do Balpa even need to mention this? I always thought that it was managements job to make us think how fortunate we are, not my own Union!

If and when this happens, and BA mainline pilots are used, then I will stand corrected and be very:O


I hope so BigBurtha


That would be most management decisions in BA then. Has not stoped them before and will not do again.

Angryfool,
Even if what you say is true,I doubt very much the members will strike if balloted. It will not be an issue balpa will war over with the company and even if they wanted to,will not have the backing of the majority of it's members.

I believe BA have decided how they will crew the operation but do not go along with your assertion that balpa have agreed or indeed know. I think you will find that when the time comes they will decide what happens and have no need to negotiate with balpa. To negotiate would imply that balpa have some influence on key financial decisions the company makes. :ooh:

Perhaps you should give us a break? The reps have done the benchmarking but say it's too sensitive to be posted on the forum. Why not approach them personally, they may be happy to divulge the information. You are suggesting we don't trust the reps, who have been talking about collecting benchmarking information for years, simply because they don't publish it. On the other hand we are expected to trust you that other airlines earn more than us simply on a hunch. Who lacks credibility here?

I've read the BALPA forum thread on this, so I know who the manager is and I'll have a pretty good guess at who you are. For your benefit I will explain some truths about BA. Firstly, everyone joins full of bravado and militancy and belief in what a union can achieve. Eventually you work out that the reality is somewhat different as the strength of the union is the resolve of it's members, so the quicker you accept that reality the better. Secondly, the manager in question is not going to be a manager for very long, and people who know his history remain mystified how he has remained in the middle echelons for so long. He is not party to the sort of information that could substantiate such comments. Thirdly, only 2 managers in Flight Ops are party to any information pertaining to company strategy, and they are not usually seen at SEP. Wanna know why the busses are rubbish? You may get an answer to that at SEP. Wanna know pension, pay or crewing information? Forget it. All you'll get is idle speculation. I have seen rumour and speculation flatly denied by management at SEP only to see it confirmed the following week when the big boys have got their heads together. The big boys don't go to SEP. A bit of cynicism will do you a lot of good in BA, but you must be cynical of the right people.

You reckon? The only significant expansion we're likely to see for years taking by direct entry Captains? A challenge to the whole concept of seniority within BA? A direct competitor to Fortress Heathrow and the long haul crews? makes you wonder what they would strike over.

Aaaah, you must be management! BA always believe that they can make their decisions in isolation without the need to take the employees with them. They are invariably wrong as history shows.

They have been approached by several people directly, and asked to provide the information. No answers to the question though. Perhaps they're really busy :rolleyes:

Carnage, as I have not posted my information, fair enough you do not have to trust me, based simply on what you believe to be a hunch. Perhaps if you read the Balpa forum you will find that there are other people who have already posted, with information on 1 EU airline which has a better package. It's really strange but no one has refuted this information:eek:


I'm sure there are more than a few flight ops managers within BA, unfortunately it's not the same one otherwise I would have taken his comments with a pinch of salt; and whoever you may think I am is irrelevant, anyway I can assure you i'm not him:suspect:
Unless you have more than one suspect, in which case :O

That's very strange, because i'm sure i've seen LCG there before;)


Carnage, you seem to disagree with most of my post, if not all. Let's wait for the work coverage ballot to be sent. This will be the litmus test on numerous issues and let us see your reaction then.

Could you explain why you knowingly gave this thread a false title?

Rainboe - exactly! As I mentioned earlier, if BA had their way, they would probably not use EU pilots but US pilots.

Starting routes to different EU cities all served from JFK or EWR, why would you choose EU pilots with multi base inefficiencies? Choosing JFK/EWR based pilots would be much more robust, and it is only a question of providing hotac in BRU/CDG/FRA vs NYC!

BALPA's task is to try to find a way of retaining these jobs for BA pilots operating rotations ex LHR.

Rainboe

I've corrected the title based on the premise that this is a 'rumour' and not 'fact'

I think with the whole thing simmering away (and definitely NOT on the back burner!), the title alone is like tossing a brick into the cooking pot. I think it creates more problems than it solves!
Rather than having a public row here (and you'll probably find half the respondents are simmers/airliners.net hobbyists pretending to be pilots, or just those hordes of bitter wannebees who like getting involved in this sort of thing), it may well be better to leave it to BALPA to negotiate quietly. It has happened before where the reps do not want public comment whilst an agreement is thrashed out. It takes faith, but it's a reasonable supposition that the reps know the dangers involved and the wants and concerns of the members. I have a strong suspicion that the effect of publicity like this could actually be adverse whilst negotiations are taking place. We fully support this work (of European companies) going to 'our' people, just as US companies can employ their own nationals on the same thing as in Maxjet, Eon etc. The reps don't need this sort of pressure- they know.

Carnage Matey!
If you think that the company will accomodate balpa on a major decision like this if they conclude it is financially prudent to use non-mainline pilots then you will be in for a bit of a suprise.

TopBunk
i'm with you on the US based pilots rather than EU

Top Bunk. There is nothing to prevent BA from having a pilot base in the US at JFK or anywhere else for that matter.Other international airlines do this already.Most pilots on this side of the pond believe if it's XYZ airlines painted on the A/C XYZ airlines pilots should fly the A/C.:)

Barry - it was financially prudent to slash NAPS, impose a career average final salary pension scheme (as supported by numerous staff groups) and ride roughshod over BALPAs objections. The savings BA could have made through that are a couple of orders of magnitude greater than any profits they could make from a US-EU operation, yet strangely enough they thought it important to keep the pilots onboard. I wonder why.

Incidentally are you actually a BA pilot Barry or just a spotter?

What is to stop BA operating this EU - US airline as a franchise, so someone else runs it and picks up the costs and BA put their colours on the aircraft?

Well I would have thought BA wants the money. Franchises have traditionaly been on marginal routes which mainline wouldnt serve. I suspect these routes will be anything but marginal.

I think the problems of a JFK base are understated. Either they need a US AOC to fly N reg a/c which means max 25% UK owned. Or they need to base crews flying EU reg aircraft which would require green cards all round or US pilots with EU licences. Either way its a tough call to sort that out for may.

carnage,
Without highlighting a separate issue the lump sum the company will put into the pensions is based on what they can afford to and are happy to. The agreement reached between balpa and the company was based on a lot of negotiations and research as well. It's a fine balance from both sides, the stakes high, if an agreement was not made/recommended by balpa then a high probability of a strike.
The issues we are talking about are very different. The stakes for pilots are not anywhere near the same as issues concerning pensions. This is not just about savings the company can make from non mainline pilots. It's far deeper:oh:

I think you'll find the view on the line is that the stakes on this issue are almost as high as for the pensions issue. This is a wholesale outsourcing of BA flying to a different pilot body, a body which could just as easily be flying work out of LHR a week after it's set up. This isn't covered by the existing scope agreement but I've yet to meet anyone who didn't see this as the thin end of a very fat wedge that BA would try to use hammer down our terms, conditions and career opportunities. I know BALPA see it as such soon, and if BA management are thinking, like you, that this is a storm in a teacup and the pilots aren't really that bothered then they have an unpleasant surprise coming their way. They want this airline running by May, they want T5 open in March and they still have round 2 of the pilots pay negotiations in February 08. If they want a fight then there's plenty of support around for one.

Carnage,
Outsourcing of BA flying to a different body. Have you not ever looked at what's happened in the past,it tends to give us a good reality check of what perhaps may and/or will happen in the future. BA routes flown by BMED:eek: What happened there and guess what,I hear lots and lots of moans on line about that. That is it though,they are just moans.
I didn't say pilots were not bothered at all,they are. I'm saying BA pilots to strike over something that has already happened in the past (BA routes flown by non-mainline crew) will not happen.

Oh dear

Apparently according to Balpa we are not the best paid anymore:(
Yes, it's true, only the 3rd best in terms of cash but we're top in relation to overall package:confused: Honest it's true

Ah dear, the spin the spin. I believe 1997 was a significant year.

I'd rather be 3rd overall in cash but have the best overall package. No point earning a load of cash if it goes straight into paying for a private pension or healthcare. Money isn't everything, otherwise people wouldn't be so hacked off with force draft. "Another weekend away from the family? Why thank you for this opportunity to earn more cash!"

Agree with you, money isn't the most important.

I'm very suprised:eek: to now know from my own union that the information they provided first hand, that we were the best paid, is actually very misleading, some people would actually say a lie. It could however be that their research was not as thorough as they had imagined and they were corrected by a few individuals who know people that work for other EU based airlines;)

I don't really care whether we are 1st or 5th. Job satisfaction, quality of life and feeling valued are top of my list. What I do care about is being lied to or mislead. It doesn't matter if it's from my company or union.

Is there anyone who can provide a link to the full story behind this thread with respect to the hiring of pilots, I've tried to gleen a little from this but I'd like to get the full picture. Did a google search too and read up on their plans but nothing with respect to the crewing.

Dreamshiner,
The crewing issue is not public yet as nothing to date has been confirmed. More than likely BA will commence flights to the US via the EU,plans are being put into place. I believe that once these bases have been announced/confirmed then crewing issues will be dealt with.

Some details;

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle2283019.ece

Many thanks Barry,

Sorry for my ignorance, its been a little while since I've been around the Cranebank coffee room rumour mill.

So just to clear things up for non-BA types such as myself, the concise story is this, please anyone correct my misunderstandings, conjecture and blatant lies:

BA to fly from CDG, BRU and MAD maybe with a cheeky FCO thrown in too (why not).

Crewing - Well could get current staff to move abroad or employ new guys, options as I see it are:
Yanks - AOC and N reg issues, saying that how many do TCX and TUI employ every year as contractors, plenty of guys dual FAA/JAA qualified
Johnny Foreigner - Multitude of issues however BA already employ groundstaff in every airport mentioned, is it hard to add 14 pilots (guess) per base?
UK based, existing BA - 'hey fancy a move somewhere sunny?'
UK based, non BA but want to work for BA (kinda/possibly/definitely)

Will there be a recruitment drive? If so, whats likely? 700 hrs min on type required, therefore major UK charter operators loose a lot of staff which in turn is filled by recently qualified CTC/ab initio/SSTR guys
Will existing BA numbers be able to manage if they entice crew abroad?

I suggest many a BA captain/f.o. has a nice barn conversion outside Paris/Madrid/Barcelona/Milan/Provence and may jump at the chance to avoid the commute to LHR.

Current BA Pilots - Not happy if management opt for non BA mainline crew, why?

May ultimately cost mainline jobs via UK hubs if foreign services go well and non mainline crew employed for satellite cities.

Backdoor to employ others on less T&C's than present crew, therefore eroding things from the bottom up.

(don't know the setup was with BMED, but LoganAir fly with BA livery and get **** pay and don't see a whole lot of strike threats from mainline in support, or is it only juicy 7.5 hour Shanwick-Gander routes with a juicy layover that cause this uproar)

Union - Recognised unhappiness, in meetings with lots of cucumber sandwiches, much waggy fingers at management

Fleet - Will they need to acquire new 75/76's or with the current lot do?

Structure - Do something similar as with Go, except ditch the circles and keep the union jack or possible psuedo-BMED arrangement?