BA Pilots Ponder BMI Proposal
 

BA are threatening to make BMI a stand alone operation if BA's pilots do not accept a host of productivity measures, plus giving up their Holiday Pay claim.

Captain Stephen Riley the Director of Flight Operations is using a carrot and stick approach. A promise of bonuses if they behave or it will be Open Skies at Heathrow. In his communication to BA's Flight Crew he stresses how it is only their extravagant pay that makes BA's shorthaul operation unprofitable. Or that is how it seems.

But with the Olympics looming, does Willy Walsh have enough leverage to push this through? Are BA's pilots going to roll over and take this whilst their peers at Iberia are currently engaged in industrial action over the creation of Iberia Express?

Err. Since IAG are buying bmi not BA, what's the issue? bmi is not currently going to be absorbed. Most suspect it might be in the future, but no-one really knows.

It's great to feel so welcomed into the IAG family by fellow pilots...

- yoo ain't seen nothing yet! Wait until you are spat on and sworn at.:mad:. You might want to try working in Spain while you are at it too.....................

By whom???

Mainline Captains, Basil, the one I witnessed was from a crew bus on one of 'our' crew (LGW 1993).

Wow. Nearly 20 years ago. Hmmm

Maybe think about Leopards and spots? Who knows how the BMIs will be treated?

I'd have a guess the leopards retired about 10 years ago. Still, I know how the Dan Air gang like to get all nostalgic about how badly they were treated.

The problem is that the BMI takeover is the catalyst for the opportunistic Willie Walsh to have a crack at his loyal Flight Crew footsoldiers. What a betrayal!!

Now BMI pilots will forever be blamed for inviting this holocaust, simply because they joined the wrong airline and had to be saved by BA/IAG. BALPA achieved a huge victory after spending over 6 years fighting for holiday pay to be based on "overrall earnings", Walsh is now going to snatch it away. What a cheek!!

Of the 100s of posts on the Balpa forum I have read re the BA / BMI merger not a single one has blamed BMI pilots.
Yes, there is concern about how the merger will be managed , and how the lists will be integrated; but not 1 BA pilot has - so far - written with anything other than concern for the plight of the BMI guys.

There will be no spitting! FFS

a difficult one, damned if you do and damned if you dont. Personally I would leave BMI (BA Express?) as a stand alone company, with BA s track record of running airlines outside of mother BA it wont be long before IAG managers are back to the table with a different attitude. The management are preying on fear to force through something that will plaque mainline for years. Let them try "express" they wont succeed and then the power struggle will be very different.

Count N, I sincerely hope that I never get the "opportunity" to sit next to you.

That has to be some of the biggest nonsense I've ever read on this site.

I think the count is not a pilot. They wrote a lot during the cabin crew strike. Enough said?

At the risk of being contentious, is there any reason why BA pilots would want bmi to be integrated? Freetown, Almaty and Tehran (plus Beirut, Damascus, Amman, Yerevan and Baku whilst we're at it) are not exactly prime roster bidding turf and I'd have thought most BA pilots would be quite happy if bmi continued to exist to serve routes which they really couldn't get excited about. Based on the last 10 years, it's also not exactly as though bmi pilots are getting commands way faster than BA guys - probably the opposite.

Yes, it temporarily staves off the risk of bmi being used for a reverse takeover of BA mainline flying.

One list or 2 companies under the same umbrella being played out against eachother.

Although I do think a lot of it is complete spin we really do not have much choice other than accept current proposals.

One united bigger company can only be good for all of us. Sure, some people might be disadvantaged but thus it'll ever be.

Having been 6yrs in the company I'm still very much at the bottom of my aircrafts SFO status list and on a way inferior pension. That's the way the cookie crumbles. If we do not show unity and always look envious at what someone else has the race to the bottom will continue at a way faster pace than currently.
Why not strife and actually improve the situation together?

Jam today can go hand in hand with Jam tomorrow. Pick the battles and be prepared to give in order to recieve...

Like when BMI Mainline welcomed BMI Regional to LHR ?

Where do the BMI guys fit into all of this? If there is a BA Express, they are all made redundant and re-employed new cheap contracts (they must have legacy costs/pay scales of their own)... If integrated, they join on the new BA B-scale PP1-34 back dated to 1st March, based on years service at BMI. Commands are kept, but everyone is on bottom of the MSL?

Lastly, aren't the LGW pilots capped at year 10, and yet SH there remains unprofitable? (could be wrong, but led to believe).

I would have thought so. BA/IAG have said that if the integration goes ahead, then the career opportunities for BA pilots will be significant; so if it doesn't, then one can imagine where the recruitment/expansion will take place:- in the so called "standalone" entity that was bmi.
The slots that bmi would bring to the operation would have a significant effect on promotion prospects, etc. Consider 1 A319's daily operations between LHR & EDI, for instance: 5x takeoffs + 5x landings into LHR (5 slot pairs). 1 early crew, 1 late crew : 2x Capts & 2x F/Os = 4 pilots. Convert those slots for a longhaul operation with 5x Capts & 5x F/Os outbound to somewhere & the same number returning.=20 pilots (& that's without a 'heavy' crew which would increase that number still further). And that is just the effect from 1 aircraft.

Black Pudding: SPOT ON...!!!

The pilots of both companies know that if they are run as seperate opco's then they will be played against each other.

eg. BMI becomes BA Express - then after 6 months IAG offer them a 25% pay cut.
They can't strike because BA mainline will cover their operation!! Or vice versa. Or IAG will simply let IB Express do BMI's work.

BMI guys are :mad: if they don't join BA.

BA guys could vote no, but then all new work would go to BA Express (on their very lean T's and C's).

What can be guaranteed Blu Riband, is the fact that BA pilots will show the usual appalling self-intererst, as they did when hundreds of them volunteered to fly as cabin crew. I am very surprised they haven't been flying Iberia jets.

Why are BMI flight crew being treated differently to other DEP's that have been recruited in the last 12 months?

It is discrimination and opportunism by Walsh who, as he did with the cabin crew, loves to play the divide and conquer game.

Point of order. BMI are being treated "differently" as you put it because a) TUPE will apply if they are merged with BA and b) most, if not all, BMI pilots under same will join on more money than a pay point 1 DEP would into BA. They won't be taking a pay cut and it will cost BA more than 300 DEPs. But we want the slots more than anything as a business I suspect so it's a cost worth bearing.

Re the CC dispute the difference is we recognise the value of having the BMI pilots on the same master seniority list as ourselves and thus still part of the same employee group for bidding and promotion. That option was there for the CC but you/they weren't prepared to make the concessions required to have that. We are being offered that option now and, if the straw polls are anything to go by, we will take it and not condemn ourselves to withering on the vine as per the CC dispute.

PS It's not discrimination. I know it's a favourite word in some parts but it's not. It's a change of terms and conditions. If it were discrimination to offer new recruitment terms we'd still be on flying boat contracts. Of course, however, it is opportunism. WW has an opportunity to extract a price for something we deem valuable. He's a businessman. Do I like the change? No. Would I do the same if I were him, bearing in mind his terms of reference are to maximise shareholder value and profitability? I would as he does, because it's his job. As morally uncomfortable as you or I may consider that.

I wasn't aware that any idiocy had gone on then. I'm very disappointed if it did.

- hopefully shot rather than retired? I can just see one of the skins on my lounge floor.

PS like the name..................;)

Seniority issues
 

Unfortunately and I think why the company aren't discussing the issue of seniority is that since the Dan Air and Cityflyer takeovers legislation has changed within Europe. Companies now acquiring/merging with another are required to maintain seniority, therefore merging the BA/BMI seniority list. Where a BA pilot and BMI pilot in this case join on the same day, the employee of the 'acquiring' company will have the higher seniority. The talk regading increased opportunities for BA mainline, therefore is negated as the additional slots in net terms are not an increase (covered by the exisiting workforce, ie BMI) The proposed opportunities are also a smoke screen as BMI has not had any significant recruitment for the last 7-10 years and as such SFO/FO in the acquiring company, BA will therefore find themselves several hundred places further down the seniority list, therefore adding a number of years to attain command. This is why we are being asked to vote without being given sufficient information to make an informed decision.

BALPA appear again to have boxed themselves into a corner.

It was clear after the cabin crew dispute that what Walsh decides goes.

He either gets huge concessions from BALPA or gets a uk Jetstar operation on BALPAs
doorstep.

I'm not sure how that equates to BALPA boxing themselves into a corner? The clever work was all Walsh and his lawyers.

You are correct if IAG's intention were to continue flying shorthaul with those slots. WW has stated that the slots, however would be used for much needed longhaul expansion. I refer you to my previous post and apologise if I've got the numbers wrong, but if WW was to go ahead & convert all of those slots to Longhaul, the expansion opportunities would be significant.
Also bear in mind that bmi are bringing across approx. 20% of the number of slots that BA owns with a workforce that constitutes a mere 10% of the BA one, & although it is more concentrated in the shorthaul area, I would imagine a significant number of senior BA SH pilots would see opportunities become available in the short to medium term as a result of the slot portfolio benefitting from such a rapid increase in size.
Several hundred? There's only about 320 pilots in bmi; if you're talking command opportunities then divide that number by 2. When bmi merged with BMED there were a handful of guys who lost about 100 places on the seniority list, that's all- and BMED constituted an airline about A THIRD of the size of bmi.
So:
20% slots vs. 10% pilots - straightaway the "impact" is halved.
Current use for large No. of slots = shorthaul - with longhaul use the "impact" will be more than halved again.
Whilst it is very easy to get drawn in to positions of opposition when talking of mergers,etc. I think in the long term a united front has to be far preferable.

MORETEA
 

sorry, seniority is NOT recognised in law...............period. There is NO obligation to merge seniority lists, seniority cannot even be used for redundancy legally due to age discrimination laws.

Isn't it the other way round?

Because seniority isn't recognized in law, you SHOULD merge the seniority lists because you can't just stick people on the bottom of the list?

This isn't quite correct either, because "seniority" is not necessarily equivalent to "age". The age distribution, even in BA's seniority list, is not monotonically decreasing.

This isn't quite correct either, because "seniority" is not necessarily equivalent to "age". The age distribution, even in BA's seniority list, is not monotonically decreasing.

correct SR71, thats why you cannot use seniority!

Seniority is a union controlled list, it is not recognised in law. The last "merger" was Bcal and that caused all sorts of political fall out, and the only reason they got a "merger" was that they bought a significant longhaul fleet to the fold, Dan air (the few that were) cityflyer etc all were tagged on the bottom (with short haul command grandfather rights), i rather suspect that this is what will be in store for the BMI guys and girls. HOWEVER BA stated that they would not allow pilots to join BA mainline without passing the BA selection procedure, (applied to BACON and OPENSKIES pilots) so possibly another obsticle in the way. Its going to be messy whatever happens.

The way I see it, is, "Seniority" is "length of service/DOJ" isn't it, and you can use it to make redundancies, albeit it may have to be part of a matrix of criteria these days, as long as you can also show it is not age discriminatory. It won't be at BA. That said, if you use a matrix its not LIFO.

MartinAir guys have recently been stuck on the bottom of the list but they're contesting this because I believe they are claiming the incorporation of MartinAir into KLM is a merger not a takeover.

Every pilot who I have spoken to wanted the company to survive.
We wanted to support the 30,000+ staff who wanted to keep their jobs, and to support the 1000s of crew who came to work.
I personally beleived that many crew who voted to strike did so having been very poorly advised and led by Bassa.
I now am sure we did the right thing , even for the benefit of those who went on strike; because things could have become much worse for them.

Check out the transcript of the branch secretary's tribunal for some shock reading and insight into the behaviour and mindset of the Bassa top table.
And where is the money?????????

Anyway, back on topic.

Seniority can be recognised, but is not automatic, and cannot be "age" based.
I expect BMI pilots to go to the bottom of the list but keep"grandfather" rights and current pay , until they catch up to BA pay.

I am more than a little surprised that if the pay of pilots on shorthaul was making the operation unprofitable, why hasn't Walsh taken action before?

I feel sorry for the BMI guys who are being used as leverage to get BA pilots to give up their holiday pay claim and accepting inferior T&C's.

Thats why you will find most of the mainline bmi guys reading these threads but not commenting. We are eager to finally have some security but are well aware of what is being played out with the BA guys, Good luck to everyone involved

It is clear that BA/IAG are playing hardball over this issue. Claiming that Easy/FR are poaching their business traffic has some validity. Saying that the pilots should be the ones to foot the bill for this doesn't. If anyone should be responsible it should be the management for allowing this to occur without understanding the long term implications. The "low cost carriers" have not sprung up over night, many have predicted their fortuitous growth back in the 90's and how they would become dominant within the short haul marketplace. BA has been slow to react to this, period.

However, it is not all negative. Mr Walsh (now speaking on behalf of IAG) has clearly pointed out that the future of BA is in the long haul marketplace. The reason for acquiring bmi is for their slots and with these slots he would like to expand further into the Asian/Indian market. BA therefore are not trying to focus their business model on short haul. BA short haul is essentially a feeder for BA long haul. Yes it would be great to make profits on short haul, why not, but to claim that it is the "Holy Grail" of BA and use their losses to erode short haul pilots T & Cs due to their mistakes, is a fallacy.

If the low cost carriers can continue to make inroads on the short haul market, then why not let them continue? This would free up further short haul slots for long haul. Equally, on the flipside, none of the serious contenders in the low cost carriers market are operating from LHR. One could easily argue that this is the reason that the "cheaper fare:ugh:" carriers can turn a profit. If the low cost carriers expand and continue to offer significantly lower prices than the likes of the legacy carriers on that particular route, surely this then makes long haul more accessible to passengers, who may not have travelled to the original long haul destination with BA because of the high short haul cost to get to LHR but now can afford to because of the potentially cheaper ticket offered from their departure airport to say Luton. Having used the low cost carriers in the past, it is my opinion that many will chose to use BA for their connection after they experience the costs and mayhem that can ensue when there are any issues affecting the low cost carrier.

This then brings me back onto the subject of the current vote proposal. Everyone more or less knows that IAG do not wish to have a standalone BA Express at LHR. Yes there are cost savings between the bmi and BA but these are transient. Operating a standalone Company on a different AOC with separate crewing, ops departments and all the other paraphernalia surely cannot be successful. bmi are losing money at a phenomenal rate, yes at a lower cost base but look at the outcome. HUGE LOSSES!!!

Why would IAG want this on their balance sheets? No one can be 100% certain that IAG will not run it as a standalone but in reality we can be >95% sure that this would not be the case.

Failing that, why don't the bmi and BA CCs come to some agreement that should the day ever occur that IAG were to try and create a BA Express, that terms such as the SCOPE agreement would be set in place to prevent BA Express pilots operating any of the BA routes, should BA BALPA envoke industrial action. This to my mind would be the strongest concern that current BA pilots have regarding the standalone proposal. If no crossing of a picket line were to occur by BA Express pilots and BA & IAG were aware of this condition, I would expect that it would take a lot of wind out of the management’s sails when negotiating future conditions. Of course the same terms would have to apply to a future BA Express if they were to call for industrial action, then equally BA pilots would not operate BA Express schedules.

I think BALPA are missing a big opportunity here to call IAG/BAs bluff here. Why not create their own terms which BA/IAG cannot interfere with?

As I said previously, I really don't think that a BA Express has any merit here in the UK. Yes I agree in Spain it would be considered as an option but not with BA's and bmi's costs being so closely matched if you were to try and make bmi profitable.

So in summary, BALPA should be playing hardball themselves and dictating the terms that their pilots will accept a standalone operation, such that it is a no brainer to even consider a standalone airline at LHR. This way, it is nearly 100% certain that a full integration will take place. Any/all savings will then have to be passed on to other departments (if need be?) such as devolving unnecessary management positions and streamlining other departments benefits. Current BA pilots and future BA pilots can then temporarilly enjoy a career that is not permanently threatened by cost cutting and the "sword of Damocles" perpetually hanging over them.

Thoughts, especially from other BA pilots welcomed.

Wrong again!.

We are not being asked to give up the holiday pay claim. It will be the cost going forward after 2014 that will need paying for. Upto 2014 (including gaw'd knows how many years back pay (i've lost count)) not affected.

That's a good piece Thick E. I agree that Walsh's bluff should be called. Let him start BA Express and he will lose money with that as well. Also with the Olympics not far away, does IAG really want to provoke a fight with their BA pilots?

VIRGIN seems to survive without a shorthaul network to feed its routes, so would LGW longhaul also limp on without the B737-400's. Inevitably, shorthaul is all but finished at LGW.

After concessions are made by BA's pilots at Eurofleet, what would be next on Walsh's shopping list? Perhaps mainline pilots pay flying longhaul holiday routes out of LGW will suddenly be unsustainable? Where does it stop unless BALPA draws a line in the sand now?

Walsh will push his luck and does not care if industrial action is provoked. He will take the short term pain for the long term gain if he can get away with it. BA pilots will find themelves in the unenviable position of their cabin crew "colleagues" (sic), of having their ballots for strike action injuncted and a campaign in the national press rubbishing them (as has happened before) and printing for all to see, how much they earn and the privileged lifestyle they enjoy.

Don't forget that Walsh will soon play the "this is the best deal you are going to get, the next offer will be worse. Take it or leave it" card, if it appears things are not going his way.

If BA's pilots are not sure where this is all going, just contact APA President Captain Dave Bates of the Allied Pilots Union at American Airliness, for some advice on where they went wrong in the past. Walsh hasn't re-invented the wheel here, there is a blueprint he is following and he will break BALPA's grip on BA at the same time if given the chance

BA Seminar / BACC GMM
 

Hi Thick E,

I went to the BA seminar on 4th January at Waterside. There is another BA seminar with the Chief Financial Officer and all the Flt Ops managers on the 10th January. I would urge you to go to that seminar if you possibly can, or attend one of the ad-hoc manager's meetings in the CRC. You will then be able to put your point of view regarding the deal to them, and maybe find some answers to your questions.

The BACC have seen and accepted the BA financial figures; I put a great deal of faith in the current BACC and trust them to make the best of the cr*p hand they have been dealt.

The take it or leave it deal on offer is not very palatable, but to vote No to maybe call a bluff is a big call. A Yes vote means that BA will have 51+% of the LHR slots and that over 3700 pilots will be on one seniority list. It would then be more difficult, time and effort for IAG to set up a new airline in an airport so slot constrained as LHR.

Whichever way the vote goes, BA and BMI will effectively be integrated - we are really only voting on whether the pilot workforces are integrated. If not, there will be two IAG airlines at LHR bidding against each other for work; if BA Lite offers to fly A380s at a lower cost, they will be flying the A380s. For the BMI guys and new entants to BA Lite (there will never be any further recruitment to BA Mainline, just stagnation) the terms and conditions to fly those shiny new aircraft will be much, much worse than those available now if an integrated solution is agreed.

In summary, go to a BA meeting, or at least a BACC GMM to satisfy yourself that your viewpoint is absolutely correct.

Cheers,

Mark