I take it that all the unhappy BA pilots will be leaving BALPA should they 'capitulate' to management? That'll be the day.:ugh:

BTW, there have been more non-BA pilots than BA in BALPA for a while. I think they have managed ok.:ok:

I suspect that there will be a flurry of activity in the ad-hoc market and a surge in profits across the industry if there is a strike.:) The pax will just love being flown across the pond in old Jumbos.:eek:

Quote: The pax will just love being flown across the pond in old Jumbos.

And they willl have four engines running instead of three over the pond.:=

BA Pilot Strike
 

I see others think that BALPA will do a deal and not strike.

The problem is that the BA pilot workforce is split 4 ways without even taking into account other unions positions on the pension problem.

1st BA pilot group..... very senior Captains APS age just over 55. These members have a protected old style gold plated pension with all the civil service type bells and whistles and will not strike... BALPA can offer them nothing they already have a 70K+ inflation proofed pension and a 120K BA job which makes them 200K pilots.... the highest earners in the UK. Numbers total less than 50 to 100 all on the 777 or 747 till they loose their medical or reach 65.

2nd BA pilot group the NAPS senior men age 50 +. The current BA proposal will not hit them that hard since they have a large amount of service in the old NAPS which is protected under the BA offer. They will not strike total 500 pilots.

3rd BA plot group junior captains and first officers members of NAPS 27years to 49 years old. Depending on their current length of service they will be hit hard by the BA offer. . They will probably strike total 2500+ pilots

4th BA pilot group new entrants 23 to 26 years old all first officers . they are members of BARP the current contribution scheme . They gain nothing from a strike, they are not members of NAPS. They will not strike . total numbers 500

All my numbers are approximate but BA nows the EXACT numbers. Add to this a pool of Retired BA pilots who have left in the last 2 years numbers about 500 who are only 56 -57 and know the BA procedures and could be revalidated to UK/ JAA rules in 4 days or so with an LPC in the in the sim and a route check by management trainers, if they can be induced to return to break a strike and ensure the security of their pension.... plus fly for a few more years, if thats what they want to do.

With all this in the wings you can see why BALPA has the twitch.

Obviously still out of the loop......:rolleyes:

Whoop out of the loop.

Your numbers are fairly accurate but your predictions are not. BALPA has the pilot workforce united on the issue. BA know this, and it is from the strong position BALPA holds that it has been able to get the management on the back foot.

That is why it is 'quiet' at the moment.

FYI I haven't met an APS member who won't strike. They are the most senior men and they are very angry at the way the management are behaving.

I am group two. I will strike if necessary.

Given that at the last elections the new reps were by their own admission some of the most militant and vociferous of the group dissatisfied with previous representation why would anybody believe that they want to back pedal over a strike?

The amount of polling done has proven the immense level of support BA BALPA enjoy which is why BA's position has moved significantly - twice.

Read the BA BALPA website to fully understand the history and situation so far. And if one rep. in particular tells me that a deal on offer is likely to be the best I will vote accordingly.

Ditto. The moose is loose.;)

WWW

I very much hope that a satisfactory pension solution can be found and a strike avoided.

With a single digit seniority number, I am one of your so-called Group 1 pilots, I do not want to strike, I have little to gain and a lot to lose.

As others have said, I will be paying especial attention to what one particular BALPA rep has to say. If, as I fervently hope will happen, he tells me that the deal on offer is the best possible and we should accept it, I will vote to accept it.

But if he does not, then let us be clear about what will happen next.

If BALPA issue a strike ballot, I will vote Yes.

If BALPA call a strike, I will strike.

The fact that you think that the Group 1 pilots will not support BALPA and their NAPS colleagues, shows me how much out of the loop you really are.

Regards

Bellerophon

I hope you're right guys, I really do!

It's just that the machinations of the BA/BALPA relationship over the past number of years have made me.....Somewhat cynical! (Even if the individuals HAVE changed! There seems to be an overwhelming temptation to 'go native' by those 'representing us)

I don't want to strike, but I am ABSOLUTELY prepared to (particularly if it includes an improvement for BARPers!)

I just don't see BALPA pushing hard enough for BA to be left crying rather than sniggering!!

So sadly the only ballot I'm expecting, is a recommendation to accept something MUCH less than I'm currently hoping for!

Hope I'm wrong!

BA Pilots Strike
 

I understand your helpful position to your junior pilots.

However my view is unchanged.

BALPA has not had a strike involving ANY of the current pilot workforce save your senior group. It is easy to talk tough when you have never been tested.

The last BALPA BA strike was nearly 30 years ago over merging BOAC and BEA.

Since then in every case BALPA has struck a deal with BA.... always talk of a strike but it never happened.

APS BALPA allowed NAPS to start as long as APS pilots were protected.

NAPS BALPA allowed BARP to start as long as NAPS pilots were protected.

This has led to the current situation.

With so many different groups wanting different things it will be impossible to hold a strike together when BA gets tough ,and it will, have no doubt .

We will soon know the answer BALPA cannot stall for ever.

WWW

Your postings are so off the wall as to be hardly worthy of a response. APS became unaffordable and NAPS arose. I joined BA/NAPS of my own free will.

NAPS has a serious deficit problem courtesy of robber Brown and his ilk. BARP was introduced. BALPA would never ever have managed to get incumbent employees to vote to strike to prevent future employees only having the option of BARP. Life is just not like that.

If we can improve BARP on the back of defending NAPS all well and good.

The wider issues of capitulating entirely over the NAPS issue are what people such as Bellerophon and myself and innumerable colleagues WILL strike over if required. Make no mistake.

Many of us have personally written to LCG to personally advise him of that fact.

The fact that we haven't had a strike for many years speaks volumes of the innate intelligence of both sides during negotiations over contentious issues.

The last ballot was over LGW around 1996. The results of that ballot were so overwhelming that even I was suprised. I suspect Ayling broke into a sweat.

I see a strike as a failure, the fact that BALPA have looked after the majority of its BA membership so well during my 20 years in the company without needing to resort to calling a stoppage makes me feel that my 1% has been a wise investment.

P.S. BALPA is not stalling. If you truly knew the facts you would realise what nonsense you are posting.

Tandem - is that what you truly believe about the current team? I feel quite secure in their hands, especially with the moose loose! ;)

overstress

I have always been impressed by the contributions of 'the moose'. We aren't far away from seeing what he, and us is prepared to settle for.

I repeat. I just don't see balpa pushing hard enough for there to be a strike ballot. I genuinely hope I'm wrong, not because I want to strike (per se) but because I think anything less than a strike, or near strike, will simply result in the company getting whatever it was they wanted right from the very outset!

Very closely followed by record profits, record management bonuses, and huge investment in new aircraft. All on the back of a massive reduction in my 'deferred pay'!

The company CAN afford whatever it wants to!

QED

If you believe that Tandemrotor you really have not been listening to the Union Pension Services actuary nor the other highly qualified and respected advisers employed on our behalf by BALPA.

I am prepared to be realistic but not prepared to be screwed by short term opportunists and there obscene 'bonus' arrangements.

M.Mouse

Is it not possible for anyone to have a different opinion to you, without suffering your personal abuse?

I HAVE been listening. I also know that 'advisors' only advise, they do not negotiate!

I may very well be proved wrong. So may you!

My personal experience has led me to believe that my cynicism is well founded. Perhaps your experience leads you to a different attitude.

Perhaps the only difference between us is that I will be happy to be wrong.

Well, I'm with you TM, I believe that the Company can afford it too. I also believe that they will announce record profits and new aircraft orders almost as soon as the pension 'deal' is done.

Sadly, BALPA paid for top advice and the response was that BA actually can't afford your obviously preferred 'no change' option.

There is no-one whom I would trust more than 'The Moose' to fly in the face of said advice if he felt there were the slightest justification for so doing. I have to believe BALPA when they say that 'no change' is no longer an option... Remember, the regulator and the trustees are running around in this particular maze as well as BA and BALPA.

The Moose would not have changed his tune for any other reason than that it were the most sensible course of action.

All I can do is look forward to explaining to the Labour canvassers why I shall not be voting for their candidate in the next election (if they have a few weeks to spare on my doorstep, that is - it is not only pensions I am extremely angry about).

Tandemrotor,
Think your feeling is right, am hearing George Lucas is very interested to know why so many from the dark side are gathering at Heathrow at this moment in time.
.
Always best to remember that many of these dark forces are using cloaking devices to trick people who have soft memory cells fitted.
.
I belive the best result will be acheived just before any IA is taken by staff(say -7days), 2nd best will be after IA has started, 3rd and last will be if unions don't ballot for IA.
.
One thing for sure, the bigger the reductions in pensions for staff will ensure managers get loads of money one way or another???:ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

I'm confused
 

Reading the Q&As from the NAPS trustees, it appears that has BA paid off at least £1.4bn of the pensions deficit between 2003 and 2006 in real terms. But what do they know.

All I can say is that that nice LCG bought my dessert in Waterworld not 6 months ago, due to a cock-up in my counting my change, and I shall be forever grateful to him.

Some of you folk appear to imply that the company and it's directors are being less than forthright with us in a bid to fleece us all. I'm sorry, I just don't know where you're coming from.

:) :) Very droll, Halfbiscuit! Let's hope that the Moose and his team have a shrewd review option in the deal they're cutting. So that when the record profits are announced, some of that money goes to NAPS and BARP instead of into the bank accounts of the dark side.

I would bet my bottom dollar, that ever since the last pension valuation three years ago, BA have been hatching their plans about which working practices to target, and how much money they will make from those plans. They have similarly been planning to reduce our pension benefits as much as possible.

They are being less than forthright, by leaving these working practice attacks (and hence savings), until after the pension deal is struck.

This time in three years time, when the new pension deficit is calculated, and we have had three years of serious profits (even though with the shambles that is BA, we quite frankly do not deserve them), we will all be scratching our heads and wondering what has happened!

BALPA cannot second guess what is going to happen, just like BASSA cannot - although they are trying to. All BALPA can do is protect us as well as they can at this moment in time. Anything short of the maximum amount that BA can afford right now, would be a total failure. Personally I think we should be pushing for more than they can afford, and explain to the trustees that whilst it does not look like BA can afford it, they will be able to by the end of the year... Perhaps we could lose the planned benefits at the end of each year, only if BA have not made above a certain profit?

No chance of that though. Because otherwie, we might just as well leave the benefits where they are now. BA looks like it cannot afford the deficit. But in reality, by the time they are done with their cost cutting (at the passengers expence I might add, they will easily be able to afford to pay).

Great idea, but would you trust the company to be honest about it's profitability in such circumstances? I am reminded of the recent alleged quote from a senior bean-counter... "We're running out of places to hide the money".

BA and most of the Unions have reached a tentative agreement about pensions tonight. Press release on it's way. Official announcement by BA to the London Stock exchange on Monday followed by our briefings.

Ballot to follow............

BA pensions problem
 

The T and G abstained at the meeting on Friday, they could not agree to the deal today but reserved judgement. As stated by the T and G deputy general Secretary Jack Dromey. in a messsage to Bassa members.
The deal proposed is only worth another 8 million according to the T and G (so it must be pretty close to the original offer).
As I predicted BALPA chickened out of a strike and went with the flow of the other unions, BA stated if they did not agree today they would impose their (BA) solution next Tuesday.... so much for a strong BALPA.
I am sure that Monday will reveal that the pensionable pay link to RPI remains.... which was supposed to be an unacceptable BALPA requirement originally.
Balpa is all talk as I said all along with respect to this dispute.
There will be no strike ballot.

The writing was on the wall, despite all the rhetoric in this thread. At least cabin crew have guts, though a strike by them may jeapordize any agreement.

Oh FFS, this is making my skin crawl; "The Moose" is not God,......he's a sharp guy who done a great job at negotiating/screwing as much out of the Company as possible without the leverage of a strike ballot, and for that I am very grateful...however by the very nature of negotiation and the beast that is BA there must be more to be had. By all means accept the deal if you have limited aspirations and are happy to hear LCG say " see, I told you you wouldn't strike". By all means accept the deal as long as you understand that all our other whinges over things such as buses, AMP, status, etc, will remain unresolved.

Please forgive me for intruding.....

I'm not a journo, but just a humble SLF and BA sharholder ( since the flotation) and i support any action that you may take to get what you have worked hard for. Incase you are wondering about my age...my father purchased the shares for me, and on my 18th birthday, they were handed over to me.


But i noticed in todays Daily Mail newspaper that the trustee's of BA's pension fund have bought some of Tesco's superstores on a leaseback deal. The deal makes BA one of Tesco's largest landlords, i dont know how much was paid, but it is a 20 year deal with an option to terminate the deal in 2016.

That's bit premature, whoop. The members will be given the details on Monday and there will be a ballot.

Look at the title of the thread, I said 'prepared to strike'. We still are, we may not need to if the management have caved.

If the members don't like the deal then that's another story.

Get the facts straight, the meeting with BA and the TU's was arranged nefore Christmas. BASSA decided to arrange a T&G meeting to coincide so that they could argue that they couldn't attend.

Their sole reason for this is so that they didn't invalidate their running ballot by removing the pension issue from their mandate. They are playing this as hardball and 'we will not give in' to spur their membership into voting 'yes'. In the years to come, after BASSA have agreed what is on the table (without improvement), the myths and legends of BASSA spin will be portrying this as a great BASSA Pensions victory despite the other TU's weaknesses.

Thsi is the way BASSA/T&G works, spin without substance.

Ba pensions problem
 

Lets get this Straight at Last.

The only improvement is the £8M Ba has thrown into the deal.(to offer a fig leaf to the unions to justify acceptance).

THAT WILL NOT BE ENOUGH TO CHANGE ANYTHING MAJOR TO THE LAST BA OFFER.

The NAPS membership will have to swallow the total cost of the tweaks to return to the old scheme NAPS type deal as BA required which could rise to 20% extra contributions of pensionable pay if a member opted for them all!

The RPI max link to future pensionable pay will remain.

Face it guys BA has WON and BALPA did not rise to the bar.

It chose the easy option to protect the senior NAPS guys who will not be affected so badly.

You will be asked to vote to accept the BA offer. NO STRIKE BALLOT.

The outcome was so predictable, like the fact that the Membership will Vote Yes to this deal and accept the Union recommendation. They have never thrown out a deal brokered by New Road and never will.

W. Walsh 1 Balpa 0.......... The City and the Chairman chose the right C.E.O.

Whats next on the W. Walsh Menu

WWW - 2 points.

If the deal is put to the members and they say no - I think you might find that there is still a possibility of a ballot. Let's hope not.

Secondly with regards to your 'what happened to the BARP improvement' - well if you had your ear a little more firmly attached to the ground you would be aware that there has been an improvement to BARP - just no details released till Monday (after the city have been told).

Now maybe you can keep a lid on your rhetoric until you have all the facts.

WWW

Lets get this Straight: The proposed negotiated deal, the one we all get to vote on, has yet to be revealed. It is ALL rumour, based on half an incomplete story.

So before you condem and gloat, wait for the full facts.

WWW
Correct me if I am wrong, but BA's original idea was a career average scheme.
Their official next proposal was £500m lump sum and £250m (plus a bit (can't remember the exact figure) per year. Then the lump sum went up to £800m and £272m per year. Now it has gone up another £8m per year yes. But ALL of these improvements have been spearheaded by BALPA (with backing from the other trade unions).
Now I am not saying that I am going to vote for the deal. I do not know precisely what it is yet. I hope it will be flexible in the future - and not in BA's favour. I am also hoping that BALPA have managed to get a shift in the amount of the money that is going to past accrual and the amount that is going to future accrual. It is the future acrual that BALPA were interested in (ie reducing the loss of benefits), whereas it is the past acrual that the trustees were interested in.
I think you should give BALPA a break until we see the proposals. And if we do not like them, we can vote no.

Just to say:

I'm prepared to keep quiet until Monday. It's pointless discussing rumour, when the facts are so close to emerging!

Ba Pension problem
 

Here is what is in the public domain ie bassa members vis the meeting............

You will read of the decision of the BA Forum to recommend acceptance of a pensions package, designed to safeguard the future of NAPS in BA.

It will now be for the members to decide.

Following our discussions with the BASSA Committee and representatives, I made it very clear to the company that BASSA was not ready to settle the issue of pensions at this stage.

The Forum was then faced with two options:

• imposition next Tuesday by the company agreeing with the Trustees;
• recommending the package that had seen a further and final improvement made in day-long negotiations earlier today.

The BA Forum concluded that imposition was completely unacceptable because:

• it would be a bad precedent for the future
• the £800 million would not be guaranteed
• the further improvements made today amounting to £8 million would be at risk.

Before the Forum made its decision, I made it clear that the T&G could not vote in favour of the package because of the clear position of BASSA.

The T&G position was therefore to abstain.

Crucially, it should be stressed that the further improvements to the pension package has a lot to do with the firm stand taken by BASSA.

Further discussions will now take place between BASSA and BA on the Pensions package as it affects BASSA members.

On the wider dispute between BASSA and BA, the issues remain unresolved and we will now be joined by Amicus in fighting for a just settlement.

Finally our members in BASSA will continue to have the total support of their Union, the T&G.




............This brings me to the view that the only union that has stood firm is the T and G and BASSA.

BALPA has been a paper tiger in this issue.

WWW

You haven't got a clue. BASSA and the T+G don't even understand pensions never mind have anything to do with sorting them meaningfully.

Whatever is on the table is due to BALPA and KJ and DS with Graeme Fowler by far the most intelligent and well informed officer.

Can you tell me one thing.

If BASSA have been all the way behing BALPA in this when BALPA say they think they have a deal, suddenly BASSA get cold feet? Do you think it is maybe that this has happened at a really really bad time for their yes vote?

They are desperate now as one of the main things on their ill thought and ill timed ballot looks to have been potentially solved, well before their "sick out" (for those that don't know most BASSA members do not have the bottle to actually strike). From what I have heard their ballot will be poor as well.

Does anybody care what www thinks? Does he get to vote on it too? He falls into the same category as all the managers-on-message that we have to endure all day everyday - background noise.

Obviously we have to wait until Monday for the facts, but I would be amazed if BALPA get a majority YES if this implies what I think it implies.

Unless they have managed to secure an outstanding deal elsewhere of course.

Just an observation here...........

Balpa members now vs Bassa members...

Divide and rule hmmmmm where have I seen that before:hmm:

The comment about being whe we are thanks to BASSA is laughable.

Just been on the blower to a pal in BALPA who said they couldn't find their arse with both hands, never mind influence a pension decision.

The whole TU position has been driven by BALPA.

Well done chaps. KJ is selling the deal as the best we could have got on the BALPA forum so its a big YES from me.

Also I will make sure BALPA realise that I will not let a badly timed stroppy ballot from BASSA ruin BALPA's 12 month campaign and my future benefits.

This made me laugh. I have not found one cabin crew member that would strike for their pension alone.
Isn't CRM great!
What is good is that the Moose believes he has got every penny possible from BA, and that the deal does indeed involve a shift in the amount of money going towards future accrual and so our pension benefits.
We still need to see the details though.