BA Retired Staff Travel
 

Is anyone (retired from BA) in the position of having their staff travel privileges with BA withdrawn in March 2014? I'd especially like to hear from anyone who took special severance in the 1980s in which staff travel formed part of the severance contract. If sufficient numbers are interested in pursuing this matter, we may be able to bring a class action against BA for breach of contract. To engage an employment law specialist would probably cost somewhere in the region of £5,000 so we'd need 50 retirees prepared to stump up £100. Let me know what you think
Thanks

You'll be lucky; I have often found that BA retirees have the deepest pockets in the entire world.

Thank you
 

Thank you for such a constructive, persuasive, well presented and helpful comment.

...and polite too, it seems. HTBFYW

I can't see any part of JW411's post that deserves a GFY! Perhaps his/her's statement is a bit too close to home! :hmm:

OMG the BA pension musn't be what it used to be if they can only afford a hundred quid each.
Anyway, won't BALPA pay for it?

As Unite/BASSA can now verify Staff Travel is NOT contractual so it could not have formed a contractual part of any severance package.

There would have been a clause that allows BA to vary the terms of ST for those that took severance with an entitlement.


All retirees now receive ST for the length of service added to the date of retirement. So work for BA ten years retire in 2013 ST will expire in 2023.

Interesting way of attracting people to the cause, going straight for the insult just because you didn't get the answer you wanted to hear.

Staff travel in BA changed in 2009, if you have used it since then, you will know that before you can proceed to making a booking there is a screen where you accept Terms and Conditions, which state that ST is not contractual.

Don't bother to reply, I'll anticipate it's wit and eloquence based on the evidence you have already presented.

As far as I am aware, if severance or any other terms were agreed based upon inducements with regard to ST and these were put in writing at the time, neither party can subsequently change the terms of the contract unilaterally. This holds true for all contracts between two or more parties otherwise they would be worthless.

That's why, as I said in my post, BA would have included a clause that allowed them to vary the terms of ST.

If this was not the case those that left the airline with a severance package, would forever, have better terms and conditions than those still working for the airline or those who just retired.


For instance if BA changed ST to say that no one could travel in First under any circumstance the lucky old severees would continue to receive this privelidge when others would have lost it.

Correct, it all depends upon what was agreed within the severance terms at the time. But if no such clause exists in regard to varying the T&C's of ST then the terms agreed cannot be modified unilaterally. And if there is mention of varying the future T&Cs of ST following severance, the precise wording would need to be examined for legal clarification and interpretation.

Not wanting to go on and on but.......it would surely just say that ST was included under the same terms and conditions that apply to others entitled.

If if did not then the legal department drawing up the severance terms would surely be the most incompetent department within the organisation.

No that's incorrect if it was specified ST would be granted without time limits ... but it all depends upon the exact wording. Significant subsequent changes, such as time limits that were not existing when the original contract was struck could be seen as unfair and contrary to the Unfair Contract Terms Act 1977

For instance, would the severance offer in regard to ST, have been accepted if a time limit had been included?

BUT ... it all depends upon the agreed terms at the time and how carefully it was worded.

Let's face it in any Airline other employees are always resentful to a certain degree about Pilots, although they cannot do the job they think we are overpaid and under worked:{

millerscourt, it cuts both way dear chap. There are bound to be other jobs in the airline that pilots wouldn't have a "scooby-do" about! Though personally I think the vast majority of pilots do an excellent job and are a credit to BA.:ok:

The whole BA staff travel business is a shambles. Whether it is contractual or not is an argument which BA have arbitrarily decided in their own favour without any input from those affected. I don’t really have any complaints as I shall be 89 when my entitlement expires and if I am capable of using the facility I shall be so happy (and surprised) I will gladly pay the full price.

However what I find particularly galling is the fact that through interline agreements, anyone with a retired staff entitlement with any participating airline will be eligible for ST on BA for life, after their BA counterpart has been binned. As I understand it virtually all other “legacy” airlines that offer staff travel to others do not place a time limit on retiree’s ST.

It is a poorly thought out diktat typical of today’s bean-counters who put no value on past loyalty or performance in a company. Had the new policy been put in place for those joining BA after a certain date then nobody would have been upset or inconvenienced, certainly all my generation believed that ST was for life, whether an entitlement or not.

Cannot comment on any other "legacy" carrier but Qantas gives staff travel for retirees of their years of service. Ie: work for them for 25 years and get ST for 25 years.

I stand corrected. However were you aware of this when you joined or during your service or was it changed during or after your time there?

Any others who similarly restrict ST?

If the agreement was worded, to the effect, "Staff Travel will continue in accordance with BA Staff Travel Manual, as amended" then I would say you are stuffed, really must look at the actual wording of the severance contract, I would be surprised if any loopholes had been left.

With regards the legal department at BA it might just be/quite likely that they were in error but I wouldn't want to pay another lawyer to find out.