The ballot is out. BALPA have negotiated from a position of weakness, i.e. against a ruthless and uncaring employer holding all the cards, and they appear to have done the best job possible.

I understand that BALPA wanted to explore methods of retaining ALL pilots with the entire pilot body making sufficient sacrifices like pay reductions, part-time, etc. but apart from the 300 retained in the Community Retention Scheme(CRS) BA intend making the rest of the surplus redundant. The reasons for this intransigence are unclear but possibly BA not wanting to see the pilots, uniquely amongst all workgroups, not suffering compulsory redundancies (CR). Who knows?

After some adjustment for disciplinary record and performance issues and a couple of other tweaks the criteria for CR then comes down to LIFO. The defence of LIFO is well understood but has the perverse effect of ridding the company of the cheapest pilots, retaining the most expensive and, for those on redundant fleets, allocating conversion courses to them. There is a double whammy for some of the junior vulnerable group because they are being cast adrift with their training loans which paid for their BA training.

Like all redundancies it is a worrying and distressing time for a few hundred unlucky people.

M. Mouse has summed the situation with regard to BALPA quite nicely.

Meanwhile:

The BA Long haul Fleets are carrying not a lot of pax ATM and there's stuff all sign of a major recovery, particularly on the highly important North Atlantic.

Load factors on Short haul flights can be missleading since most routes are running at reduced daily frequency. In addition HMG's actions over the weekend will not have help passenger confidence and forward bookings.

Given the above surely even the most pro-Union, least receptive to the management POV individual must realise that BA, like pretty much any airline not offered state aid, is actually in a genuine "fight for survival";) ?

UNITE/BASSA have did not help themselves by not engaging with the company but here we go again, crunch time and..it's all BA's fault.

Sounds like a bit of a case of if in doubt fall back on using the only tool in the toolbox you are used to using, regardless of whether it's an appropriate device or not.

Good luck using the hammer but watch you don't hit your thumb.

I am sorry but I find Len’s letter totally unacceptable and pretty childish. Obviously I say that without seeing Alex’s email to Len but the whole thing screams playground school kids rather than professional organisation.

Industrial action at a time where we need to get as many planes in the sky as possible is extremely damaging. Whilst the threat may be there with a view that it will seek some results, going ahead with it may well be one of the final nails in the coffin and will not deliver any empathy from other employees caught in the firing line.

I honestly don’t know that there is a solution to suit all but going on strike is not the answer in my opinion.

The situation for Unite was that BA wanted only to consult on job loses. By not engaging in meaningful consultation Unite bought time for the leverage campaign to have effect and to delay the fire and rehire for staff. We would have been removed on the 15th June.

Once Unite found ground to meet BA, BA engaged in consultation, not negotiation - a significant difference and now the BA proposal to slash T&Cs is set for 7th August.

We all understand that Covid is a major issue which a huge detrimental effect upon airlines and we are prepared to do what we can, within reason to help. BA are not interested, they’ve seen and seized the opportunity to create a permanently cheap labour force. Nothing temporary about it. What, I ask genuinely not acerbically, T&Cs did BALPA negotiate away. Was it the total destruction of variable pay, the striping of seniority, the need to reapply for the roles crew have undertaken for years, a harsh sickness and absence routine, a change of route flying, loss of days off, etc etc.

I am no fan of industrial action but BA only sought to tick consultation boxes and to implement destructive changes to staff terms and pay.

From the outside it does look like that.

In our own business, principal cost salaries, we have taken salary reductions, on a sliding scale from the lowest paid staff (no change) to the top management (over 50%), this to be temporary until positive cash flow is restored. Who knows, we might have to take a further reduction. Emphasised as temporary, and not to score some future advantage. And you take all the team with you.

BA's actions look similar to what a past generation called "war profiteers".

we were not given the calculation, but some clever people back-calculated to find that the VR offer was statutory minimum + PILON + 10% annual salary.

But the kicker is that the PILON doesn't get pension contributions (as a CR notice period would).

This reduces the effective uplift to around 3 weeks (depends on which pension you are on).

So VR ≈ CR + 3 weeks pay

If as I understand, BA are losing nearly a Billion pounds a month it will not continue as a going concern. Nothing will change in the near term. If the vaccine is successful and distributed quickly and herd immunity is established then demand may start returning for next summer. That is the optimistic view. There are a lot of IF's e.g. anti vaxiners, lack of efficacy, demand itself etc.

My opinion is that the UK will need a national Airline going into Brexit. Therefore I think that BA will be re-nationalised.

Doubt it. The shareholders, such as Qatar, might have a say about that.
Besides it would be a minefield since BA is embedded in a TopCo called IAG, based in Spain.

I wouldn’t trust the UK government to run a bath, let alone an airline.
They should stick with what they’re good at: raising taxes and changing their minds every two weeks.

You're dreaming if pinning hopes to Qatar. They'll be the first to bail out. Like they did with Air Italy which Qatar had high expectations, they expected it to become the new Italian National carrier. They were forced to bail out of Cargolux because of the unions, who couldn't accept conditions which Qatar wanted to apply. Qatar will want to make money at your expense, they're no white knight and they're not particularly nice guys. Do me a favour, forget Qatar. The nationalisation is much more likely.

Qatar are no worse than BA ‘Management Committee’.

Phrase "Devil and the deep blue sea" springs to mind!

Yes but it's not realistic. Qatar certainly want equity for any cash put in, they absolutely don't want junk bonds. The current market capitalisation is £3.7B. As a non EU state, Qatar can own 49% of IAG, they currently own 25%. Therefore if you issued, by further rights issue, shares which Qatar could buy, that cash could not exceed £1B. That's 1 additional month of survival.

The most likely future outcome is nationalisation.
OR
The Norwegian NAS outcome... You can read about that on the other thread

White Van Driver

You are quoting VR. My reply was answering the question asking what had been negotiated for CR.

CR is the statutory minimum subject to the cap of £16,140.

Nationalisation
 

Be careful with this. Governments that Nationalise tend to streamline more aggressively before selling off. Pay is also cut. Look at Lloyd’s Banking Group in the time that HM treasury effectively part nationalised in 2009, thousands of jobs gone and thousands of positions gone with even more gone when it sold its last tranche of shares.
‘Stuck between the devil and the deep blue sea’ is an accurate analysis.

Looks like BA are going to shut the HQ:

https://www.headforpoints.com/2020/0...e-head-office/

Fair warning..I suspect some in the company think somehow they can force re-nationalisation and this will solve all their problems.

And move it to East base at Hatton Cross...

Rename it Speedbird House and it truly will be back to the future ..

I believe the idea that the airline is in danger of nationalisation is credible. After all the trains buses and tube system are effectively being Government funded with very few passengers. Various countries eg Germany are taking equity stakes in exchange for funding.
Once Brexit takes place IAG will have to be broken up if BA is going to be allowed to function freely in the U.K. It is planning to sell Waterside so clearly it is in a deep hole as the cash raised, assuming it is saleable, is only going to be minimal
The UK will need a national carrier with the two contenders Virgin and EasyJet unable to provide the complete coverage needed. What might make the Government pause is the potential for an almost financial bottomless pit

That is exactly what I think. There two of us, almost a done deal...

Please explain because you clearly know something we don't.