Meanwhile...

https://www.forbes.com/sites/willhor.../#142c77742af5

https://airwaysmag.com/airlines/aer-...tes-to-the-uk/

Yet again someone steals a jump on us, this time one of our IAG bed fellows, when will our management start thinking? This is exactly what we should have been doing, thinking out of the box and saving jobs...

It all goes into the same pot, that BA, IBERIA, AER LINGUS are ALL using to survive, so it doesn't really matter what colours are painted on the tail. Why not stop looking to find fault in BA managment and be pleased that IAG who hold the purse strings for ALL of our jobs are looking at different ways of saving our skins.

So you think if Aer Lingus turned a profit it would help save jobs at BA?

With the set up at IAG I'm not sure it works quite like that when it comes to jobs within the individual OpCos but happy to be corrected.......

When it comes to profits the profit is all IAG, when it comes to costs, the costs are all the OpCo's.

Guess where job costs will lie.

183,000 deaths ... so for every 19 that recover 1 dies - not so good news.
That means the probability of one death among those diagnosed with Covid on the TUI flight currently in the news.

Could you provide the link?
When I look at the UK GOV website I see 36,844 deaths in England up to 26 August.

The chances of me getting on any public transport, esecially an airliner, at the moment is ZERO.

Just my point of view looking at the data I have available to me.

P.S. Yes, I am one of the very lucky ones who can work from home.

https://cimg6.ibsrv.net/gimg/pprune....649328df3.jpeg
From england.nhs.uk, Tab3 deaths by condition, screenshot.
Also, look at the ages that are most affected.
Apparently, obesity is a significant factor too, but the media avoided that for a while.

OpenCirrus619

6.1m cases in US and your conclusion is daft and inaccurate. If one of them has a pre existing condition then maybe but if they have they are not exactly going out of their way to protect themselves are they.

And if you won’t go on a plane and you are lucky enough to work from home (we cannot) why are you here ?

I understand your fear, and why you're paranoid.

I've operated 16 flts, and pax'ed on 28 since the 1st april. I've had 6 Covid tests, and 2 antibody tests (all negative).
Still here!

The death rate is now statistically insignificant.
Many of the early Covid deaths were incorrectly reported, improperly treated, and mostly to people with pre-existing conditions.

In the UK last three days.
Covid deaths 6
Road deaths 15
Cancer deaths 1350

777JRM Thanks - I was looking at gov.uk.
I hadn't found those stats before - once I've waded through them I'll certainly be better informed

FlipFlapFlop Not ridiculous at all - simply using the numbers provided.
My figure of 5% mortality certainly sits in the middle of those produced by JHU https://coronavirus.jhu.edu/data/mortality
I willingly concede the point that the death rate from Covid is now well below some other causes - but, personally, I do my best, where possible, to avoid risk. The number of deaths, in the past few days, from lightning strikes is 0 - but I'm still not going to stand under a lone tree, in the middle of a large field, during a thunder storm.

The Blu Riband I agree with your statement about death rates. Unfortunately I am more worried, these days, about long term mordibity (as opposed to mortality).
This program raises some worrying questions: https://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episod...-my-brother-me

The whole thing is stupid. In the uk the infection rate is 517 per 100,000 and where I live as of this morning 572. Why is everyone so fearful? The government quarantine policy any country with more than 20 cases per 100,000 must be quarantined is protecting nobody and damaging the wider economy, not just aviation. By that logic the whole of the uk should be quarantined. Government policy is driven by the media and nervous nellies. One of my parents is shielding and rightly so, however they are not demanding that everyone else shield too.

should I go to work tomorrow or quarantine? After all cases are above 20 per 100,000. By the same logic as a male under 50 with no underlying health conditions I am more likely to be killed driving to work than by Covid. Perhaps I should quarantine my car until that statistic improves too.

To continue the same response now more is known is only going to do great economic and social hardship.

Could we please take the covid discussion to the various threads already running in JB please. Leave this for the BA staff redundancy discussion.

I see BALPA are still suggesting that the only C744 in the CRS are those who did not bid for short haul which is false.

They also state “Some C744 move to C32L; likewise P744 to P32L”.
The first half kind of implies no C744s move to P32L, and the second half is completely untrue. No P744s have a successful move to P32L. In MD’s post on the forum, it was possibly a typing error, but to repeat it again in the official newsletter suggests they are purposefully trying to make the deal seem better for the 747 community than it actually is. There are C744s in the CRS who bidded aspirationally for absolutely everything and therefore, together with most of the P744s, were beaten to a seat by the Gatwick pilots. BALPA are suggesting otherwise and it is untrue.

Devil’s advocate here (and vested interest) but because Gatwick and Heathrow were split into different fleets you were going to end up with more senior pilots getting shafted either way. The Gatwick fleet is moving up the road to Heathrow to form part of an expanded LHR Airbus fleet. It would be a complete nonsense to move the aircraft and the routes but tell Gatwick pilots that they weren’t allowed to fly them. I think the P&P word for that situation occurring would have been displacement.

More senior Gatwick pilots were originally going to be told that they couldn’t displace junior Heathrow pilots flying the same aircraft. Yet in the same breath they should sit quiet whilst being told that more senior 747 pilots were not only being retrained to fly their aircraft but being pay protected into the bargain? That would have utterly shafted the Gatwick Airbus pilots, who let’s remember are type rated on a BA fleet in operation and currently flying from Heathrow. The 747 lot are not. I’m all for seniority but it didn’t apply when it came to displacement we were told. You can’t have your cake and eat it.

The whole thing is an utter buggers’ muddle.

The deal isn’t good for anyone. Round two is coming and paying for lifo won’t work a second time. If I were putting my money on it I’d say balpa now know this and are just trying to calm the masses before big bad BA come along and swing the axe again.

Rex, there is no need to play devils advocate. My beef is not with what has happened, it is with the fact that BALPA are misleading the community, by spinning the truth and also actively telling porkies about the result.

With that I wholeheartedly agree. LIFO applies unless you’re a 787 or A350 pilot (you don’t need to have even started the training) or you’ve been a pilot
for a subsidiary airline or you’re an FO on the Jumbo.

Which Jumbo FOs had any kind of immunity to LIFO?

You misunderstood. I’m just saying that they’ve not received the protections of LIFO in the MOA that listening to Balpa would have you believe have been upheld as part of the deal. There are several groups to which the “general principle of last in first out” from the MOA has been played fast and loose.

Oh I see what you mean. Yes that is true.