|
Originally Posted by VariablePitchP
(Post 10714185)
The problem with this view is that it crumbles under the slightest questioning.
I highly doubt that after the first week of the the second world war people were sticking their heads in the sand and laughing it off on the basis that by that point no one had actually been killed yet and therefore bee stings, shark attacks and accidents involving ice cream dispensers had still killed more people, and therefore we’re a bigger threat to life? More people die of flu than in car crashes in the U.K., I suspect you still wear a seatbelt... And more people die of old age than cancer, I still think it’s worthwhile researching cancer treatments though! Flu is not COVID, they are totally totally different and one has zero effect on the other one. Apathy is more dangerous than the virus itself. Not a daft comparison at all. Swine flu, 10 years ago, infected over a billion people. Only reason there wasn’t 50 million dead as with the Spanish flu was luck as it wasn’t a serious disease. You may think that people in the 1900s lived in caves and still worshipped trees but sadly not. They had exactly the same number of ways to cure Spanish flu as we have for COVID. Zero, nada, zilch. Tell me again that it’s a daft comparison. Other news, Will be interesting to see if Bojo will agree to the £7.5bil lifeline to UK airlines that Virgin will request on Monday. Right now I’m feeling very insecure and seriously fearing for my job.... |
It is fair to say that for most people, this will be just a mild, ranging through to nasty, respiratory infection from which they will recover, with ranging from no long term effects, to life long scarring of their lung tissue. However, given how many people would get it, the small percentage it would kill if left unchecked, would be a very big number. Now the governments of the world could just sit back and let it happen, and watch tens of millions die, or they can cause economic damage but save many many lives. There will always be some who would rather forego the economic pain and let millions of people other than themselves die, but fortunately, the governments of the world, together with their health care and economic advisors, have deemed it better for society that they do something to try and limit the fatalities. Mistakes will I am sure be made, but fortunately in most people’s world, life versus death is more important than employment or money in the bank.
|
Starting the 23rd
Originally Posted by CLN1E
(Post 10714129)
Evening all.
Is anybody else here due to start on the 23rd? I haven’t heard a thing from BA yet, growing increasingly worried... Thanks |
Originally Posted by VariablePitchP
(Post 10714185)
The problem with this view is that it crumbles under the slightest questioning.
I highly doubt that after the first week of the the second world war people were sticking their heads in the sand and laughing it off on the basis that by that point no one had actually been killed yet and therefore bee stings, shark attacks and accidents involving ice cream dispensers had still killed more people, and therefore we’re a bigger threat to life? More people die of flu than in car crashes in the U.K., I suspect you still wear a seatbelt... And more people die of old age than cancer, I still think it’s worthwhile researching cancer treatments though! Flu is not COVID, they are totally totally different and one has zero effect on the other one. Apathy is more dangerous than the virus itself. Not a daft comparison at all. Swine flu, 10 years ago, infected over a billion people. Only reason there wasn’t 50 million dead as with the Spanish flu was luck as it wasn’t a serious disease. You may think that people in the 1900s lived in caves and still worshipped trees but sadly not. They had exactly the same number of ways to cure Spanish flu as we have for COVID. Zero, nada, zilch. Tell me again that it’s a daft comparison. Protect the elderly, vulnerable and those with underlying health conditions which make them susceptible to Covid at all costs of course. The rest of the world needs to carry on and quite frankly, get a bloody grip. Back to the thread..... I feel very sorry for those that have been caught in no mans land and only hope their current airlines allow them to rescind resignations. All I would say is that the news coming out of BA is very very sobering. I've been in 5 years or so and for the first time in my career I'm fearing for my job. Next week will probably reveal wide ranging survival measures. It's not going to be pretty. Best of luck all. 2W2R |
Word on the street, some of our FOs from near here in the Middle East are working their notice on the basis they did have a job offer and start date at BA.
BA cancelled their start dates and put them back in a hold pool. The company here not letting them stay as not required. |
Originally Posted by Black Pudding
(Post 10714968)
Word on the street, some of our FOs from here in the Middle East are working their notice on the basis they did have a job offer and start date at BA.
BA cancelled their start dates and put them back in a hold pool. The company here not letting them stay as not required. Again, best of luck folks. This isn't gonna be pretty. |
Originally Posted by 2 Whites 2 Reds
(Post 10714980)
Absolutely awful. I feel very sorry for them. The global situation is truly unprecedented and I wonder who will be left standing when this is all over. I'm preparing myself for some major news from my employer and the CC early next week. As some of my colleagues have already said, I'm really hoping we can avoid any pilot job losses and am prepared to take a hit to achieve that if needs be.
Again, best of luck folks. This isn't gonna be pretty. Good luck to all |
There's perhaps no easy way to say this but the over 60s should consider calling it quits, life, particularly at BA has been good to them. What they have, the next generation of pilots could not even hope for. Besides, I read somewhere flying in your last few years taxes the body as much as it did in the last 20.
|
CW247.
Why not tell them to roll over and die instead. |
BA have just issued an HR-1 redundancy notice for an unspecified number of pilot redundancies.
While at face value, this is perhaps a little alarming, it’s part of a longer process involving negotiations between BA and BALPA. Previous form suggests compulsory redundancies will be avoided but obviously everything else will come to a halt for some time. |
Originally Posted by Tay Cough
(Post 10717124)
BA have just issued an HR-1 redundancy notice for an unspecified number of pilot redundancies.
While at face value, this is perhaps a little alarming, it’s part of a longer process involving negotiations between BA and BALPA. Previous form suggests compulsory redundancies will be avoided but obviously everything else will come to a halt for some time. |
I hope BALPA are on the ball with this. Remember, what they take away they'll never give back. At the same time they'll justify their huge bonuses by claiming they delivered an amazing turnaround even though it will be the lowest paid who made the biggest sacrifices.
|
Originally Posted by RexBanner
(Post 10717490)
New joiners and the internal guys on conversion/promotion courses at TBC today have had their training terminated and been sent home, with the exception of those on the A350. Uncharted waters indeed, god knows what’s about to happen.
|
BA today issued a FAN suspending Schedule F of the Memorandum of Agreement. Some
ongoing training courses are indeed being canned. |
Originally Posted by Percula
(Post 10717541)
This is untrue. Please can we not try and spread rumours. This is stressful enough as it is.
It very much is true.. |
Rishi Sunak just announced financial help to UK businesses and airlines with a series of measures, with an initial bailout of £330Bi. I guess BA has no excuse to make pilots, or any other employee redundant now, considering their profits and cash liquidity they have plus Government cash injections to avoid redundancies.
|
Macron stated €300bn is to protect french jobs.....no french redundancies. The same must apply to the UK £300bn
|
Lot of banter in previous threads about Nigels wanting part time. Well the door should be wide open now surely? Or will guys n girls back track?
This would mitigate only a small amount I appreciate. |
No, the "Nigels" :rolleyes: I know who have been pushing for Part Time aren't back tracking.
Whether offering Part Time fits in with the company's plans remains to be seen. |
Yes, once you’ve started day one, you are an employee. I don’t think anyone was suggesting people been told to go home from a course and rejoin the holding pool.
|
Sadly I very much doubt they’ll be going anywhere but short haul.
|
LH SFOs doing A320 command courses have had their courses canned and are being directed RHS 320. It’s not pretty.
|
They're also offering temporary secondments from the A380 to A350, killing two birds with one stone (dealing with the A380 surplus whilst filling the gaps of the poor A350 bound DEPs who had their contracts torn up..
|
Originally Posted by BitMoreRightRudder
(Post 10717828)
It’s not pretty.
|
Originally Posted by BitMoreRightRudder
(Post 10717828)
LH SFOs doing A320 command courses have had their courses canned and are being directed RHS 320. It’s not pretty.
|
Were you two sent here by management? You sure sound like it.
|
Originally Posted by BitMoreRightRudder
(Post 10719447)
Were you two sent here by management? You sure sound like it.
IAG are not debt laden I thought? |
IAG are not debt laden I thought? |
Originally Posted by BitMoreRightRudder
(Post 10719447)
Were you two sent here by management? You sure sound like it.
B |
Epic....outed. Loving your work dude
|
Looking at the posting history of said individual I’m not convinced.
|
Was merely a joke, dear boy. The fruit was hanging too low to ignore; besides, I needed to make my yearly post!
We got to see how truly awful some people could be during last year's pay talks. I personally hope said individual never works in aviation again. Cheers and good luck to all those affected by this stupid bug. Buter |
Originally Posted by Buter
(Post 10720409)
Was merely a joke, dear boy. The fruit was hanging too low to ignore; besides, I needed to make my yearly post!
We got to see how truly awful some people could be during last year's pay talks. I personally hope said individual never works in aviation again. Cheers and good luck to all those affected by this stupid bug. Buter |
After the announcement today that the government will cover 80% of an employees wage with a limit of £2500.
Is there any possibility that would include the FO’s who have had their job offers withdrawn due to Covid-19? Or do you have to be employed by the company and have your salary paid by BA and then the government pay the 80% back to BA? Sorry if it’s a silly question, can’t really find the details anywhere at this early stage. |
Originally Posted by SissySkinner
(Post 10722034)
After the announcement today that the government will cover 80% of an employees wage with a limit of £2500.
Is there any possibility that would include the FO’s who have had their job offers withdrawn due to Covid-19? Or do you have to be employed by the company and have your salary paid by BA and then the government pay the 80% back to BA? Sorry if it’s a silly question, can’t really find the details anywhere at this early stage. |
Originally Posted by SissySkinner
(Post 10722034)
After the announcement today that the government will cover 80% of an employees wage with a limit of £2500.
Is there any possibility that would include the FO’s who have had their job offers withdrawn due to Covid-19? Or do you have to be employed by the company and have your salary paid by BA and then the government pay the 80% back to BA? Sorry if it’s a silly question, can’t really find the details anywhere at this early stage. For those of us who have a family and mortgage to pay for and no prospect of returning to our previous employers this would be a lifesaver. |
IAG don’t have a choice on the government wage guarantee, unless of course they just make thousands redundant. That would do far more damage to them than allowing employees to accept help offered by the government.
|
Originally Posted by bex88
(Post 10722224)
IAG don’t have a choice on the government wage guarantee, unless of course they just make thousands redundant. That would do far more damage to them than allowing employees to accept help offered by the government.
Agreed. Unfortunately I don't think it will help us who have had our contracts rescinded already, from my understanding the company would have to request a grant from HMRC to cover up to 80% of the employees wages. 1. I can't imagine IAG wanting to do that. 2. They would need to reinstate our rescinded contracts and put us on the payroll. A big ask of a company that are willing to withdraw your job offer just weeks before your start date. |
Originally Posted by SissySkinner
(Post 10722247)
Agreed. Unfortunately I don't think it will help us who have had our contracts rescinded already, from my understanding the company would have to request a grant from HMRC to cover up to 80% of the employees wages.
1. I can't imagine IAG wanting to do that. 2. They would need to reinstate our rescinded contracts and put us on the payroll. A big ask of a company that are willing to withdraw your job offer just weeks before your start date. |
Originally Posted by SissySkinner
(Post 10722247)
1. I can't imagine IAG wanting to do that.
How much authority do IAG have over BACF? As they are actively looking at keeping everybody employed through this government scheme according to a letter from the union. |
| All times are GMT. The time now is 11:11. |
Copyright © 2026 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.