I think the BA pension proposal is superb, keeping a final salary pension and all the pilots get to fly the lovely shiny jets for longer, what more could the winging lot want?

And off course us managers get lots more bonus shares becuase it looks like we are making a better profit margin. I only got about £330K worth of shares from the latest operating margin managers bonus recently, how am I supposed to live off that?

My plan is also to work every BA pilot so hard that most will drop dead well before they are of the proposed 60 age for drawing a pension .....

Happy flying ...

Llyod CG

Captain PitBull said: Sadly not. The first attack was when they closed naps to new joiners. You couldn't see it then, and you still don't see it now. He was wrong!
I am, (thank God) no longer a part of the great BA thing, and am once again enjoying a Regional life in a smaller Company which has a small Manager - employee ratio, and a similar lifestyle to that which I lost some four-five years ago. I reiterate my total support for the BA pilots, anyone who does not think that BA, (like it or hate it), is actually the standard bearer for UK Ts and Cs has completely lost the plot. If BA get shafted today, then it will be everyone else tomorrow. I have had many a debate with Hand and Tandem, usually to a score draw depending on who you wanted to believe, but always about peripheral issues regarding the BA / BRAL relationship. To see those two, HS and TR, of everyone I have ever read on here, in disagreement is deeply deeply worrying. I have to say that TR is absolutely correct. If I were being a bitch, I would say that PitBull is wrong, the actual first attack took place when what was then the BRAL/Manx scheme was closed to new joiners. I said at the time that unless BACC supported us and helped to stop that closure, (the only way would have been to have brought us onto the seniority list ..... and hey, it's all history now) then eventually the BA scheme would also be closed to new joiners, and subsequently closed to all. I award myself the order of the Crystal Ball!!!! You can see how far down this line we (as a pilot community and particularly as BA, BRAL, BACX, BACon) have travelled. The ONLY way to sort this is to stick together, and of course that means supporting the BARPERs. I only have an interest as a deferred member of the BRAL scheme, but if that goes down the tubes, then a good third of my pension is stuffed.:rolleyes: Whilst that's not the complete end of the world, I don't see why it should have to happen just so Hutchings, Witts, Evans and everyone else up to Walsh can be paid a bigger KPI bonus. I'll go further, I see even less reason why NAPSTERs should be shafted by an even bigger amount, by what in hard cold fact is a rip-off of utterly gargantuan proportions. Yes, maybe some new BARPERs were a little foolish in not checking out the small print in their rush to become a Nigel, but they have been conned as well. A Union is just that, a UNION, and it should involve everyone and everyone's benefits belonging to the same group. In fact, the bigger the pressure group (say, for example, pilots employed by the BA group) then the bigger and even more irresistable the pressure. At the moment Walsh is achieving precisely his objective from the divided and agressive comments between the mixed interest groups presently posting on this thread.
I would suggest that BALPA has just one shot at this. If they (we) lose, then the whole BA Ts and Cs edifice is up for grabs by the management, and those unscrupulous b@stards will go for it at a run. Remember, we are talking about the most profitable airline in the UK, if not presently in the world, and it is utter bullsh1t to suggest they cannot afford what THEY signed up to. If there is the slightest evidence to show they can't, then a few beancounter's and management heads should go rolling down the corridors, but we can all read a basic balance sheet, and the money is there!!!!!!:D
So, Hand := you really must wake up and smell the coffee, you are not in a silo, you are not an island. I genuinely don't believe your rights should be degraded one iota, but you are far more likely to retain them all if you and your NAPSTER colleagues look just a little further than your own flight decks. I know you don't need to, and that you don't have to, however as I have often bleated in vain, there are ethics and principles involved here, and if that ain't good enough for you, remember that God is on the side of the Big Battalions - are you really SO big that you can not only afford to turn away reinforcements, but perhaps actively create more opposition. The enemy of my enemy is my friend and all that good stuff.

And yes, I'll hoot in support as I drive past the picket lines..............:D

TLP

As a deferred pensioner, you may be interested to hear that, the rumour is, BA signed an agreement to underwrite the deficit in the BRAL scheme.

Many thanks
 

TR - thank you for that news, most welcome if true. (Not that I doubt yourself, just the BACon management.) In any event though, it will make me breathe a little more easily; it would help if anyone bothered to keep us informed, I'm not even sure how the BACon admin setup works anymore.
No more thread drift, stick it to Willie Wonka without greasing it first, and twist it hard for me!;) .

Look after the BARPers, and they'll end up looking after you.....:ok:

Senior managers make a mint, e.g. Chief pilot makes 300K Sterling in shares as a bonus...but Company won't
(a) pay a dividend and
(b) won't top up pension fund
......:mad: um, when's the ballot?

Using a representative share price, and information free to all from the LSE:

Robert Boyle PDMR 45335 £157,765.80
Paul Coby PDMR 82574 £287,357.52
Lloyd Cromwell Griffiths PDMR 97147 £338,071.56
Martin George Director 123862 £431,039.76
Roger Maynard PDMR 106861 £371,876.28
Alan McDonald PDMR 92289 £321,165.72
Neil Robertson PDMR 80146 £278,908.08
Geoffrey Want PDMR 40931 £142,439.88
Robert Webb PDMR 164177 £571,335.96
Keith Williams Director 46631 £162,275.88
Total £3,062,236.44

But they want me to accept a 41% reduced pension :*

PS: PDMR=Persons Discharging Managerial Responsibility

Looking at todays BALPA BACC election carnage I'd say we are closer than ever.

I hope the children that ran the pathetic Airbus stitch up will be happy to see so many experienced reps relegated to the sidelines or out completely.

The lunatics have well and truly taken over the asylum now.

I don't see many experience reps turfed out and I've gone through the results and compared them to the manifestos. Perhaps you'd like to offer some evidence Flashy. No? Didn't think so. I thought you'd be thrilled there are a couple of new ex-RAF boys elected. As you think there's some sort of Airbus stitch up going on perhaps you like to explain where you think the shorthaul reps should have come from, given that there are only two shorthaul fleets? I'd say that the results in that constituency generally reflect the proportion of pilots in each fleet. But then we know you're just trolling anyway. Keep it up, it makes us laugh.:)

Well shall I start with Dave Fielding or Mike Delboy or Paul Copland?

I assume you are on the Airbus. In that case you may have been party to the vulgar campaign masterminded by a captain on that fleet (returned to BACC office) and spread by his trusty gang.

You will no doubt have seen the warped version of the work coverage document leaked by the same gang.

Both smears were vulgar and pathetic.

I hope you will not live to regret the falling of such trusted an effective reps. It won't affect me as I intend to resign as a BALPA member forthwith.

Flash,

Of the three you mention, two were re-elected. As I see it, there's a good mix of new blood and experience, with the new blood having a reasonable mandate.

It's entirely up to you whether you resign or not but I hope you choose to donate your "1% payrise" to a good cause (may I suggest Dreamflight) rather than choosing to sponge off those who negotiate on your behalf.

None of the above were re-elected to the BACC.

I welcome new blood but it now seems that SC and his gang, along with the forum, control BALPA.

Look at the first 3 on the SH vote to see what I mean.

Number 2 having the reported highest draft level in BA shorthaul due to his position as an (up until now) minor pool rep.

That I want nothing to do with.

My money shall indeed go to charity and I will not be striking under the instruction of these people.

But one of those three is on the Airbus so hardly an Airbus conspiracy. IIRC he was also the man who signed us up to AMP without consultation. Perhaps that has something to do with it? Given that only there was only a 51% turnout, which isn't too far adrift of the proportion of members on the forum, perhaps it was only the people who take an active interest in the day to day running of the BACC who bothered to vote. If you're mates haven't been voted back in then I'm afraid thats tough luck. It's what happens in a democracy Flashy. As it happens the only evidence of the 'smear campaign' I saw was on the forum and the only influence it had on my voting was to turn me away from the instigator. People demand results and they feel the results have not been delivered. Perhaps the outcome of the election shows who the electorate really trust. It's a vote for change, a vote for less compromise and fewer shady deals behind closed doors with BA.

PS You don't strike under BALPAs instruction, they just organise the ballot and you tell them whether or not you'll strike. Perhaps you prefer to be led rather than lead yourself?

Do you have evidence to back up such an accusation?

Would you care to name those who are obviously corrupt so I can watch them sue you?

Well we could start with signing up to AMP without any consultation with the community. I believe the justification was that it helped the management extract concessions from other workgroups in the company. I won't be expecting any writs soon you drama queen.

quote from lord flash
"My money shall indeed go to charity and I will not be striking under the instruction of these people. ":D

what a flash from the lord (pun intended)
also quote from the same lord when asked to donate

"Do you have evidence to back up such an accusation?"

:cool:
back to my garden and my roses i suppose now

Just out of interest, Human Factor, do you mean that paying union dues is morally equivalent to giving to charity? I see a considerable difference.

I suspect that the strike has just moved closer looking at the list of elected candidates.

No need to strike now - BA have publicly stated that employees will receive the pension that was on the contract they signed on joining the company.

http://business.guardian.co.uk/story/0,,1791037,00.html

Good old Rod - knew he'd come in handy one day...

52049er i reckon you read the report wrong

"BA are being very forceful in trying to change the terms of their pension scheme," said Brendan Gold, national officer for the Transport & General Workers' Union. "It doesn't help when we see these vast inflated sums paid to directors - especially a chief executive who was only there for five years. In fact, quite the opposite."

furthermore

"BA has warned staff that it needs to make sweeping changes to tackle a £2bn black hole in its pension fund. Its proposals include raising its retirement age from 55 to 60 for pilots and to 65 for cabin crew.

A BA spokeswoman said Sir Rod's pension arrangements were contractually agreed when he joined the airline and were "considered appropriate" in comparison with executives elsewhere.


see what i mean geezer works for couple of years sacked a lot of staff he gets a 100 grand a year in pension whilst poor pilots worked all thier life contributed to the fund only to be told " er can you wait five more years"

:ok:

I think what he means is that regardless of their membership of BALPA all BA pilots benefit (or not, if you believe that) from BALPAs collective negotiations with BA. In the past people who resigned from BALPA were inclined to to give an equivalent amount to their subs to charity to indicate they were not simply freeloading from colleagues who continued to pay their dues. I doubt it happens much today.

Any news, chaps?

It's going to be a long play. Don't expect big news from BALPA for a while.

However, there may still be an interesting summer ahead for the cabin crew..... :uhoh:

Agreed - cabin crew morale is rock bottom and sinking fast - with the new unworkable sickness policy, the pension position, already ludicrous handbaggage limits set to rise by 400% next month,inexcusable delays caused by overzealous 'efficiencies' - which in the end cost more - and the ever present threat of yet more new (unworkable) working practices etc . . I don't think BA fully realise how close the crew are going to get soon too.

Everything falls on deaf ears, yet more propoganda is churned out, and a current situation involving a crew that allegedly were way out of hours being disciplined is fast making the crews realisation of how much they are truly valued, plummet......

Nobody wants a summer of discontent - but BA certainly like to push their luck causing untold stress and uncertainty among its crew and customers.
Will they EVER learn . . . . . . . . .

..except they weren't out of hours, not by any measure. Even BASSA aren't claiming that.

It would appear from BALPA that BA have just broken an Industrial Agreement over a leave week.

BTSM

This is the company 'asking for a favour' from the pilots.

Measured against the background of the pension issue, it will be interesting to see what happens.

BALPA officials are now expressing privately that the 'threat' of a strike means nothing to Willie Walsh.

Interpret that as you wish....but I'm putting money in my piggy bank and downgrading my car for the short term...

Well I know where my extra week's pay is going and it is no longer on the LCD widescreen tv.

BTSM - didn't you use your HCI money to buy a new telly like everybody else?;)

I'll be sticking as much money as I can aside for a couple of months.

This one is going to go to the wire....

May be WW can pull a rabbit out of the hat like the Royal Mail has just done, every £1 Gordon B puts in, he gets £5 out later.
.
Simple fact is, the more money Joe public puts into looking after his/her pension, the more Gordon will take it away, I wish it was a joke, but its not.!!!

BA 'could sell Air Miles to fund £1.8bn pensions shortfall'
 

BA 'could sell Air Miles to fund £1.8bn pensions shortfall'
The Independent By Philip Thornton Published: 24 July 2006

British Airways is mulling the sale of its Air Miles customer loyalty scheme to help fill a pensions deficit that could be twice as big as first thought, according to reports at the weekend.

The shortfall in its retirement fund has almost doubled to nearly £1.8bn, according to new valuation being carried out by actuaries, one said. It is understood that Watson Wyatt have revised an initial estimate of £928m to just under £1.8bn in a move that could force the airline to inject more cash into the fund.

The article continues with another three paragraphs

You have to question what is going on when the actuaries initial estimate is half what the final figure is. Don't know much about this business but that seems an excessive difference.

Better to flog airmiles, than flog the rest of the company to death.

Ex-actuary speaking. Shortfalls in insurance and pension funds are the difference between two extremely large numbers:

the value of the fund - this is known pretty accurately, although some items (such as commercial property) may be estimated. Stock prices can, of course, change rapidly, particularly where hedge funds are involved.

the present value of the future liabilities - this is calculated with great precision, but based on estimates of such things as interest rates in 20 years time. What appears to be a very small change in these underlying assumptions (e.g. 0.25% in the interest rate) can make a big difference to the final answer. When you subtract that answer from the fund value (which, in an ideal world, should be at least approximately equal to value of the liabilities), you can get what appear to be (and, in fact, are) huge swings.

Hope this helps

PV

(Hence the joke about the actuary who was asked "what is two times two". Answer - it all depends, what would you like it to be?)

Thanks for the explanation PV. Yes it does help. :)

To follow on from Pax Vobiscum's knowledgeable posting:

The £1.8bn figure was probably from a BA press office deliberate 'leak' which the papers appear to have swallowed wholesale.

The value of the assets in the fund has just been published at £5846m. The liabilities are of course not known, but working forward from earlier figures, it is quite possible that the fund is now actually in surplus.

BA are masterminding a gigantic con trick on their long-serving employees in order to feather the nests of a few management fly-by-nights.

Good point overstress. The bigger the lie, the easier it is to get away with.

Ask an Enron executive... mind you, they got found out eventually... :hmm:

You are living on cloud cuckoo land matey.

Yes, it may have shrunk, but have you not noticed how the markets have moved? They are not magic!

I can assure you I'm not, matey. (If you object to the patronising term 'matey' then edit your post above and I'll edit mine. Forgive me for my testiness but my future is at stake - maybe not yours?

Cleverer people than (you? &) I are looking into this as we speak. Do you understand that we are dealing with projections?

From an ex-actuary above

BTW, you're not related to the Prince of Darkness, are you? Or perhaps BA management?

So can we have a poll as to how many people think that the £1.8bn deficit is genuine?:E

The actuaries will come up with whatever answer their employers tell them to come up with.