There seems to be some VERY deep approval of the BA CC.
It will be interesting to see what there is to justify this devotion.
I have never encountered any organisation, management or union who deserved such blind trust. Maybe this will be the first, although I doubt it.
I'm sure that the BACC are very good at there job. The bmiCC are credidble too - maybe they could learn from the BACC, but I would be very worried if they didn't try to get a full, objective, view of the situation before representing THEIR members. The bmiCC can't have the same blind following of the BACC.

There's no blind following of the BACC, but there is recognition that they've given us the bad news when we've needed to hear it, and a recognition that the paths other unions have taken with BA over recent years have led to less desirable outcomes for them.

The bmi CC don't seem to have grasped the basic fact that time was not on their side and they wouldn't be getting a full, objective view before the axe started swinging.

The Jury is out......we will see!

Dan Air all over again.
Let's hope BALPA doesn't 'look after' the BMI pilots like they did the Dan guys!
Sad news for all!

I guess it depends on what your definition of fair is. BA and bmi pilots clearly have opposing views on the matter. Hypothetically speaking, do you think the bmi CC would consider themselves to have negotiated succesfully if they achieved integrated seniority but at the expense of 47 redundancies out of seniority?

It's rather more than just better management. Better representation has played a significant part. Remember we are talking about the same management team which has hammered every employee group in BA. How you engage with that team is as important as how they run the business.

I'm sure they do, but they also owe it to their members to ensure their goals are realistic. What BALPA advised the bmi CC to do for the BMED takeover is yesterdays news. You can't simply point to that and ask BA and it's pilots to acquiesce because they simply won't do it, and I doubt any amount of special pleading will persuade either interested party otherwise. Sooner or later the bmi CC are going to have to realise that it's not achievable, park that ambition and get on with getting the best they can for their members, if they can get anything at all beyond TUPE and isolation.

Good,I'd expect nothing less.

I hope they will too, but if they are hoping that BALPA are going to try to pressure BA pilots into merging seniority lists I think their hopes will be dashed. After all, the only industrial muscle BALPA has in BA is the BACC, and it's quite clear what their position is.

Let's hope they (BALPA) perform their legal obligation and treat all their members equally and fairly.

Anton-RTFQ
 

Or more particularly read the answers before you type.

Who exactly do you think BALPA is. In reality in this case it's the BACC and the BMICC, not some organisation that lives off base and wields a magic wand.

If you're not part of the solution then consider-are you part of the problem.

BMICC could learn from that.

Sygyzy - your opinion NOT my experience.

And how much experience do you have in BA Anton? There'll be no magic wand. You already have the view of BALPA via the ISRC report.

Twas ever thus, surely? Anyone thinking otherwise is kidding themselves.

I'm not getting involved in Anton et al's obsession with seniority - I couldn't be arsed to keep contributing to the other thread with people banging the same drum over and over and over again. Some people really need to wind their neck in though, as theres a huge amount of crap about employement laws being spouted from people with a clear entitlement disorder. And when 1000's of people are loosing their jobs to have people still banging on about seniority and 'me-me-me-entitlement' instead of being thankful that they may still have a job is frankly disgusting, as is blaming the company and the people therein who are the only ones willing to come to the rescue./Rant mode off

Just a short comment 'on topic' though.
Have the mainline crews at regional bases and LHR trainers been made redundant or have they had a statutory notice that their role is reduntant, but that they then will be considered in the pool of all mainline pilots for the jobs availalble - coz there's a world of difference.

I went through a similar 'consultation' at a previous airline, and also in a previous career - and alot of this stuff is statutory. Its quite clear that IAG do not have regional bases in their plans, so its obvious that all regional JOBS are now redundant. It doesn't necessarily mean that the PEOPLE currently attached to those JOBS will be out of work.

Sadly I think its inevitable with the scale of BMI's losses and the future plans that there will be less jobs up for grabs than there are mainline pilots, however I very much doubt anywhere near the clear picture has emerged yet. Lets just hope for that as many jobs as possible are salvaged as every lost job is without doubt, a personal tragedy.
But lets also not be a bunch of lib-dem-woolly-rose-tinted-anti-capitalist types. At the end of the day IAG / BA etc are not a charity, nor do they have unlimited funds, they need to keep their cost base and business viability under control too. nobody owes anyone else a living.

This is a terrible situation for everyone affected and I hope BALPA, the BMI CC and the BA CC can come up with some kind of solution to mitigate any pilot job losses.

However, so far as I can see if there are going to be any redundancies this is being handled entirely correctly and entirely within the law. Whether it be a base closure, or the redundancy of pilot manager posts it ought to be uncontroversial surely that the person in the post being dispensed with is the person who loses his/her job?

Seniority can take us so far - and it is a good thing in many respects - but we can not use it as an excuse to break the law, and no amount of strong union negotiation could ever change the legal framework under which employers have to operate.

IMVHO.

The irony is, one of the representers is on 90 days notice I believe.

The bmi cc have massively missed the boat by not taking the advice of the BA cc and this is the result.

If I were a BMI pilot right now, I would be asking huge questions of my cc,
why did they bury information that was in the public domain regarding merger recomandations,
why did they walk away from BA cc advice, ( they didnt need to take the advice, but it would of been good to listen)
why did they think for so long that a bankrupt workforce should still be able to hold out for a massive wind fall when they were rescued by IAG.

I hope the redundant pilots end up only being redundant in their current roles and are absorbed into BA lhr.

My understanding is that conversion courses for BMI crews start mid may, so things will move quickly from here.
rumour is,
3 days ground school for sops etc
1 day sep
3 sim details,
1 sim lpc/opc
line sectors, 4 for f/o's 6 for captains, followed by a BA command check.

seems to me to be about 2 weeks worth with days off. should be enough time to repaint about 4 of the fleet in BA colours......

red 7 - i said most of that a few weeks ago, but was shot down by anton and a few others as i obviously didn't know what I was talking about. Oh well. There are none so blind as those who refuse to see.

The bmiCC have not to the best of my knowledge not even mentioned zipping of the seniority lists. From the outset they where offered a deal(!) that would have been impossible to recommend to their membership without at least exploring their options with their future employers. Events have subsequently become even more complicated by the threat of lay off.
It would indeed be a very difficult sell to their colleagues if they do not engage with the future employers. The constant harping on about them overplaying their hand is unjustified. Infact it would be more accurate to say their hand have been tied behind their back so far!

To insinuate that the bmiCC's actions have resulted in the threat of lay off's is, quite frankly, scurrilous.

I don't think anyone IS insuating that - I'm certainly not.

However what I DO think , and what many people think is that the BMICC were focussed on the wrong issues and didn't see the elephant in the room.

I said it on the other thread and so did many others, that worring about seniority and staff travel and other t's and c's is 10 steps down the road. Suddenly step 1 has turned out alot different than they thought, however depressingly similar to what alot of other people thought it was.

Lamina


Firstly the BMI cc were not, and still have not been offered a deal, so they could not make any recomendations but they could of heard out some very good advice to help that process.

WHich leads onto the fact that I think they tied their own hand behind their own back, and based on that, YES I would insinuate that due to the bmi cc's INACTION, not action has resulted in the layoffs we are discussing.

Had they taken advice I am pretty certain a different result would of been being discussed here, but we did try and suggest that a few weeks ago, but they knew better..

Absolutely. The posts from BA pilots make sorry reading.

Don't be brow-beaten into forgoing what is due to you under the law. And respect to the BMICC for having the courage to seek this. Unfortunately, BALPA will not help you, so you will have to get a pot of money together if it comes to tribunals/high court.

Time traveller
Care to explain what you think is due under law?
I assume you mean TUPE, and with regard to merged seniority, but we await a detailed reply of why you believe this.

As I understand it the bmiCC didn't publish it because it was a cringe-makingly badly produced document that reflected appallingly on the Association. A point that is privately accepted within BALPA HQ, I believe.