Are these two statements compatible? For example would the most senior BMI First Officer have to wait until after B.A. recruit who joined the day before the merger/takeover is promoted to be eligible for command?

err - that document is from the BACC not the BMICC - the BACC are there to represent the interests and requests of BA pilots only. The BMIcc will be fighting their corner and most probably are right now talking with the BACC and balpa behind the scenes. I know its no fault of the BMI employees - but before anyone throws their toys out remember BA (management and staff) have a choice here, BMI do not. The most likely alternative to not being taken over is redundancy and slot / asset stripping
Also remember the TUPE ONLY APPLIES IF THEY ARE INTEGRATED. so if the BA pilots vote no, or BMICC refuse to sign up to whatever they are requested then BMI becomes a part of IAG, not BA, probably gets rebranded as BA express and there is no TUPE, no seniority, no protection, no-nothing.
I have no idea what BMI are being asked to bring to the table, but given the concessions that BA are being asked to provide to have an integration rather than a takeover I assume that BMICC are being asked to provide some concessions too. If joining the BA list at the bottom is what they are being asked to do, in order to guarantee all the other benfits then that seems like a reasonable request to me.
I've got some good mates in BMI and I don't wish to see anyone's job or career harmed due to no fault of their own, and a wrong place wrong time deal, but thats the way the cookie crumbles.

BOAC

At the risk of boring everyone to death there is more than 1 interpretation of how things went at LGW in the late nineties.

In particular, the phrase "mostly OK with the odd exception".

I'd rather not go over old ground, as I was fed up hearing about it when sitting in the RHS.
The Dan guys were great (see quote above), as were the BA guys.
What strikes me about it is the CRM issue, of which there were, shall we say, occasional difficulties.
You are never going to keep everyone happy, but I hope that both CC will come up with something that satisfies the aspirations of the vast majority of both sets of pilots.

And despite all the moaning on here, largely from people who are not involved, I suspect that is exactly what will heppen. Both CC's will get the best they can out of the bad hand thats been dealt. We can't change the dealer, we can't change the cards.

what promotion prospects do you think BMI FO's currently have? I'm not being sarcastic - just asking the question. I'd guess that even at the bottom of the BA list, almost all of them would have better promotion and career prospects than they currently do.

Re: BMI promotion opportunities

Am I right in thinking that BMI pilots feel that they are bringing something quite substantial to the table ie airbus aircraft and SLOTS?
Slots that we intend to expand our longhaul fleet with.

Therefore they probably feel that they are entitled to be able to share in that expansion. They will of course, but the big questions are

(1) When
(2) Where exactly will they slip into the 747/777/787/380 fleet list

And that 2nd point is probably crucial, as we know how much our lifestyle can be determined by our position on the fleet list.

And if IAG didn't purchase BMI then they'd be out of business this time next year probably so it's definitely the lesser of two evils.

- not sure when you came along, (actually looking your details you would have 'missed' all the excitement) but I should point out that by "interpretation of how things went at LGW in the late nineties" things had pretty much settled own - it was the 'early nineties' where the issues arose and we had some rather bizarre behaviour from a few of the BA 'secondees' which to the credit of the DA F/Os we were able to handle.

The lessons for BMI are:

BMICC - do your best against overwhelming odds. Assuming you have no 'redundancies' (see above) during the process it is roughly 340:3000

Pilots - things will almost certainly improve as you 'rise up the list' and you are able to bid onto other fleets with a reasonable seniority. The problems largely arise for those with less time to retirement where either a fleet/seat change is blocked or not financially viable.

BOAC

Early '95 for me. I did not miss all the excitement.
I flew with all the DA guys and BA guys. Virtually all excellent chaps.
Eventually the DA FOs got their opportunity too.

And my recollection of who was causing the difficulties is different.
I think the BA guys did a splendid job managing certain situations.
Best leave it at that, as it has little bearing on our thread.

But it does illustrate that there can be potential Notech consequences when either side of the cockpit has a different idea of fairness.
And as we've illustrated, these ideas can exist years later!

I sincerely hope we don't repeat some of those difficulties. Which I might add were isolated, and not representative of the other 98%.

Confirmation Bias
 

Heard that said a lot recently and I have a lot of sympathy with your POV. That's the reason why I was bemused by Dingbaticus's peculiar comment a day or two back that:

confirmation Bias
Your observations about cutting costs are correct; indeed at bmi we've been doing that for sometime now, along with s/e taxi-out'which has saved 6 figure sums p/a. on our relatively small fleet, but, as was mentioned on a thread in another place, the savings mentioned above don't seem to be included in the deal; it's thrust seems purely to cut employee costs. I don't doubt that attempts to include such savings will be made in the future, but that's for another day.

I find it sad that IAG are probally using the money saved by the changes to the BA pilot pension schemes to probally fund the buyout of BMI which in turn is being used to reduce the T and C's of the current BA pilot workforce.

Studi, please re read the long Q and A statement. The answers to your questions are answered quite comprehensively in there.

In brief though. Integration brings all the pilot workforce under the SCOPE agreement and hence work done on all aircraft with over 100 seats will be kept in BA mainline. The chance of a LoCo start up outwith SCOPE as a standalone is almost impossible due to the lack of space/slots at LHR. Without integration the basic building blocks for that new airline are already in place.

If there is no integration there is no need for IAG to maintain the BMI terms and conditions when the a initial period which TUPE applies is over. The new airline can re employ on whatever conditions it wants...not a great place to be.

This is not a merger. IAG is buying BMI and can do with it as it wishes, with the workforce on side or not. That is what this is about. Do we want to be in the negotiations arguing for the best we can expect or looking on as our futures are decided entirely by the bean counters?

As for where BMI FO's fit into seniority lists and fairness. Maybe being at the bottom of the list in and expanding airline is better than having your job conditions dictated to you after a new paint job is put on your aircraft. For those of us that have moved through different companies we understand seniority is not transferable. In some airlines seniority means nothing, in others it is everything. BA is the latter. Why should those that chose to move to BA from other jobs prior to this be disadvantaged by being pushed down the list by those that did not choose to take that decision?

We all make career choices some lucky others not, some considered others through necessity. That is part of this industry.

I enjoy reading your postings playing devils advocate. However you do seem to advocate a non conciliatory approach which in this situation does not exist as a genuine option. This is a bad job, we are trying to make the best of it.

I look forward to flying with colleagues from all backgrounds. The future BMI pilots will be warmly welcomed and all our job security fought for from within. That will not happen so easily if there is discontent about their integration with regard to current BA pilots CHOSEN lifestyle/career prospects. I can only empathise with the current angst amongst BMI pilots. Unlike many of my past colleagues at least they are not staring at redundancy, the desperate search for any job going and all that entails for family and lifestyle. This could be very different.

Jazzy

studi - you seem to be rabble rousing on an issue that not only has nothing to do with you, but is conducted in a different country, under a different legal system.

However
There is no space and no slots at heathrow. That is the bottom line. Sure IAG could set up BA express, despite what happens in the next few weeks, but it won't be at heathrow.

I'm sure the seniority system will be sorted by sensible discussion from both sides, but those advocating that BMI pilots play hard-ass should remember that BMI almost certainly will not exist in 12 months. BA could just sit at the sidelines and then dive in with everyone else to pick up the pieces after lufty eventually fold it up. I'm 100% sure that BMICC are well aware of this fact and will negotiate accordingly.

I am very surpised that there is no talk of co-ordinated action with Iberia flight crew, who coincidentally happen to be in dispute with Willie over similar issues, rather than being picked off over the BMI takeover. Don't any of the BALPA members here not realise that BA and Iberia Express might one day be merged?

As the occasional dictator has found in the past, it is not easy to fight a war on two fronts.....

You mean apart from it being illegal ....? :ugh:

I would imagine that a lot of BMI FO's will be hoping this fails.

After all, if the soon to be BA EXPRESS comes along, expands as every BA pilot thinks it will, then their Commands are going to be a lot quicker in the new outfit than they could ever be in mainline.

The quick Command pay will possibly outweigh a 15 year stint in the RHS, on a 34 pay point scale.

Either way, it's not pretty.

757 Driver,

Remember that when your daughter is run over by a bus, driven by a maniac.

Sure, "unfair" things happen, but that does not mean we should not seek to mitigate the consequences of those "unfair" events, if it is within our power to do so.

Whilst some BA pilots seem to think this is their battle, studi is right to point out the wider ramifications. What happens at BA affects the UK market - the argument has always been that they exert the upward pressure on airline T&C's here in the UK - and one imagines the MartinAir guys might have one eye on what happens here, for instance?

In this instance, I'm sure UK pilots outside BA are wondering whether capitulation will mean downward pressure on their T&C's in the "nearer than expected" future.

Thats why they might be adding their $0.02.

are the BMI pilots not being asked for their "vote" on this?

TBH this gets my goat AGAIN, not so much the BA pilots but BALPA, when the Openskies pilots were made redundant and NOT offered mainline just a poor excuse of an "interview" BALPA did sweet FA, now they are working flat out on this, Jim and his team YET AGAIN dont look after the small fry, only interested in the big issues (airlines?). Double standards and i have a real problem with it.

I hope the BMI pilots and BA pilots can work TOGETHER to bring about a happy marriage here and i honestly hope it all works out for the best, but i suspect BA CC will dictate the terms and BMI will have to take whatever crumbs they are offered.

Guys,

Surely you would all want BA Cityflyer to be tagged onto this merger too?

They have to be planning to expand due to being on half the T&Cs that BA mainline do?

Gettingn the support of everyone would be much more beneficial?

What utter tosh. Please confirm what factual basis you have to back this up and please don't tell me that it is some journo such as that plum working for the FT.

As a bmi employee we were actually shown a Powerpoint presentation from the management documenting Lufthansa's objectives for the Company. The first objective was to sell bmi. That wasn't to sell it to BA/IAG it was to sell it to the most beneficial bidder. That doesn't necessarily mean the highest. So if/were IAG to for whatever reason pull out of the sale, Lufthansa would simply move on to the next bidder. This could be Virgin, Etihad or any other player who submitted a proposal that Lufthansa considered suitable. If the options were not acceptable then Lufthansa would go with option number 2.

This was to invest in bmi to turn it around. Sure there would be further pain and suffering for some and undoubtedly further slots would be sold to help fund this strategy but a plan was a foot. The question was asked whether Lufthansa would simply wind the bmi up and it was explicitly said that this would not be an option. By winding bmi up they stood to lose everything.

My guess is that they wanted to turn bmi around with the least amount of spending required. When they realised that this could not be achieved they have had to dig deep and come up with alternatives. They could turn bmi around but it would need to be brought down to a more manageable size to stop the costs required to do this from spiralling out of control.

So for anyone who thinks that bmi staff should be lucky to have a job, yes you are right, who isn't lucky to have a job at this time but if you think that this was the 11th hour for bmi, guess again. bmi staff could have been wearing a red uniform, a sandy brown one or even a Germanic looking one. We really are a happy bunch who get the job done. Berating bmi staff as being lucky to have a job is a long way from the truth and quite insulting. Had we gone to an opposition, especially a Gulf carrier, things would not be looking so rosy as they do at the moment with the grand lonhaul expansion plans.

For those asking what sacrifices bmi are making, why not let us have a go at operating the standalone Company. Sure there may/will be some erosions eventually in terms and conditions but we would not be type frozen, not be at the bottom of a massive seniority list, probably flying new wide bodied aircraft and for our SFOs and FOs, potentially seeing career progression at an accelerated rate far quicker than they could dream about within BA.

I'd be extremely proud to wear a BA uniform and operating with high calibre professions as I have done throughout my career but please do not belittle us with comments regarding how lucky we are to be at the bottom of the MSL, how we can continue with our BMI salaries without incremental pay until sometime in the distant future when we may be lucky enough to finally make it on to the pp34 list. We are not fools. The talk that is going on here is merely just the minimum required by TUPE law. Nothing more, nothing less. Lets not beat about the bush, trying to jazz it up as anything other than the bare minimum. I for one am prepared to make concessions, lord knows we've all made some along the windy roads of our aviation careers but lets just try and stick to facts rather than beat each other up with hearsay and speculation.

My rant is not meant to deride or aggravate, merely to open people’s eyes so that they can make a more informed conclusion of the events. We recently were flying BMed's aircraft with their Business class cabins to destinations close to China from LHR (tech stopping naturally along the way). We were taking other narrowbody business class cabins down to Sierra Leone. We have interesting routes to many of the worlds "Axis of Evils". Until a couple of years ago, we were flying 330s to Caribbean destinations, Las Vegas and other longhaul destinations. Many on here may recognise us as a flying on domestic routes but we are far more than that.

I totally empathise with those that have been absorbed by BA over the years and found themselves at the bottom of the MSL seniority list. If the present legislation was available during those periods, perhaps you may not have been handled in the same way as you have been. This is the other feature that some people have not understood. The law has changed over the last few years. I am sure that many people are pouring over the TUPE wordings as I type but the bottom line is, that as is often the case, areas are not clear black and white. This means that it is down to the judge on the day. It may go one way or it may go the other. Hopefully though neither of the two CCs will wish to see this go to the wire, as potentially it could sink the whole concept of seniority and we'd all be left clutching the flotsam from the wreck that was what we considered a stable career path. It is as we know an emotive subject, the merging of Companies and what everyone has to be careful of is one side winding up the other side to the extent that they feel that all they can do is throw out their toys out the pram and thus create a situation far greater than the original problem.....

1033,

BMI are losing in xs of £250m pa. Bmi have no assets apart from the slots and one A320; the rest are leased. The pension scheme is 80% invested in equities and is a total basket case (in fact worse than BA's NAPs scheme). They were v.close to being insolvent when Bishop exercised his Put option to sell it to Lufthy in 2008(?). That's why he had to accept less than he was due under the original deal he struck with Lufthy/Scandinavian (the company had to be solvent to exercise the option). They are bust!

BOAC,

There are indeed many similarities between the Dan and BMI take-overs, the main one being that both companies were/are on the verge of insolvency.

Studi
In the UK there is 'TUPE' legislation (Transfer of Undertakings Protection of Employment). This guarantees the terms of employment are carried over from the previous employer so as not to disadvantage the employee upon transfer.
It has been said that this legislation will protect the bmi employees where it is triggered throughout this transfer. It is not concerned with future scenarios such as career progression, seniority, etc.
This is not the only problem with the bmi transfer.
Most people's (pilots included) aspirations concern 1) Salary 2) career progression.
Given that BA has just introduced its new 34 point scale and has indicated that the bmi workforce will join at the bottom, most, if not all the bmi pilots will see TUPE 'kicking in' to protect them.
A 5 year F/O would have to wait a further 6 years before he would see an increase in salary, a 5 year Capt.-12 years, a 10 year Capt.- 16 years, & a 15 year Capt.- 20 years. As far as I am aware, the legislation does not compel any further increases in salary until the 'catch up' is complete. So we have Captains with 15-20 years to go before retirement with about, er.. 15-20 years before they can expect a salary increase. Nice, eh? Oh, and I don't think that the law compels the employer to match our (pathetic) subsistence allowance with the pilots of the new parent company.
As far as I am aware the present state of affairs regarding seniority are that we will be added to the bottom. There have been (and still are) 'discussions' going on on other forums about that; The BA pilots' argument is that they have been assured that no-one will be disadvantaged, so I can understand their concerns about integration.
The most common theme from our side is the BMED integration 3 years ago where Date Of Joining was used across both workforces, under advice from BALPA, the same union representing both sets of pilots here. There will have to be robust negotiations over all of these items.
The bmi pilots cite the fact that we are bringing a large number of slots (more than a fifth) of the size of the BA portfolio across; unlike previous mergers into BA, along with aircraft & qualified Crews; unlike previous mergers into BA.
The BA pilots state (quite correctly) that in its present form bmi would not be around in a year's time & therefore we should be glad of anything that's offered. Well, in order to get the books signed off in the latter part of 2010, WPS (our CEO) had to have a plan B if any sale did not follow through. It involved cutting it loose from the hub style of operation of the past, it would involve more LH & MH flying & would be a 'blank sheet of paper' approach. This, and a possible offer from Virgin or the Middle East were options.
Bmi has posted significant losses over the last few years. We have been run to lose money since the tie-up with DLH & SAS back in 1999, where losses would be covered in part by DLH & SAS. Anything of value was stripped systematically from under the noses of DLH, our main external shareholder. I am led to believe that our Cargo company was owned separately by our Main Shareholder who benefitted hugely. Aircraft were leased & sub leased through a company owned by our Main Shareholder at extortionate rates. We are still paying for leases on buildings that have remained unoccupied for years, some in countries we no longer fly to. When BMED was integrated, there was supposed to be a sum set aside for re-liverying their aircraft; this was not carried out until last year after the Main Shareholder had forced the sale onto DLH. (paid for by the loss making airline)
The last 10 years saw advertising disasters, on-board product cock-ups of monumental proportions,etc.
DLH gave the impression of being serious about turning it around, but with no serious investment in aircraft that could use the slots, it was never going to work. following restructuring, and with several hundred job losses, bmi's admin. costs ballooned. That's right - they went UP! (could this be an efficient way of writing down tax just before the disposal?)
It was obvious that DLH had no intention of turning bmi around in the last couple of years; after acquiring the 20% of shares from SAS there was a clause whereby if they sold bmi before Sept 2010,SAS would get a cut. Guess what? within days of that expiring, we were put up for sale.
The staff have all made sacrifices to try to keep the old ship that was bmi afloat, while its owners had started to cut that ship up for scrap while it was still at sea.
Those that transfer to BA will, at least have a job; but there is a feeling of unease out there that we're in for more of the same.

There you go Studi, I bet you wish you had never asked!!!!!;););)

BMI guys – sorry to have to tell you this, but when you come up against the BA CC all that stuff about being “United in the Interests of British Airline Pilots” goes out the window, and the BA CC will use its weight within BALPA to trample all your hopes and aspirations into the dust - you will be on your own - you are only as strong as your own membership group/CC.

What you will be offered is one of two options:
1/ The bottom of the BA seniority list – with all that that implies for your prospects.
2/ A separate seniority list where you will end up in a situation similar to the GSS guys – BA FOs taking your command slots and so blocking your access to command, or even (in the event of downsizing) you tenure in your job, while they retain their golden parachute back to mainline.

For the baby and regional guys its even worse – you can expect to be ‘sold down the river’ to the highest bidder (or more accurately the outfit that will accept the least to take you away) just like the BA Connect guys were. I say again you are only as strong as your own membership group/CC.

Notwithstanding the above, should an issue arise that negatively affects BA pilots (eg Openskies) you will be expected to support the BA campaign and have your subs used to finance any legal action.

DLH didn't seem too bothered what happened to BMI when it was in their stable? Neither did VC.

Seems the same goes for the T's & C's of Lufthansa Italia? Are they on the same benefits and pay package as DLH? Nope, didn't think so.

Studi advocates the type of IA that saw the death of Alitalia, another case of 'who would buy that???'. Intense IA saw that company, in a country reknowned for its vicious use of IA to ensure untenable wages, deliberately recind its AOC, declare itself bankrupt and re-issue a joint Alitalia/Air One AOC with new contracts. All those that wanted a job and were wanted by the company (exclude Union officials and anyone vocal against the company) had to sign a new contract. Alitalia Air One reborn. Another victory for the 'they would never take us on' brigade. I also seem to remember, taxying through Vienna one morning, thinking that no-one in their right mind would by such a diverse fleet as Austrian Arrows, saddled as they were with a massive debt. Up popped LH , bought them and stripped the fleets.

Germany has the dubious, lucky honour of being the financial driver behind Europe. It does have a good export economy that drives a high standard of living. It hasn't had a useless Chancellor who has raped personal, private pensions over the past decade forcing companies into massive corporate debt due to over taxed pension funds being driven into the red. Unfair, over riding taxes levied against Airlines under a very flimsy 'green' umbrella has seen UK LH traffic driven over to the continent, into the arms of DLH, AF, KLM as savvy passengers, especially premium, avoid extortionate APD.

The scenario in the UK is different to that of Germany of that there is no doubt, but to advocate another Union into pushing for IA under the guise of looking to protect your own ass into the future is a little rich. Look at the T's & C's in Lufthansa Italia and Austrian Arrows and see if they meet your exacting standards before trying to throw other pilots to the wolves.

We see this from different perspectives. DLH has done well to keep themselves where they are but the economics behind DLH and BA are wildly different. IAG has the ability to transfer slots between subsiduarys. If BA Express were to get a grounding then they have the startup slots and terminal capacity to get going. If they are brought onto the Master seniority list under BA then, and only then, does our Scope agreement apply. The ability to 'start up' BA Express in any other for is then severly curtailed by lack of Terminal Space, lack of route structure and lack of Slots. Whilst not impossible it would make starting up another subsiduary company very difficult and costly.

This is NOT about IA, striking etc. This is about how best to integarte BMI into BA and adhere to TUPE to ensure that neither BMI or BA pilots are disadvantaged. Always remeber that TUPE applies to both companies.

As to the bullet point Q&A from the BACC being 'one sided' what do you expect? They are there to answer the queries and worries from BA pilots, not BMI pilots. I would be very surprised if the BMICC hasn't produced something very similar for their members. The 90 day consultation period for TUPE only begins once it has been agreed that BMI is to be integrated. Therefore the decision rests purely with the BA pilots as to whether they are prepared to accept productivity changes to achieve this as the company is demanding.
Once that agreement is in (5-1 in favour as a rough straw poll) then the TUPE chanllenges rear their heads. At the moment the junior pilots who would be most affexted by the nature of the merger, especially with repect to seniority, are being asked to vote on something that they, and the CC, have no firm ideas on. Only speculation. In this respect it is a leap into the dark and therefore takes alot of discussion.

Personally I think the integration can only be a good thing in the long run. Both for BA and for the future securities of the BMI pilots. BA has alot of cash for future fleets and, with time and space, the future growth could bring the possibilty of a return of terms and conditions. Hopeful? Possibly but at least we will be there to try it and not withering on a dying SH vine.

Well that's wrong for a start.

bmi owns a lot more than one A320. It also has other assets too such as a fairly hefty share in NATS.

Lufty were forced to buy bmi for a reduced price and that lack of desire has really hurt bmi recently with no clear direction for company being disseminated by Lufty.

bmi are trading at a loss and have been for a while, which is of course unsustainable, but with a clear strategy from IAG and access to their coffers, then there is no reason why it couldn't return to profit in the future. It would take a lot of work and would need the backing of IAG to do it, but if the IAG strategy is to keep the company as a seperate entity and they invest in that, then bmi can get back to being a profitable organisation.

If anyone here says they know what the IAG strategy for bmi is, then they must be senior IAG management, as no-one and I am including the most senior people at bmi in this, know what the plan is going to be.

So everything that has been posted on here is just conjecture coloured with each poster's individual prejudices or beliefs. There is no fact here at all.

ACAS lists the mainline fleet as being entirely leased (chiefly ILFC, BOC, Macquarie, AerCap) with the exception of... one owned A320 (G-MIDT). Now the Regional fleet is another story - it's mostly owned - but the sale value of small Embraers these days is not enormous.

Hi Studi, Not sure why you are getting so incensed by all of this, which is still mostly hypothetical, especially when you have "no skin in the game". Whatever the result, it is the BA pilots that will have to live the consequences of what happens and surely a weakened BA would be in the interests of DLH so why the constant and vociferous postings from an entrenched position? I could understand a BMI or BA pilot or even a hold-pooler getting exercised about this issue I just do not understand where your are coming from. Please do not take this a criticism, I am just trying to understand why you are adamant about this issue?

Cyrano, I work for bmi. I can assure you that ACAS is wrong on that. I have the fleet list open in front of me now.

Not quite correct. Alitalia is trading under a joint AOC held by Air One. Not the same as trading as 'Alitalia' as all contracts were torn up on one day and reissued to all staff on the next stating their new terms and conditions.

Whilst not another country (again IA laws differ) it is not possible to take IA to prevent a company from forming another company with a different AOC under an unbrella holding company. The only option would be to allow said company to form and THEN take IA if the future trading conditions of your company are threatened. It cannot be do on a future premise. By integrating BMI into BA, even with the associated costs involved, it is a ratification of the Scope clause. It will at least give BA pilots a moderately assured (as assured as pilots can get in this industry) future as well as bring some forward stability to BMI crews. The Scope clause only covers BA aircraft operated by BA, not aircraft operated by a subsiduary. IAG has the ability, now, to startup wherever it wishes and we need to be in strong position to prevent that. Allowing BA Express and then retrospectively trying to fight it would be, IMHO, a disaster.

As averse to DLH who wouldn't push investment into something they were 'verpflichtet' to purchase and have been trying to offload since the were required to buy it. TUPE must cover both sets of employees and this initial decision is there to decide which way they will go. If BMI isn't integrated there might be no reason why IAG don't lease out the slots for later use and grind BMI into obscurity, they may run BMI as BA Express and rape the Terms and Conditions. Whichever way they jump I'm sure that the working practices will not be for the better, looking at the past BMI performance, led by an inadequate management, they have to improve.

Integrating BMI will give job stability, it will give future employment protection through TUPE and SCOPE. It will allow for continued career progression and bring benefits from roster stability and choice. The method of integration will then be discussed under the 90 day Tupe consultation. I fail to see what 'new scope' clause you elude to? All IAG aircraft to be flown out of LHR by BA Mainline???? Pie in the Sky.

Once concessions have been granted, when the company and the economic circumstances are on the increase, as a cohesive group of BA and former BMI pilots operating the majority of slots out of LHR, then, only then can we push to recover ground. Now is not the time for BASSA style 'all or nothing' suicide action.

Fair cop, guv - your information is definitely better than mine then! I humbly concede my error.

Not sure why the ACAS info is wrong - perhaps if they are finance leases, or used as security against commercial mortgages, the bank/lessor shows up as the owner even though they are in reality bmi assets?

That is often the case.

I'm not going to go into detail about that, but if you look at it just as leased Vs owned, then bmi owns more than 1 A320!

All BMI pilots will join at the bottom of the seniority list in their respective seats - this ensures that no BA pilot is disadvantaged.
All BMI First Officers will have first access to vacated commands from ex BMI captains retiring or moving fleets - this ensures that no BMI pilot is disadvantaged.

Note - if ex BMI first officer moves fleet (I.e. goes to long haul for a bit) then their right to a former BMI command is void. So you will have to stay short-haul or lose your 'early' command opportunity but that is / was the current situation in BMI now so again your are not disadvantaged either. Seems fair to me?

I believe that I am right in saying nobody knows how BA are going to manage both pilot bodies until the TUPE consultations next month. That assumes that BA pilots vote Yes to the BA takeover.
This endless speculation doesn't really help anybody.

True and one thing we can all be sure of is that if there's any merging of seniority lists it won't be next month! Maybe next year, so if you're joining this year then it shouldn't affect you.

Spare a thought for the other 3000 plus people at BMI. The TUPE talks will mean more to them in actually keeping a job rather than a seniority list position.

For crying out loud.

Repeat after me.

IAG (not BA) is buying 100% of the shares in bmi. This means no TUPE is needed as nothing is being merged.

What happens in the future is nothing more than a guess, but if bmi is kept as a standalone company (like BA and Iberia) then there will never need to be a merging of anything and TUPE will not apply.

Clear?

But it's not a guess is it.

If the BA pilots vote for integration then BMI will be merged into the BAOpco. IAG have stated it's entirely in the pilots hands. From the Balpa forum I'm 99% certain the vote will be passed.

Hence 99% certain Tupe will apply.

So let me get this right. The future of bmi as a company is entirely in the hands of the BA pilots?

Link please.

No link required. That's the way it is