The peak hasn’t hit, yet.

For the many not the few.
The few such as WW will still be multi-millionaires. This crises wil not effect them.

There are quite a lot of pilot multi millionaires (if you include pensions and houses) who will probably not fly commercially again. A fair few will not bother with the hassle of switching fleets at a late age. I switched from Boeing to Airbus in my late fifties and would not fancy doing it the other way. I am not making light of the upheaval but lots of us on here have had companies go bust, including no doubt plenty of unfortunates who thought they had found a safe billet at BA. My gut feel is that things will pick up again relatively quickly and there will be plenty of opportunities for the younger cohort with us oldies out of the way. The next few months are going to be tough and it will be interesting to see how the various HR departments approach this. But I suspect the medium term future is brighter for 787 co-pilots than for A380 captains.

the issue is, it’s very easy to say “I’ll go work for Tesco until the industry picks up again”, but what if it doesn’t (or at least not to the level where you can go back into a job)? Your only choice then is stick with Tesco or career change. At that point, you’re back to the (new industry equivalent) of being a fATPL with a rating but no hours, competing not just against the same but all those who were made redundant from other companies & have lots of experience.

Its bleak.

I prefer to take Baldeep’s message away with me and try and look on the bright side. There will be massive changes coming for all in the next few months, but things will improve economically, and it may be the impetus some needed to make the jump or change career. Having had over 30 years in this industry, I know I don’t want my kids coming into this, unless it’s as CEO. I think it may well do some of the younger staff a favour if it means they are forced to change industry. As we all say, this job ain’t what it used to be. I certainly haven’t read of any Doctors, lawyers or accountants being laid off yet.

Where are these ‘quite a lot of pilot multi-millionaires’? Include their huge mortgages? Pension cap?

The only millionaires are in the BAMC (BA Millionaires Club) whose jobs are safe!

I think that is a very valid and fair point - good job.

This thread started off initially with a lot of good debate. Now, is it just my feeling or is it now littered with mainly (usual suspects) have been pilots/wannabe pilots/armchair pilots, acting as resident doom-mongers and some, seemingly getting kicks out of acting in such a way? If this applies to you, you may be well advised to find a hobby/pass time outside of the house.

I am sorry if it may be unrelated, but is it in the realm of possibilities that IAG might use Vueling in Gatwick to a bigger extent to compete with Wizz and easyJet?

Here we go.. Do you live in a parallel universe where there’s no Coronavirus or one where Vueling are completely immune to its effects? I think they’ve got their own problems at the moment to be honest.

(Ignoring all of that Vueling and Level - whoever you choose from the IAG stable - have absolutely zero brand awareness in the U.K. Level to Vienna was an absolute disaster for instance. You might as well give up and hand Gatwick on a plate to easyJet.)

God forbid if someone is not pessimistic, huh?

A BA manager has specifically mentioned the possibility of another IAG company moving into LGW instead of BA. I doubt WW really cares what brand is there as long the money is kept within the group.
All WW cares about is lowering costs. If that means moving Level or Vueling to LGW then I’m sure he’ll do it. For the unfortunate pilots selected for redundancy the offer could be we are closing LGW, there is a job with another IAG company if want it... have they then not fulfilled their requirement to find another position?
I think of you turned that offer down you’d not be in a great position. As for the passengers I’m sure that joe public will not be bothered if the ticket price is correct whoever gets in. If it’s partnered correctly and still sold via the BA website WW and IAG will be laughing as they’ll offer a cheaper product at the same price.

Why would WW not be focusec on making more money - that’s his job ! He is not a charity leader.....

Which manager would that be then? Because when the COO Jason Mahoney was directly asked this question his answer was the same as mine ie “they have problems of their own”. Willie has directly stated that he wants BA to remain at Gatwick, not IAG but BA themselves. He then had to remind himself to say “subject to consultation” a couple of times as he suddenly remembered he’d undermined his negotiating position. What’s going on is coercion tactics to strongarm changes in Ts & Cs under threat of a base closure.

Good job you’re not in charge of commercial decisions at IAG because brand awareness is very important to IAG and specifically in relation to BA. There does exist a very strong client base at Gatwick who with minimal price differential with easy will book specifically with us because it’s BA. Nobody has a clue who Vueling or Level are in the U.K. If BA totally tank versus easyJet at Gatwick then that damages the viability of their short haul network at Heathrow. They’re not likely to have forgotten that the Level experiment in Gatwick was an utter failure.

BA Gatwick does make money. Vueling cost may be lower but likely so will the income.

Would have thought they'd just use Vueling and Level in BA colours. Any existing protection against doing this likely to go up in smoke along with 25% of the workforce.

Not like they haven't done that before.

couldn’t agree more Paddington. I thought this forum might suggest possible mitigation solutions or some degree of commonality on a way forward. I accept the points some have made about temporary reduced flying hours/temporary part time flying etc until such time as economic/commercial conditions improve. But aside from that I am,,,,,,,,,,, shall we say ‘disappointed’ (to be diplomatic) with the level of discourse and relevance to the topic
I’m out. Done. Nothing to be achieved here.

Are BA able to unilaterally remove that without agreement?
And if so why not just operate out of LHR with Vueling/Level under the BA brand as well?

The power of logical thought escapes these clowns, The Foss I wouldn’t even bother. Like a downsizing Vueling suddenly has the ability in the current climate to expand into Gatwick but trash yields at the same time or, alternatively, it’s moved wholesale to the U.K. What then replaces Vueling in Spain?

(Sounds like they’ve forgotten about TUPE)

This is only the beginning :)
 

"Chair's comments

The Chair of the Committee, Huw Merriman MP, commented:

“It is very disappointing that British Airways seem determined to press ahead with devastating cuts to their workforce despite the Government furlough scheme being extended until the end of October. On the one hand, BA are happy to take taxpayers’ money from the furlough scheme which was designed to help companies avoid redundancies. Yet on the other, BA is ploughing ahead with a cull of their workforce and a lowering of terms and conditions. This is not what people would expect from our national flag carrier. BA’s loyal staff deserve better than to be treated like this.”

On 20 May, the Committee will hold a further session on aviation involving trade unions, the Civil Aviation Authority and the aviation minister, Kelly Tolhurst MP."

If this committee has no power, what is it’s purpose?

The airline specific forums were set up to allow internal informed debate by those verified to be employees. I was surprised that BA does not have one on PPRuNe, indeed three of the nine that I can see are for defunct airlines like Monarch. My constructive suggestion is that for those of you who don't want the rest of us butting in on what is clearly a very important debate you go about setting one up.

My view from the sidelines is that BA is likely to be a winner in the current situation. That does not mean that employment levels will remain as they are. It seems improbable that there is not going to be a serious reduction in flying over the next couple of years. The ideal from the airline's point of view is to solve its resource planning problem in a fair and agreed manner, keeping maximum flexibility for the upturn when it comes. One solution is to encourage those close to retirement particularly on fleets like the 747 to take early retirement. The pension cap/tax actually helps this because the incentive to carry on is reduced. Encouraging as many others to job share, work part time etc. is another obvious thing to do.

Wait and see
 

Expropriation is the power.
Post Covid 19 priority will be given to people (e.g. saving jobs and T&Cs'), the environment and public funds (future profits shared with Gov).

Aviation is not the only sector that will need to be nationalised. In several other countries this is already happening.
It has got nothing to do with socialism. This is pure survival of economies & societies during the biggest crisis in modern times.

When has management done anything "obvious"?

Read today some CSDs earn £80k(with allowances, box payments etc) (am sure these are outliers) but is that sustainable in the good tones never mind now. A senior ICU nurse might earn £40k !

Last week it was 30 years ago that I joined BA and for my entire career with them we had all the same issues with the management trying to reign in all these legacy contracts. I'm pretty surprised that they still have not got this basic issue sorted out.

Looks like things might be picking up sooner than expected?
https://www.businesstraveller.com/bu...eekly-flights/

Just demonstrates BA’s land-grab opportunism.

There was for many years. There is a BALPA BA forum elsewhere on the internet which is in regular use.

Walnut
 

This thread has been suggesting Veuling May be in line to be parachuted into Lgw. Is this likely as most of its workforce would be ineligible to work in the the U.K. when Brexit is finalised in December
So there will be no free movement of people and interestingly also Capital. The current split of assets in IAG according to WW. 66% BA, so with the share price at around 165p that means the U.K. government could take a stake at 100p a share.
WW stated one of the reasons he wanted restructuring is to allow him to compete with state funded EU carriers,eg Lufthansa and Air France. So as the U.K. must have a national carrier (even a combined Virgin EasyJet option would not have the reach) it seems a Government stake should be considered
After all already the Government has taken controlling stakes in the rail network the bus network and recently in TFL to ensure these essential transport links remain
i suggest that the H of C Select Committee ask this question of the government minister when she appears before them next Wednesday 20/3/20

One of the reasons these carriers get support (whether financial, political or whatever) is that they have structured their whole relationship with their governments, and indeed their wider target customer base, to be perceived as a national asset, despite private ownership.

BA have gone the other way, HQ is in Madrid (with a little regional but powerless admin office in Waterside), top execs openly don't give a hoot for the UK government. Now push has suddenly and unexpectedly come to shove and the playing field has changed. But the attitude hasn't.

https://www.independent.co.uk/indepe...-a9520131.html

First major press support. Get on the comments section everyone. Shame it's not in more, and print.

Unable to read, pay wall.

BA latest
 

You can register and read it for free.
Otherwise read all my previous messages under this topic. More or less the same concept.

I genuinely believe this is not Willie Walsh vs BA pilots, actually I should say the entire BA workforce. This is much much bigger, it is about the future of working conditions in the UK.
Do we want to end up like the USA or like Germany/Switzerland/Denmark/Sweden?
This is the question we need to ask ourselves.

Our kids deserve better than this toxic management style. Greed alone is leading us to an awful type of over-polarised society.

“Major press support”? Sure it’s very critical of BA but main point is that airlines should be taxed more heavily (Indy counts lack of VAT on fuel as a subsidy) and that airlines should be taken into state ownership. Hmmm. Can anyone name a state-run airline that’s NOT a cash-haemorrhaging basket-case, even in good times, which these definitely aren’t?

Is there a case in these unprecedented times,crews out of practice,distractions etc for all Long Haul two person crew to be mandated to three person crew for a period of time.
Whatever happened to PIA yesterday,a contributing factor will have been Covid.
BALPA need to raise this as an issue for all UK Long Haul carriers.
If any carrier were to have an ‘Incident’ it could be terminal for them.
Stay Safe,Keep Alert.

Why would airlines increase their costs when they are currently faced with an unprecedented loss of income?

What is that assumption based on?

I am sure that will help.

The current situation will be terminal for many of them without needing an 'incident' (sic).

EK springs to mind.

AF is currently augmenting all long haul flight deck crews by one additional crew member, for safety reasons.

When has AF (or EK) ever been run as a proper commercial business ?

I think it makes a lot of sense to have at least three crew on flights at the moment. The airlines are currently over-crewed so it costs next to nothing, and the risk of incapacitation is higher with the virus knocking about. Also crews are less current, and have the anxiety of possible redundancy or catching the virus at work eroding their capacity. Why would you not utilise your spare crew to protect the safety of your customers at this time?