|
WWW shows his location as 'Out of the loop'. Funny how every time he posts he reinforces that position.
I will wait for the publication of the facts but if anybody truly believes that BASSA were the last remaining bulwark against BA management read this wonderful piece of illiterate half-truth designed to engender more support for their present ballot. BASSA EMAIL UPDATE: BASSA UPDATE BA PENSION IMPOSITION Friday 5th January 2007 20.00hrs All BASSA reps were derostered for today's meeting with the T&G's Deputy General Secretary Jack Dromey and Steve Hart Regional Secretary on their report back on any movement from BA on our current impasse with BA on our 12 points, one of which we might add is pensions. Interestingly, at the same time that this meeting was going on, BA had organised a pensions meeting with the rest of the TUs in Waterside to try and reach a solution on the way forward over the NAPS pension deficit, knowing full well that BASSA could not attend, as they were locked away in talks some 15 miles away. We received a telephone call from T&G sources, indicating a 'final' position from BA had been received in our absence and that we would have to agree today or not at all. As this so called 'final offer' was so very detailed, we agreed to take all the information away and dedicate a full day next Friday 12th January to discuss it fully with the T&G Financial Director who has agreed to give up his day, to devote the necessary time and expertise to help us fully understand the financially technical part of the company proposal. We will NOT agree, or indeed disagree with anything until we fully understand it, you would expect nothing less. BA subsequently has indicated that without full agreement from all the TUs they will impose their solution to the Trustees on Tuesday. That agreement they sought was not reached. So our fears have been realised BA has imposed a deal BASSA have hardly had view of, for what reason, so they can line their own pockets with bonuses? All your reps will wait for your voice through the ballot and will act accordingly with your wishes and we all stand committed with one more aggressive act from a management, who have no right to be in the people business. Similar to another cabin crew member who thought BASSA would pay her salary if they went on strike. BASSA are being disingenuous about their position on the pension negotiations and their communications leading up to this strike ballot have been abysmal in that they are strong on rhetoric and short on facts. If they attempt to strike they will come of worst. Frankly, many of us would like to see them brought down a peg or two. |
Mouse
Simliar experiences to you. Whilst I agree they should fight for their T+C's (well some of them) their lies had better no scupper the chance of a pension solution |
Copied with permission from elsewhere (the author is welcome to contact me via the BALPA site if he'd rather I remove it from this specific site and I will do so):
MYTH1: BA set up the pension meeting yesterday knowing BASSA could not be in attendance. FACT1: The pension meeting was adjourned for over 2hours in order to give BASSA time to make an appearance, which they did about 4pm. Their main union officer(T&G) was there all day and he couldn't get a response from them by telephone. Almost 40% of the pension meetings never had a BASSA Rep in attendance anyway. BASSA was not there yesterday because the resolve of their members for IA is weak enough without resolving the pensions issue. They didn't want a pensions deal yesterday and asked if we could delay the decision 1 week. This was not possible as BA were meeting the trustees tuesday and any offer can't sit indefinately on the table. BA wouldn't be able to commit to the offer past next Friday as BASSA would have their ballot results by then and the whole situation for BA could be vastly different (they might be facing a strike and have to freeze the offer). MYTH2: Each of the other three unions acknowledged at the meeting that their own improvements had only been achieved through the resolve shown by BASSA. The deal currently on the table is there purely because of BASSA's strength. Because of your strength and because you are telling anyone that will listen that you are not happy and that you aren't going to be walked over. FACT2: BASSA was at the beginning of the pensions debate being sold down the river(accepting NRA65) by their own larger union(T&G) who seemed more concerned by the majority of their ground staff. BASSA was not even present at these meetings. When it was leaked to BASSA what was transpiring, they suddenly turned up at the next meeting, they adjourned to a separate room for 2 hours and obviously a battle with the T&G ensued. They then decided to represent their own position and that was "we are in line with BALPA's proposal" as they were at this point starting from scratch with no research or knowledge. From that point forward BALPA carried BASSA(it was in our own interests as well to do so, for legal and other reasons). Eventually pressure was brought to bear and the whole of the T&G agreed with basically BALPA's proposal. I am still not convinced BASSA to this day even understand the basics on pensions, let alone be in a position to negotiate on them. MC knows first hand BALPA saved their bacon on pensions, despite what they know feel necessary to release. It was acknowledged yesterday though how well BALPA had done for it's members and this had some unions scratching their heads how this had come to pass. MYTH3: Amcus and BALPA received an additional £9m/yr yesterday in order to sign an agreement that sells its members down the river. FACT3: The £9m is BALPA's and BALPA's alone. It will become apparent how this £9m came about on Monday, it is part of £15m/yr savings that BA were going to claw back from AIRCREW(flight crew and CC only, not groundstaff) after the initial 5year transition period in BA's proposals was ended(BA's contribution were going to drop from £280m/yr to £265m/yr as spotted by our experts). Of the £15m/yr, £9m/yr was attributed to flight crew and £6m/yr was attributed to cabin crew. BALPA managed to secure these funds and have them allocated directly back to the groups where the money was being robbed from in the first place. Without BALPA's efforts, BASSA would never have seen sight of the £6m/yr which will be distributed to BASSA and CC89(Amicus) Cabin crew. Although unlike BALPA who had a set plan months ago, cabin crew have no idea on how to use the money, if they ever get it now with their actions of late. MYTH4: Two of the 4 other unions have agreed so this will be imposed on BASSA and GMB. FACT4: The T&G had to abstain from the vote due to BASSA's politiking. BASSA's stance had nothing to do with the deal itself(in fact they didn't even want to hear what the improved deal even was), and more to do with their 14-point(?) strike ballot and divergent membership. BA are going to give us time to ballot our members, and BASSA are only grandstanding. If the time comes to sign with trustees and BASSA continue to play games it is likely that BA will impose the changes. After all BASSA had very little imput to the negotiations in the first place other than we accept BALPA's proposal. BASSA have some serious divisions. More than half their members are on the new pay scales which are capped at PP7 until they get a promotion, and some are now on PP7. Promotion is highly unlikely given the increased retirement age laws and the fact BA also want to remove CSD's off SH and a purser off LH at the same time. If unification of pay scales is going to happen, it will be a resut of the old pay scales suffering, not the old scales moving up. But this is the prime motive of their XX-point issues ballot. |
BA pension problem
You BALPA guys are at the T and G and BASSA throats now. No wonder W. Walsh was not afraid of the BALPA strike threat.
The F.Times today gave most of the details away probably due to a leak somewere. The OFFER is hardly any better than the one BA offered you several weeks ago and has been on the Company Website for ages. The problem is you have oversold what you could get for the BALPA membership and now you are going to have to backpeddle like mad... and some of you seem to be prepared to blame everybody else for your failure on the crucial points. That is : 1. The payments be affordable.... 20%+ increase in members contributions IS THAT AFFORDABLE?????? 2. That the RPI cap on annual pensionable pay rises which would reduce pensionable pay to half normal pay in 12 years or so.... (if the earnings RPI gap continued to be about 2 to 3 % a year as at the present time)..... ........Be removed from the BA offer?????? (If the current accepted deal was applied to today's rates for those that are late members of NAPS....... final salary pensionable pay would be about £60000 and a pension using the new calculator about £35000 a year with a pension RPI increase capped at 2.5% a year.) ..RPI is currently just under 4% If BALPA has removed these major obstacles then it has succeeded in what it had previously stated was an esssential part of any solution. The problem is that it has failed on both counts and the details of the failure will be known to all on Monday. Balpa set the height of the bar itself at general members meetings and it has failed to reach it. The membership will be very upset by this poor deal that has been accepted by the Union. |
sssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss
Anyone hear that? ssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssssss It's that noise again:= |
I hear nothing but static.
Just background noise. |
The FT story:
BA maps out its pensions flightplan By Kevin Done,Aerospace Correspondent Published: January 5 2007 23:41 | Last updated: January 5 2007 23:41 British Airways has agreed a further major increase in its annual pension contributions to secure the backing of its trades unions in a breakthrough deal last night. It is making a one-off cash contribution of £800m, subject to fund members also accepting reductions in pensions benefits, and has agreed to make annual contributions of £280m a year, up from the £272m proposed in November. It has been forced to move a long way in negotiations; first with its pension fund trustees and then in talks with the unions from its first proposals tabled early last year, when it put forward a one-off cash injection of £500m and annual contributions of £235m. BA will also pay an additional £50m a year for the next three years depending on the group’s financial performance. The £800m injection will be paid out of the group’s cash balances, which totalled £2.6bn at the end of September. The three annual payments of £50m will be paid as long as BA’s year-end cash balances are above £1.8bn. The £800m will be paid in two tranches, £250m this month and £550m in April in order to secure the maximum tax benefits. The £800m payment will be tax-deductible and will have a net cost for BA of £560m. The deal will involve employees contributing a one-off saving of £400m by agreeing to a 2.5 per cent cap on future pensionable pay increases, which, together with the cash injection, will reduce the actuarial deficit from the current £2.1bn to £900m. The remaining deficit is due to be eliminated during the next 10 years through increased company contributions and changes to benefits, which include a higher retirement age and a lower cap on annual increases in pensions. Previously, the proposals have centred on staff accepting cuts in future benefits, including an increase in the normal retirement age of 10 years for pilots and cabin crew from 55 to 65 and from 60 to 65 for ground staff. The main pension fund will remain a final salary defined benefit scheme for existing members, but the scheme was closed to new members in 2003. Last night the Transport and General Workers Union said that BA’s four main unions had agreed to recommend “changes to future benefits” to secure the cash contributions from BA. The changes would provide “a choice of benefits at differing levels of contributions”. and: BA in pensions deal with unions By Kevin Done, Aerospace Correspondent Published: January 5 2007 23:24 | Last updated: January 5 2007 23:24 British Airways reached agreement on Friday night with its four main trade unions on a package of reforms to eliminate the £2.1bn deficit in its pension fund over the next decade. The deal, which will be recommended by the unions in a ballot by the workforce, ends 16 months of negotiations and lifts the threat of industrial action against the airline over the controversial changes in pensions terms and conditions. BA will make a one-off cash contribution of £800m, subject to fund members also accepting reductions in pensions benefits, and has agreed to make annual contributions of £280m a year. The agreement is expected to lead to a review by rating agencies of BA’s credit status and could pave the way to the airline regaining an investment-grade rating. Its bonds were relegated to junk status in the wake of the September 11 terrorist attacks in 2001, an event which contributed to the global airline industry’s prolonged financial crisis. A resolution of the pensions issue will also clear the way for BA finally to embark on a decade of heavy investment in the renewal and expansion of its long-haul fleet with capital expenditure of more than $10bn (£5.2bn). Ironically, the breakthrough on pensions and the improvement in its financial status could leave BA more vulnerable to possible takeover. The airline, already one of the most profitable network carriers, has been the subject of growing speculation as a target for private equity funds, which has been triggered by the recent acquistion of Qantas, the Australian flag-carrier, by a team of financial groups including Macquarie and Texas Pacific. The BA share price has risen by about 75 per cent in the last 12 months. Collins Stewart, the UK stockbroker, said this week: “We strongly believe BA is a primary takeover target.” The share price closed last night 4p higher at 548¾p, its highest for seven years. BA has been burdened with the biggest pensions deficit of any group in the FTSE 100 index of leading companies relative to its market capitalisation. Resolving the pensions issue has posed one of the biggest challenges to Willie Walsh since he took over as chief executive of the airline at the end of September 2005. Mr Walsh last night hailed the deal wth the unions as “great news” and said: “[It] effectively tackles one of the most fundamental issues we face.” By reaching agreement with the pension fund trustees and the trades unions, BA had found “a shared solution” that had helped to secure the pensions of the 33,794 active members in the group’s New Airways Pension Scheme (Naps) and had removed “a major blocker to future investment in British Airways,” said Mr Walsh. BA still faces big labour challenges, however, including the result of a ballot, due next Friday, by cabin crew on taking industrial action over controversial changes to working practices. |
this whole thread is largely irrelevant if BA has no customers to fly.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/london/6227187.stm absolutely :mad: useless. |
BRAKES HOT
Judging by the profits, it seems passengers STILL trust BA more than the cowboys that are their competition! :rolleyes: |
I am glad to say that Lucifer's story from the FT has some MAJOR loads of tosh in it. I have just downloaded the initial info from both BALPA and BA and 'thankfully' the proposed LPI of only 2.5% has been dropped and remains at 5%.
The BALPA Pensions team have done a sterling job against a bunch of thoroughly deceitful and totally dishonest thieves - BA management. I for one will be voting in favour of the package. It is not ideal, but a lot better than it could have been. The news that the REAL possibility of BA pilots taking IA will obviously upset some on this forum!! Some of the uninformed rubbish spouted on this thread has been quite appalling. It very much appears that some pilots really want the worst for others. Not so much 'happy landings', but 'go on screw up - and I can get your job'!! :\ |
An awful lot to take in regarding the new proposals. Little of it good. (If one starts from the current scheme!) However.....
It is fantastic to report a very significant improvement for BARPers! First suggestion is that BARP may genuinely become 'market leading'! So any non BALPA BARPers out there, join up now, and discover the improvement! |
More media reports (unlinkable):
Headline : British Airways union disputes BA's claim that negotiations have concluded; BA denies approaching Goldman Sachs regarding potential takeover defence Main body : British Airways (BA), the UK-listed airline, claimed to have reached agreement with unions over its pension deficit, although unions disputed the claim, The Times reported. BA said yesterday (8 January) that it had 'concluded' talks regarding its GBP 2.1bn (EUR 3.1bn) pension scheme deficit, the report said. Balpa, the union representing BA pilots, said in the report that BA's assertion that it had reached agreement with unions was 'totally untrue.' Discussions between BA and BA Forum, an employee organisation comprising representatives of Balpa and the Transport & General Workers Union and Amicus, ended Friday (5 January), the report noted. A Financial Times report detailed BA's announcement yesterday, in which the company said that it had agreed an increase in its contributions to the scheme in exchange for agreement on measures to eliminate the deficit over the next decade. The item also noted that some union officials said BA's statement was premature. The Financial Times report quoted GMB union representative, Gary Pearce, who said in an AFX report that BA's final offer would be presented at a union meeting on Friday (12 January). The union would decide whether to back the agreement at the meeting on Friday, Pearce added. Separately, a Daily Telegraph report quoted BA chief financial officer Keith Williams, who downplayed talks that the company might now be in play for a takeover after reaching agreement on the pension scheme. Williams also denied market speculation that the group had sounded out Goldman Sachs regarding the US-based investment bank joining its advisory team of Merrill Lynch and UBS in anticipation of mounting a bid defence. A separate report in the Financial Times carried analysts' mixed opinions regarding the potential for a takeover bid for BA. An analyst at Collins Stewart yesterday tipped BA as a likely bid target, citing its agreement on the pension scheme. Based on valuation multiples being applied to Qantas, the Australian airline, the analyst mooted an 800p per share take-out price for BA. Other analysts quoted in the Financial Times report and the Daily Telegraph report were dismissive of the prospects of a bid for BA. Both reports quoted an analyst at JPMorgan, who said yesterday that BA cannot be compared to Qantas, which is at an earlier stage in the profits curve than BA, which is reaching a peak in its profit cycle. Therefore, there is less chance for upside with BA, the analyst explained. British Airways' market capitalisation stands at GBP 6.25bn (EUR 9.31bn). Source : The Times (London), Financial Times, Daily Telegraph |
So, as usual another load of cobblers from BA. You should see the BA Intranet!:mad:
Nice to see that the Times has amended it's piece this morning to include a more reresentative view from the TU side. Even the Engineers got a mention! That can't be right.:uhoh: |
I think its the best deal we will get even (in the now unlikely) event of a strike.
Well done to Dave Kevin and Graeme. Yesvote from me for massive damage limitation. The whingers have started on the BALPA forum though on the (unofficial) compare cost thread. I suggest that if they are unhappy (their right of course) and if the pension is now so crap that they gracefully move on from BA. Anyway one of them is a well known moaner (good at balancing on logs I'm told) and would moan if the deal came with gold on top. |
Gold on top?? No chance. Just a slightly less thinly disguised sh@fting.
Moan..... :( :( :( |
BA pension problem
Still it is basically the same deal as before apart from
1. an improvement to BARP . 2. An improvement to the RPI protection of the pension to 5% from the proposed 2.5%. These are good BUT....... The rest is basically the same as before, the main problem is the max of RPI increases to pensionable pay. Over 20 years or so that wiill increase the gap between actual pay and pensionable pay to 50% from the 20% it is today not a good deal for copilots and junior captains and this was originally unacceptable to BALPA. However true to form they have accepted a bad deal for the juniors to protect the seniors. As I said before, par for the course. However I am sure it will get the votes from the members and the BA pilot T and Cs will fall again lower. |
What a b@lls up. Personally I'll be voting against this tripe!
|
true to form they have accepted a bad deal for the juniors to protect the seniors But why let the facts interfere on a Rumour network, eh, Whoops? :ugh: |
Overstress,
As you say, I'll also retire at 60 with a larger pension than if I'd retired at 55 on the old pension option. Con: i) I'll have to pay more to do this ie. larger monthly contributions and for an additional 5 years. Pro: i) The fund should be stable compared to the present situation. ii) I can remain at BA until I retire at 60 instead of going to work for one of the low-cost airlines. I'll be voting 'yes'. |
Looks like this can only get better, retire at 65,70,75 etc etc
. Con, staff pay more in and get less out. . Pro, company makes more money and can allow the managers to leave nice and early with large chunks of cash. |
This has been an inevitable review process. Even the most optimistic and naïve amongst us would have imagined that we could have come out of it unscathed. The decimation of this country’s once revered pensions industry by the present government is a shameful episode which has destroyed the futures of many hard working people, their families, and their long term care. They will, if justice prevails, suffer their fate at the hands of the British electorate next time around.
For BA however, this has been a much harder smash and grab that they surely intended at the outset. The cynical opportunism of the management has been breathtaking. They had hoped that a big headline grabbing bung, would dupe the staff into accepting what would have been a devastating blow to their deferred salary and rightful reward. What they hadn’t bargained on though, was a renewed and refocused BALPA council, with new reps and considerable expertise in the field of finance and accountancy, which was able to foil each and every one of their shabby tricks, in some cases even before the latest company offer hit the doormat. I reject the accusation, in this one instance only however, that the senior guys have stuffed the juniors yet again. Considering BA would not even discuss BARP at the outset, I think the BACC have made amends for the reprehensible behaviour of some of our colleagues in the past. In summary, BALPA have redeemed themselves, and are clearly a force to be reckoned with. Just like many others in the UK, our dotage will be less lucrative than before thanks to Gordon Brown’s loot and sack of the pensions industry. However, the sickening prospect of sniggering suits walking away thumbing through wads of cash is not as certain as it once was. For that in itself, we owe the Moose and his estimable band of merry men our considerable gratitude. Gentlemen, may you never have to buy another beer. http://www.toonhound.com/roob-1.gif I’ll take on the opposition anyday. It’s my management I can’t beat! |
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/6247897.stm
. Have a look at above link, give em an inch and they take a mile, will be interesting to see how long the watering down process is played out in BA, my thoughts are with all those loyal staff at WH Smith today. |
Whoops x 3
You seem to know all the answers, so can you inform the readers of the historical level of pensionable pay increases, as a proportion of RPI, in BA? BA BALPA members will know the answer and the reasoning behind much of the present proposals. Anybody with a modicum of common sense will understand what has been achieved. Whoops x 3 would obviously liked to have seen a strike which would have possibly done more damage than good regarding the final pension settlement (again BA BALPA members will understand what I am alluding to). I would love to know why an outsider such as Whoops x 3 is so cynically bitter over a deal which actually doesn't concern him one bit. It is like me berating Ryanair pilots for working for the Ts & Cs they have. |
Well, to keep what I have now I'll have to increase my contributions from 5.25% to over 17%.
Poke it!!:mad: |
Originally Posted by Tandemrotor
(Post 3056536)
BRAKES HOT
Judging by the profits, it seems passengers STILL trust BA more than the cowboys that are their competition! :rolleyes: |
Well, to keep what I have now I'll have to increase my contributions from 5.25% to over 17%. |
Quite easily. If you add up the extra percentages for still retiring at 60, maintaining 1/56ths instead of 1/60ths and keeping the inflation cap at 5% this amounts to over 17%. In fact as the rules stand at the moment you're limited to 15%!
|
You are being disingenuous.
Give us your year of joining, age now and what accrual rate you have been paying for to date and then we will see if you are comparing like with like. |
BA pension problems
The fact is that I have done a lot more years in BA than you have...M. Mouse ....and now as a retiree looking at the BA working pilots situation I would be very upset if I was them and had the prospect of pensionable pay wasting away over the years that I had to go to retirement. The example case I produced earlier was just a 1.5 % gap average between RPI and wage inflation. Over my 30 plus years in BA it was always more than that.
Those conservative figures of a pay gap will HALVE pensionable pay with respect to normal earnings in 20 years in 30 years produce a 65% gap. You may be able to maintain the calculator by paying a lot more in but it will be based on a fraction of your basic earnings when you retire. Currently pensionable pay is 20% below basic earnings which is what it was when I retired with APS but even an APS pension would have been rubbish if the pensionable pay was 65% below basic earnings and the calculator was applied to that. A top salary captain would have a pension of £35000 on that basis if he retired today. Just about half what an APS captain retired on 2 years ago. As I said before this deal is good for the senior guys with a lot of time in the old NAPS but it is very bad for those who are junior and will take the full brunt of the RPI cap on pensionable pay. You can pretend that it is a good deal, and it is.... but only for the senior pilots. It is a shame that BA pilots T and Cs just continue to go down for the future pilots in the company. As I said before it is BALPA history repeating itself. |
Whoop. Hope you are enjoying your APS retirement. (I had you down as a current CSD or some Waterside person)
The new NAPS pensionable scale will be 95%LH. Hope that helps. |
The example case I produced earlier was just a 1.5 % gap average between RPI and wage inflation. Currently pensionable pay is 20% below basic earnings |
BA pension problem
I take it then that current pensionable pay will rise by 15% under this deal.
which is an interesting development. It will have to since current pensionable pay is 20 % below basic pay. |
Yes WWW, you are correct. But only for future pension accruals. It offsets any inflationary problems for a while so is a good short-term solution.
I too had you down as a CSD or Waterworlder. |
Originally Posted by Joetom
(Post 3060479)
Looks like this can only get better, retire at 65,70,75 etc etc
. Con, staff pay more in and get less out. . Pro, company makes more money and can allow the managers to leave nice and early with large chunks of cash. You may or may not be happy with the deal, but the simple thing is, the deal is agreed. You can either adapt to it and live with it, leave BA if you're realy not happy or continue to grumble about it untill your retire. Adapting seems the best option, the industry and life in general moves along, you have to adapt or just get dragged along kicking and screaming. wrightbrothers |
Thanks for the patronising stuff, Wright, it really helps the thread along....
....would you be a miffed manager, perchance? :hmm: |
Yes overstress, and how much have the managers' lifestyles been eroded since 911?
I don't see them in the office much when I finish my trips at 01:30 instead of the previous 22:45. I know it's slightly off topic, but it further illustrates how much we have lost ground in the past five years. "The world has changed, but some pilots' world has changed more equally than others". I'm sure I could corrupt the final paragraph of Orwel's wonderful novel too, but that might be a bit rude. |
WWW,
. Your point about RPI and pay increases is the big fish, if said deal goes through, the longer any staff remain in NAPs, the longer the watering down effect has to erode pension value, it will hurt all staff, as you say, staff with long years remaining will save most money for the company. . The other changes can be worked out now, but the above change is a company master card, infact some would call it the joker, the company will have teams of bean counters using these cards to hugh effect. . The company have played a very very cool hand!!! |
Originally Posted by Wrightbrothers
(Post 3063129)
You may or may not be happy with the deal, but the simple thing is, the deal is agreed. ........wrightbrothers
The TUs have negotiated to a point which they feel is the best they can get without further mandate from the members. Ballots will now take place. If the TU membership tell em to poke it then it's back to the table for another round of tea, biscuits and chat.:zzz: BTW my earlier post re;17% applies to groundstaff only.:ok: |
Wrightbrothers,
I think your first name is Steve and you've got an afternoon radio programme. |
yachtno1
From the numbers you sent me privately for you to retire at 60 with the same accrual rate as you currently are buying your increase in contributions from the table I have in front of me shows an extra 3%. I am genuinely puzzled how you reach 17%. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 13:36. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.