PPRuNe Forums

PPRuNe Forums (https://www.pprune.org/)
-   Terms and Endearment (https://www.pprune.org/terms-endearment-38/)
-   -   IAG: BA restructuring may cost 12,000 jobs (https://www.pprune.org/terms-endearment/631988-iag-ba-restructuring-may-cost-12-000-jobs.html)

wiggy 28th Jun 2020 14:02


Look like yet again it needs pointing out that the Bloomberg/Sun article seems to be based on an unsubstantiated rumour circulated on Whatsapp a few days ago....

I know this may be an old fashioned way of thinking but maybe it would be wise to reserve passing judgement on "how elitist the BA lot still are" until we see something official from BALPA...

Raph737 28th Jun 2020 14:14

Yes, we shall see. That said, I speak from experience. BA has broken agreements in 2006(birth of Gatwick fleet), 2010 cabin crew disputes, 2007(MF disputes) and now. There is no interest from your reps in changing that part of the MOA in order to provide a fairer option and protect the junior members, it’s clear protectionism of the old guard. My airline does it as LIFO alone is discriminatory, another airline, Virgin, also felt that it was unfair to carry out LIFO in their last redundancies.

Yes the source isn’t the strongest, however I believe we will get some news this coming week and it will follow those lines, but as you say, lets see. In regards to the comment I made about elitism, I stick to what I say, I have seen enough of my many years at BA to come out with that judgement. It’s my opinion and judgement, you don’t have to agree but your disagreement will not erase my experiences.

3Greens 28th Jun 2020 14:16


You clearly have little knowledge of what LIFO will entail or what our MOA actually says then. I won’t repeat it here as if you worked at BA, well, then you’d know.
If there is a LIFO deal, and it’s still an IF, it’ll be LIFO plus some other stuff. Like active disciplinarians and poor performance; which would address those issues that, I agree, needed sorting a long time ago.
As for cabin crew agreements in 2006, well I’m not sure about that as I don’t recall the exact details. 2010 however, BA did seek to break their agreements and as I recall, BASSA took them to court and ithe judgement was that the MOA forms part of the contract so must be respected.
Quite why BALPA should have renegotiated the LIFO part of the MOA years ago, like your company; why would they do that? BA is a seniority airline. Everyone who joins knows that, and it’s positives and indeed negatives. Joining, them whinging it’s unfair just smacks of the I want it all and I want it now brigade. We will have to differ as to your definition of “fair” too. Is it fair that someone who joined last week into the A350 gets to stay, but someone who has given 30+ years service but flies a 747, gets the chop? Sorry fella; there’s nothing at all fair about that In my book. Life ain’t fair unfortunately, it’s just isn’t and In the absence of a better system a LIFO+ matrix is about as good a way I can think of.
There are many negatives to seniority too, but on balance give me the transparency of LIFO/seniority than the way virgin, Emirates and Wizz went about treating their crews.
Just in case you haven’t worked it out I do indeed work there, and have done for 22 years. What aircraft does to wife fly? FO/Captain? Or is she crew? If she’s crew then let’s leave BASSA&UNITE to fight there own arguments eh? And defend their own agreements as they see fit; they have nothing to do with pilot agreements.

Raph737 28th Jun 2020 14:42

Again, the opposite is true, it’s your opinion and I don’t have to agree with it, which as a matter of a fact, I don’t, “fella”. I couldn’t care less for it or your interpretation and it doesn’t matter what fleet she’s in, as she won’t have a say considering the union is ignoring her position, just read the BALPA forum.

Well someone who has done 30 years on the 747 won’t get the boot, someone who had issues should no matter when they joined, they shouldn’t be ahead of someone junior with better conduct, performance etc, as you know the other aspects of the matrix do not outweigh seniority, since you know it all.

My airline is also a seniority airline, and the mandate given to the union by both seniors and juniors was clear, we will share the pain evenly if it comes to it. That’s unity and that’s how it should be done. Yes, “someone’s terrorist is someone else’s freedom fighter” so the concept of fairness is debatable. But don’t sit there pretending you see yourselves as equals as anyone with over 10 years of BA knows that it’s not true.

I wish you the best of luck in your dispute.

Paddingtonbear 28th Jun 2020 14:47

Is it fair that someone who joined last week into the A350 gets to stay, but someone who has given 30+ years service but flies a 747, gets the chop? Sorry fella; there’s nothing at all fair about that In my book. Life ain’t fair unfortunately
Life really isn't fair. It isn't fair for the long serving guys and girls at Virgin on the 747/330. What happened there?

Before you tell me BA is different from Virgin, BA claim to be losing £20m a day and is in a fight for survival. Get rid of 350 from the bottom of the MSL and they save what, £60k a day? It won't cut it. I can guarantee the only battle Balpa have on their hands at the moment is a battle to save the guys on the 747/A380 with the argument for the line in the MOA that states something along the lines of "regard shall be given to LIFO" - hardly a binding statement.

3Greens 28th Jun 2020 14:49

Ahh now it all becomes clear. This isn’t about fairness at all; it’s about your wife’s vulnerability to redundancy. It’s only fair, if someone else gets the chop in your opinion then.
FWIW, I believe the sun article is fantasy and although BALPA have said from the outset, that they expect agreements to be respected, they’re clearly looking at all avenues to secure ALL jobs. Including your wife’s I hope.
so rather than getting all het up and playing the man and not the ball, try taking a look at that BALPA forum yourself, and you’ll see that to a man/woman; the talk is all about saving everyone’s job and not about savings ones own arse. We aren’t the elitist selfish bunch you seem to think we are. To date, not a single pilot has been made redundant from BA. I sincerely hope we can keep it that way.

3Greens 28th Jun 2020 14:53


did Virgin have a LIFO agreement within their MOA? I genuinely have no idea.
BA are a VERY differant animal from virgin. Virgin have no simulators and the training costs to retrain their 747/330 pilots would be astronomical. BA have all the resources they need to do just that. Yes, there will be a cost, and I understand (from the “rumours”) that BA have agreed to respect LIFO (with some other elements).

RexBanner 28th Jun 2020 15:05

3Greens, the Whatsapp rumours originally suggested that the Gatwick pilots were going to be stood down on 50% pay. The Sun article suggests they’re all going to be laid off. Either way that has nothing to do with seniority; as I have stated earlier Gatwick pilots comprise only 21% or so of the bottom 350 on the Master Seniority List which by any stretch is not “most” of the rumored CR. So regardless of the rights and wrongs of LIFO the inference from the article is that LIFO has been ignored, not promoted by Balpa. Are we going to get a nasty surprise this week?

I am very concerned with the change in rhetoric from Balpa which started out as flat out denial then recently has turned into “elements may have been agreed but there is no final deal”. Paraphrasing of course.

3Greens 28th Jun 2020 15:08

none of that sun article really makes any sense. Lazy, inept journalism IMO. They’ve clearly been “leaked” the whatsapp message and failed to either, read it or understand it. I won’t believe anything until I see it in written joint BA/ BALPA email or letter; but last I heard was BALPA remain in a position whereby BA will respect our agreements. Any deviance from that would lead to a breakdown in talks I believe.
I hear LGW holiday flight are on sale from July15th. Given holiday flights to Europe will be the first to return, I expect Lgw to bounce back strongly. BA are using it in disgraceful way as a bargaining chip with both HM.gov and the union.

RexBanner 28th Jun 2020 15:10

Sorry I really should proofread before posting!

101917 28th Jun 2020 15:35

3 Greens

“it’s written in our MOA which forms part of our contract that every BA pilot signs. Far from disgusting or elitist, just ensuring the company follow what is in our agreements. Or would you prefer BA to be able to ignore contracts and agreements as they see fit? What would then be the point of “agreeing” anything at all?”

Companies and Unions can agree to whatever they like. However, it should be within the law.

LIFO as the sole method of selection for redundancy is not within the law and should not be applied by the airlines as a sole method of selecting people for compulsory redundancy.

The Employment Equality (Age) Regulations 2006 and the Equality Act 2010 changed the ‘rules’.

3Greens 28th Jun 2020 15:44

I don’t think anyone is disputing that. I understand both sides legal advice is that LIFO+ is legal
LIFO on its own isn’t.

101917 28th Jun 2020 17:21

That is correct. LIFO can be part of a matrix. I understand that TUI have a matrix.
Your post led me to believe that the BA pilot's contract for compulsory redundancy was solely LIFO.

PilotLZ 28th Jun 2020 20:48

Originally Posted by 3Greens (Post 10823650)
I don’t think anyone is disputing that. I understand both sides legal advice is that LIFO+ is legal
LIFO on its own isn’t.

True that. Selection of employees for redundancy, as a rule, shall never be based on one sole criteria, with the exception when the qualification possessed by a group of employees is no longer relevant to the company. So, if it was a matter of scrapping completely any one fleet of aircraft, the dismissal of its crews would be extremely difficult to oppose in court. It has happened unfortunately, and many times. Nothing in the law can oblige an employer to retrain an employee for a new, relevant qualification, shall their existing one no longer serve any useful purpose to the business.

However, when all fleets are still there, experience can be a contributing factor, but not the sole one. Other matters need to be taken into account as well, i.e. performance of the employee, presence or lack of disciplinary issues, qualifications for any side duties (e.g. line trainer, CRM trainer, fleet technical pilot), progression perspective and so on.

thetimesreader84 29th Jun 2020 08:30

I can honestly say I’ve never worked with a more selfish pilot body than I have at BA. It’s not every pilot obviously, but it is a sizeable minority mainly skewed to long haul who have consistently chosen to protect their own at the expense of sharing the pain. PP34, JSS, etc, these things do not appear in a vacuum.

As Foss says, it was interesting to see the narrative change from “‘we’ve all got to share the pain & save all jobs’” when they were at risk to “‘we’ve got to make sure our job is worth doing, some CR may be necessary’” once it became apparent that LIFO was going to be a main factor in the redundancy.

I say interesting, what I mean as a PP2 SH FO is “‘horrifying’”, to be considered as collateral damage to preserve a senior pilots gilded lifestyle.

These people have had the very best out of this industry, and are seemingly insistent in pulling up the ladder behind them. I hope they are more of a minority than they seem to be.

Just to put the other side of the LIFO argument, I’ve never quite understood how it would be fair (to use a BA example) why I as a A320 FO should be forced out of the business to make way for a 747 FO who quite clearly in normal times wouldn’t dream of taking up a SH role, who would incur a retraining cost as well as having to pay (stat redundancy) for me to exit. LIFO within a fleet, absolutely, but as soon as you have to start shunting people into training courses, it becomes a lot harder to justify in my opinion (and is borderline illegal anyway - see redundancy bumping).

Jwscud 29th Jun 2020 08:33

The number plate that was doing the WhatsApp round at the weekend certainly indicates the mindset of a few on long haul :}

M.Mouse 29th Jun 2020 09:04

I can honestly say I’ve never worked with a more selfish pilot body than I have at BA. It’s not every pilot obviously, but it is a sizeable minority mainly skewed to long haul who have consistently chosen to protect their own at the expense of sharing the pain. PP34, JSS, etc, these things do not appear in a vacuum.
BA pilots may or may not be selfish and you may or may not believe that but to state that 'a sizeable minority mainly skewed to long haul who have consistently chosen to protect their own at the expense of sharing the pain. PP34, JSS, etc, these things do not appear in a vacuum.' is utter nonsense. With an increase of 10 years of the retirement age do you believe that BA would have been happy to have pilots sit on the highest pay point for an extra ten years, bear in mind the highest pay points had big incremental rises in the last few years because the (then) final salary pension was based on pay in the last few years? That was why the 34 point scale was introduced and there was little anybody could have done to prevent it.

If you had actually been in the company for longer you would know the history behind the changes mentioned and that the options were limited.

In the current climate I do not see BA rushing to make the most junior on say the B787 or B777 to make way for a senior pilot from a contracting fleet, e.g. the B747, to take that position with all the associated re-training costs involved. It has been mentioned previously and often that simple LIFO is legally questionable.

Icarus1981 29th Jun 2020 09:11

M. Mouse, as you're bringing it up, when PP34 was first discussed, was there an option for all pilots to go to 28 paypoints? I'm pretty sure it was discussed and vetoed!

thetimesreader84 29th Jun 2020 09:35

Like I said, these things don’t come around in a vacuum, but when BA come knocking it does seem that solutions are found that preserve lifestyles of those at the top. When retirement age was increased, there was no “PP29” compromise - those at the top kept the A scale, and everyone that came next was on a B scale. Same with JSS - when it was “discovered” that bidline was broken (debatable), the solution that was pushed (JSS) allowed those at the top to hoover up the “cream” trips, leaving those at the bottom to pick up the dross that’s left (and more of it, as it’s usually low credit stuff too). Vague promises of “you’ll be senior one day” ring hollow for many when you’re burning yourself out working 20% harder at the bottom, and the goalposts keep getting moved anyway.

Vokes55 29th Jun 2020 10:07

If you signed up to a seniority based airline knowing that you'll be shafted until you work your way up the ladder, you have no right to complain that an airline is enforcing the principles that you agreed to when you joined. The fairest outcome is the MOA being adhered to, to the letter. Otherwise you're essentially agreeing to having your agreements torn up to suit the company whenever they see fit, especially if it's proven to divide the workforce.

Whether or not some of those at the top of the tree should be considering if they really need to bankroll their grandchildren through private school or if buying that second boat in the coming years is absolutely necessary is another matter. I'm sure there's plenty at the top of the seniority list in BA who wouldn't be missed by the company or those who sit to the right hand side of them.

All times are GMT. The time now is 08:23.

Copyright © 2021 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.