BA/bmi merger (was Virgin & Balpa - bmi next ?)

[BusDriverLHR]

As one Captain said to me the other day "If only BALPA were a bit more like BASSA..."

British Airways Cabin Crew Careers - Mixed Fleet (http://www.beoutstanding.co.uk/mixed-fleet/routes/)

Look at the IBERIA pilots; they are not going to give in without a fight.

Iberia Express (http://www.iberiaexpress.com)


:ugh:

[MuttleyJ]

Well, on a lighter note, the cabin crew at BA will welcome you bmi pilots with open arms. They can't wait for some young, good looking, enthusiastic, friendly, human pilots to fly with. :cool:

[SinBin]

They're a very friendly bunch. I used to be one and welcome you all to BA as do MOST BA pilots that I know...Not sure about good looking:}

[Van G]

Afraid you may be disapointed if your after a good looking bmi mainline pilot. Try bmi regional... ;)

On a serious note, most are sound (characters, not looks of course). There are some self obsessed :oh: who are oblivious to what the rest of the group are facing. You're welcome to them BA.

Good luck baby and regional guys, who like the mainline guys invested a lot of time and energy into this group and now have very uncertain futures.

I'm sorry to say I have little to no sympathy for the bmi mainline posters on here. Show some professional respect to your colleagues who would gladly trade places right now. Like I say, it's only a minority, most aren't so self absorbed.

[moo]

LHR BusDriver - Succinctly put!

[Propellerhead]

The thing to remember is that out of 3800 pilots, I find the BALPA forum (which is not anonymous) is frequented by a very small minority of a few hundred pilots with extreme views, which never represents the reasonable majority.

Whenever a big issue comes along, the extreme views on the balpa forum never represent the final vote (which is normally 80% very pragmatic and reasonable).

Now project that to an anonymous forum and it is clear the views get exponentially more extreme and less representative of the majority. On this post there are trolls, those stirring things deliberately, those without the guts to post on the BALPA forum (which is fairly quiet and more reasonable), and those with extreme views, or those wound up by other's extreme views.

Anyone reading this would think there is huge bad feeling between the 2 sets of pilots, which in reality couldn't be further from the truth I suspect. As I've already said, I'm sure the 2 cc's will get together and represent their pilot groups to the best of their ability, will come up with a sensible proposal to BA, and together fight for the best possible outcome for the combined good of all in accordance with the restrictions in place by law and by IAG (bmi pilots will maintain their equivalent pay and conditions, BA's cost base will not rise, and no BA pilot will be disadvantaged in terms of STATUS or SENIORITY.

Job done. The overall sensible majority in bmi will see this solution gives them the best future career prospects and 70-80% will vote yes. A small minority will feel hard done by and will post vitriolic crap on this forum.

[160til4]

Excellent post Propellerhead, neatly sums up the situation I believe.
However, as I understand it, BA/IAG are only obliged to "consult" with the BMI cc (note this is very different to "negotiate"). So I don`t think there will be the option of a vote on any "negotiated" proposal put forward by the BMI cc.

[pint'alfempty]

Absolutely correct Stucano.

Mind blowing arrogance and ignorance being shown by some bmi mainline posters here. Be grateful, very grateful, that you have the opportunity of a secure future. Threatening legal action?? What planet are you living on Count V Alt. Amazing, unbelievable and actually quite sad. Humility should be the name of the game, especially considering the vulnerable position of your colleagues within the same group.

Time to wind your necks in guys.

[757_Driver]

If we can cut through all the vitriol for a moment theres a bit of an elephent in the room that seems to have gone un-noticed - either that or I've got the wrong end of the stick

For avoidance of abuse I'd like to state that I'm looking at this from a purely commercial point of view, and clearly my future colleages at BMI have "value" and are not just "liabilities", but commercially:....

The original agreement from BACC (pp34, £10m savings etc etc), was based on the premise, and calculations by IAG, that we bought BMI in its entirety. The only real value in BMI was the slots, the rest, financially, is just one huge liability. thanks to branson and some scottish politicians we are now only buying 75% of BMI, but still get 100% of the liabilities.

Now clearly branson is all flash and no cash, and dispite Alex Salmonds posturing, nobody actually wants to fly to scotland, otherwise the aircraft that do wouldn't be 1/2 empty at the moment, so its likely that we will get those slots back, but its a brave man that mortgages the future on that assumption

I'm no financial wizzkid, but even I can see that inheriting 100% of the million-per-day losses and 100% of the staff and airframe leases, but only 75% of the slot asset value and income potential, must change the assumptions hugely.

I'm assuming that there are some at IAG board level who are more canny than I at business and will have worked this out for themselves - but what are the ramifications at the coal face? does this change things so much that the orignal BACC vote and assumptions are now way wide of the mark and we need to bring more to the table? or walk away? does it even make the whole deal viable at all?
what about BMI? not only is there the question of BMIr and BMIb, but mainline now will have a significant crew surplus.
I don't wish to see anyone loose their job, but in the current climate can we carry that surplus and what do we need to bring to the table to make that happen?

Surely rather than obsessing about the fine details at the end of the deal, we should all be looking at wether the deal is worthwhile at all, and what these changes mean to us all.

[Megaton]

nobody actually wants to fly to scotland, otherwise the aircraft that do wouldn't be 1/2 empty at the moment

Wrong on both counts. You've obviously not flown up and down much recently.. Hotlines are nearly £200 and I've been on the j/s more often than not lately.

[757_Driver]

nobody actually wants to fly to scotland, otherwise the aircraft that do wouldn't be 1/2 empty at the moment Wrong on both counts. You've obviously not flown up and down much recently.. Hotlines are nearly £200 and I've been on the j/s more often than not lately. that bit, and the branson bit was meant tongue-in-cheek :}. I was merely making the point that alot of fuss was made about competion but now its piss-or-get-off-the-pot-time, its likely that nobody is going to come forwards and take those slots, depite all the bluster

[Lord Spandex Masher]

Funny that the BRITISH AIRWAYS Connect lot were merged into the Flybe seniority list when they were taken over.

Now the shoe is on the other hand it smells a funny colour doesn't it?!

One rule for BA, another rule for BA.

[Propellerhead]

I rest my case!

[BlackandBrown]

Yes but they are basically the flying labour party. Of course it's a case of do as I say not as I do.

[sudden twang]

MuttelyJ
BASSA always look over the the fence to the BACC.
It seems that this is no exception. Everything you've said about the bmi boys is what your pilots already have with mixed fleet.
One question though to the wider audience,
if you believe a bmi pilot should have DOJ for seniority then how can you justify the bmicc not deciding how an excess of pilots is dealt with from the bmi group not just mainline? I understand it's bmir pilots who fly some of the slots into and out of LHR.
And as for loyalty, many chose to leave bmi for a better future at a financial and personal cost for long term gain . Those who didn't backed the wrong horse and now expect to collect their winnings.:=

[Phil.Capron]

Does anyone remember which airlines these phrases refer to?....And now there's BMI.I'm pretty sure that IAG/BA know the difference between the phrases and you can be sure their lawyers are setting up the BMI arrangement,in that respect,to be just what they want.They have stated that there will be job losses.Their largesse will only extend to what they want out of it,basically the LHR slots.They would rather maybe the rest just went away.
Because of the above,DOJ seniority (Does adjusted FO date still mean anything to anybody?) is simply unrealistic and the BA pilots scope clause (good job guys)
with their T&C commitments will see to it that it won't happen.
Take the seniority deal with all the usual freezes and protections and look forward to the future.
Remember that the seniority system,conversion agreement and Bidline are often complained about but they continue to be what makes BA so good.
(Well it was in my day!)
ATB and keep the sunny side up.

[Anton du Flasheart]

757 Driver,
You seem to have missed to point of BA buying bmi (slots) in the first place.
Firstly, only a small proportion of bmi is domestic - and that proportion doesn't appear to be efficient, so combining it with BA will make it more efficient and free up slots.
Some of the other flying is competeing with BA, which can clearly generate more slots.
Some of the rest is actually financially productive ( or could be made so ).
Some is just unviable and will surely disappear.
A lot of slots can therefore be produced to change to crew greedy LH. Add in that BA have stated a very large number for desired recruiting ( double what all of bmi could provide ), and the viability of the deal seems clear.

[757_Driver]

i haven't missed the point at all.

BACCs origonal discussions with IAG / BA were based around an assumption of BA getting 100% of the slots, we are now only getting 75%. Assuming getting 100% of the slots made the deal viable, and getting 0% of the slots (but 100% of the liabilities) is not viable, there is a point somewhere in between that the deal falls apart. I was merely asking where that was.
Something is going to have to be revisited now we are only being allowed to take on 75% of the slots. I don't know what that is - but all the good calculations that went into our orignonal vote and £10m savings were based on an set of conditions which is now incorrect. I've got no idea wether giving up those slots makes a huge difference or next to nothing.

All those good things you mentioned are medium / long term gains (where are the long haul aircraft coming from? who's going to train the new pilots - cranebank is maxxed for the next year with the BMI courses etc etc). Short term we need to survive, in order to get to the medium / long term benefit.

Of course all this could be moot, as branson is talking about apealing the decision, and I've got a feeling that if that happens IAG and Lufty will just walk away from the deal, nobody wants to sit around throwing a million a day on the fire whilst branson struts around the EU courts. In reality I suspect branson is having a bit of shakedown, as he knows what the implications of an appeal are and I reckon he's behind the scenes trying to extract some more out of IAG and Lufty.

[wurlizter]

I would like to say thank goodness for the merger/takeover. It has been a really worrying time for many at BMI and it seems that there is still some uncertainty as to who or how many will be going to BA.
I hope something will be pulled out of the bag for my friends at Baby and Regional, good luck.

I completely understand how some BA pilots feel about a zipped seniority list.
After years of loyal service to BMI, when we were integrated into BMED, I went tumbling down the seniority list and lost my chance to fly the 330. I believe that I was disadvantaged! Now this is not BA's fault or problem but if the integration is handled differently it's Balpa HQ that needs to answer the questions how/why?

I would like to work for a company that will offer me security, decent pay and a future to look forward too. I do believe it is right to have DOJ for redundancy and staff travel, at least my years of working for the company will count for something. If that means I'm put to the back of the seniority list (again), I'm ok with that.

It could have been so good at BMI, but a mixture of poor management decisions, Lufthansa never wanting us and a bit of bad luck has left us in this unfortunate position. I'm tired of the "will we be here next year feeling" and it would be nice to sit up look forward to the future.
Someone mentioned about flying to ****holes in Africa? Well they might not have been the nicest of places but the crews made the trips and I'll miss that.

I will miss the people and that was BMI's GREATEST asset it's people. Pity no one at the top of the company thought or cared about them.

So I"m looking forward to BA, bring it on. :ok:

[No walkover]

757 Driver

Are you for real???

You sound like a broken record.

Whenever a valid point is made you seem to dance around it like Fred Astaire and throw back another tangential question. Unfortunately there is no "filter" button on this forum.:ugh:

No one is 100% sure at this stage what the outcome of the slot release will have on the total number of slots available to BA (apart from it would appear you). There is a good chance that nothing may come of them and that they will be utilised by IAG/BA as per the original transaction. Then again, there is a remote chance that someone may come out of the woodwork and take a potluck chance with one or two. So to write off 25% and then start arguing over this is way too premature, unless you are WW's right hand man and are angling to diminish the pilots T & Cs further?

To say branson struts around the EU courts unless you know specifics, is again pouring oil on the fire. Even if this was true, what would he do with more of these additional slots. The constraints that the EU have placed are rightfully in place and would be a non-starter for him. All this would achieve would be to waste more Virgin resources - not a clever thing to do at the moment.

Perhaps you could enlighten me as to why BA couldn't damp lease some aircraft to start LH routes within a year? Better still maybe Iberia or a OneWorld partner may have some surplus airframes or under performing routes that they would happily lease BA for a guaranteed return?

As you can see, I view the future with positivity and a bouyant attitude. I can easily wallow in the pit of despair, it takes less energy to imagine negative options. I'm a pint half full individual by nature but even when I take my rose-tinted spectacles off, I can only see good things for IAG & BA in the next 2 - 10 years.

I'll give you this one for free though, I read previously that you said that you are at the bottom of the current MSL and 100% of BMI pilots would displace you if DOJ was used. I do not know your start date but BMI have recently recruited a couple of pilots in the last month or so. Perhaps that might brighten up your dour day? i.e. you may not be at the very bottom for long whatever happens?

[Hand Solo]

Let's also not forget that BA short haul pilots average around 100 hrs per year more flying than their bmi counterparts. Levelling the productivity is only going to exacerbate the surplus.

[londonmet]

Hand Solo,

Very good point there. One would think they'd sort this out pre-merger?

[Anton du Flasheart]

757 Driver,
Do you really think that BA didn't factor in the 25% slot loss - my guess would be that they knew exactly what they would have to give up before it all started - they had been talking to the EU for ages.
As flight deck we obviously have far too much time on our hands - these subjects are for the bean counters - it is not part of our remit and winners and loosers can not take responsibilty for any of it - all of that is purely in the domain of those in a different part of the tree.
Hand Solo,
How much time do BASH spend away from base? Efficiency is one thing but, the mid haul routes are semi LH and more crew hungry. The efficiency is not flight deck responsibilty. We get one less day off a month, so actually spend more time at work - most of us would gladly agree to better useage of our time for the extra day off ( if we get it ).

[Hand Solo]

LH should be upping your annual flying hours, not reducing them! I don't think you can reasonably say you get one day off less as BA pilots don't work to a set number of days off per month. It all depends on ones bidding habits.

[Anton du Flasheart]

For clarity - LH was meant to mean Longhaul, not Lufthansa.

I agree, bmi should have got more out of us to reach are maximum (740 in 12 months, befor overtime) allowed by our agreement - but THEY would say they couldn't ( 5 day BEY - 1 sector out 1 sector back - 9 hours flying in 5 days !!!! ).
I can only quote second hand about your days off - but we get 10 off in 28 averaged over several months - I understood that you could do better than that.
Pilots agree the contract, if it is not utilised fully it is not the pilot should not be blamed.

[757_Driver]

yes, I am for real. I'm not going to bother any more, as obviously you are missing the point of what I am asking as much as I am aparently dancing around like fred astair.

and if you are going to be abusive then at least have the f**king decency to read what I've written
No one is 100% sure at this stage what the outcome of the slot release will have on the total number of slots available to BA (apart from it would appear you). There is a good chance that nothing may come of them and that they will be utilised by IAG/BA as per the original transaction. Then again, there is a remote chance that someone may come out of the woodwork and take a potluck chance with one or twoI've you can be bothered to read my previous posts, then you'll see that what you said there is pretty much 100% of what I wrote previously. But I expect that like most people on here, you just see what you want, rather than bothering to take note of what people actually say :rolleyes::rolleyes:

and I'm not having a dour day, I'm quite happy thank you very much.

Bottom line. BA bought BMI for the slots. I'm sure the aircraft and the people are marvelous, but there is no shortage of aircraft or people. the slots are what its all about. I'm sure its very upsetting but If IAG could get the slots without all the other stuff attached they would - not very nice I know, but thats the cold hard truth.
I was merely making the point that the game has changed. I'm 100% sure that IAG and everyone else involved at the business end knows exactly what all the numbers are (and of course they went into the negotiations with the EU with their own bottom lines), but they are different to what the BACC and BMICC thought they were a few weeks ago. I was trying to make the point that whilst its all very nice talking about seniority lists and staff travel, some fundamental stuff has changed which MAY change the whole picture, so obsessing about details is probably pointless at this stage as we are a long long way away from getting to that level of detail.

I dunno what you think is wrong with my statement about branson strutting around in the courts. He publicly announced, at a press conference that he was PROBABLY going to appeal the decision. Its a matter of public record that branson said this - its not heresay or 3rd hand, a-mate-of-a-mates-cousin-said-down-the-pub-stuff. I very much doubt that he will appeal it as it will cause huge damage to BMI prospects, and his own brand when he gets the blame. I'm pretty confident it won't come to that as its almost certainly a shakedown as he knows that a 90 day delay will cost someone (Lufty or IAG) about 60-70 million quid.
I'm not wallowing in a pit of dispair by acklowledging bransons spanner in the works - just being realistic.

My whole point of all my posts (for those that have clearly missed the point) is simple.
Discussing details about seniority and TUPE and staff travel is pointless as fundamental aspects of the deal have changed and its still a long way from being signed sealed and delivered.

FWIW I'm overwhelmingly positive about the deal and I think it will be great development in the future, but I think (as posted above) that BMI should be more worried about how many jobs they can keep and what happens to regional and baby than worrying about wether a couple of senior captains are going to get a stab at bidding for the A380 (that last bit was tongue in cheek - you know - humour? that sense that most people here don't have:E)

really can't be arsed with this discussion any more. Laters.

[CAT3C AUTOLAND]

On a positive note with all this nonsense....

Sin Bin was the best looking man in Bmi, so its all down hill :}.

[one day soon]

That is what he claimed!!! Lol:E

[queenvic]

757 DRIVER - Arent you an ex AEU FO?

[SinBin]

Thanks chaps! CAT3 have you found your hair yet? All this talk of TUPE reminds me of you!

[MuttleyJ]

Sudden Twang:
"MuttelyJ
It seems that this is no exception. Everything you've said about the bmi boys is
what your pilots already have with mixed fleet."

Er - yes, SuddenTwang, that was kinda the point of my post... ;)

Joking apart though, the vast majority at BA will welcome those from bmi, and appreciate the bigger picture and the position you guys are in.

[Sgt Wilson]

Evening All,

It would seem that the next move in this game will be the BMICC talking to BA about what will happen after the money has changed hands. BA, we all know, would like to have any talks over quickly and start the process of integrating BMI into the BA operation. The question is how are they going to do that.

This TUPE business would appear to be good for BMI pilots as it means that their terms and conditions are respected, and rightly so, but increasingly from reading various posts on the subject, it may be a double edged sword.

BA bidline and any position on the BA MSL may not provide the entitlements that TUPE requires and that would of course leave BA open to legal action. The proposal that I'm picking up on would be that the future ex BMI pilots will remain as a separate group within the BA pilot work force and be rostered very similarly to the way that they currently are and even retain the routes that they currently operate, although I suspect that BA will not keep the 330s. A group that because of the BA pilots agreement, will be one that withers on the vine with all future recruitment being into mainline.

This would satisfy the TUPE requirement, negate the prospect of a legal challenge, allow economies of scale by using BA resources instead of Midland ones and yet not make the BMI pilots immune from further cost savings should they be required.

BA get what they want, the slots. No increase in costs, no danger of a legal challenge.

I think that that scenario is the one that the BACC have foreseen and wish that the BMICC avoid.

Before the inevitable accusations, I wish the BMI folks the best of luck. The BMICC seem to think that they will have a better chance negotiating with a BA team. We will see. I would hate to see them seize defeat from the jaws of victory. Is this an attempt to coerce the BMICC to agree unilaterally to what the BACC proposes? Of course not. They are there to do the best for their constituents, but if they represented me I would hope that they have a "Plan B".

I know that some will hope that their length of service for BMI will count as the same as if they had been working for BA all that time and can sympathise with those that don't want to start from scratch again, but the real danger from this is that you don't end up on the MSL at all. That would be fine if your retirement plans are in the next few years, but pretty disastrous if you plan to work beyond that.

Any way all the best, hope to fly with at least half of you soon and good luck to those in Baby and Regional.

[Human Factor]

I think that that scenario is the one that the BACC have foreseen and wish that the BMICC avoid.

It appears we have led the horse to water. Whether it chooses to drink is up to the horse. The best move for the BMICC to make is to approach BA alongside the BACC with a joint proposal. This is not a stitch up of the BMI pilots, far from it. There is a limit to what BA will permit, based upon cost, and the BACC have a pretty good handle on that limit. Unfortunately it won't mean the most senior BMI folks jumping straight into the left seat of a BA 747 but it will ensure that you will get the best possible deal available. The only way this can be achieved is with joint discussions with the BACC prior to approaching BA. Forewarned is forearmed and all that. :hmm:

Anything else will most likely result in the BMI pilots receiving the bare minimum which TUPE requires (for example, no Bidline), which I am sure is not where they want to be - especially knowing it is avoidable with a bit of discussion. :{

Don't for a second think that legal challenges will work either. The BACC know from somewhat bitter experience that BA legal will have everything absolutely watertight. :=

[Anton du Flasheart]

Well... my reading of what has gone so far is that bmiCC want to talk, but have only been met with dictate, so they have nothing to lose.
I basically agree with all above, but to quote some politician, "we are all in this together!".
I don't think that bmi pilots are expecting much but there is no need to jump up and down on their dignity either.
My fear is that, as with the politician, we will soon seen that some are "in this together" more than others.

[Super Stall]

Nobody is jumping up and down on anybodies dignity.

There was a window of opportunity for the CC with decades of experience dealing with BA management to help secure a 'with benefits deal' for the BMI guys. Their offer of help was turned down.

Sadly that window is now closing.:(

I honestly take no pleasure in 'I told you so's', because no pilot group will win from this.

I rather hoped this thread would just die.:(

[Hand Solo]

It would appear the Bmi CC are very keen on talking but not so good at listening. Judging by the message they've sent to their members they still appear to be in a state of denial. Their victim mindset seems worryingly similar to that of the BASSA leadership and is likely to produce similar results. Meanwhile the rest of BA will have to deal with the ex-Bmi lot grumbling about their self-inflicted isolation.

[Anton du Flasheart]

Hand,
I'm not saying that anything is one sided, but you have just proved my point!
There is a feeling that BA is telling bmi to shut up and be grateful.
The arguments in this regard are wide and various and bmi employees know them well, but if the boot were on the other foot........if it was BA being bought by someone bigger ( and not too long ago BA wasn't too healthy ) would you expect to be treated as the enemy or a fellow professional?
Everything I have read here says that the BA guys are telling the bmi guys the way it will be. Pilots have notoriously large egos and being 'told', is a red rag to bull. Humility ALROUND would be far more constructive.
BA has a status, but it isn't exclusively due to it's flight crew. bmi has had difficulties but not in anyway due it's flight crew.
We have all been through CRM training - is this atitude getting the best out of anyone?

[londonmet]

Anton,

There is a feeling that BA is telling bmi to shut up and be grateful.

I think it's the opposite. It's BA (CC) saying to BMI "let's talk now before it's too late".

Seniority is king in BA.

[Hand Solo]

Charity begins at home Anton. The Bmi CC are asking for a lot of charity, especially when BA are not obliged to offer them any. The bone that's been thrown by the BACC has been thrown right back because the Bmi CC seem to expect the right to eat the BA pilots dinner. That may not be true of the majority of Bmi pilots but their company council seem to have no concept of the size of their ask.

[hunterboy]

If I may offer a bit of advice to the BMI CC and the BMI line pilots....
Listen to all the advice you possibly can...get legal advice and know what your bottom lines are. BA Flight Ops management are ruthless and quite brutal.
As someone senior on the 777 in BA, I have no skin in the game, I doubt more than a dozen pilots in BMI joined before I did. However, to last in UK aviation, and BA in particular, one needs to grow a thick skin or develop another coping mechanism. There is probably more bull**** in BA than you have been used to, except you don't have the camaraderie and small base friendliness to get you through it all.
You will be in for a big culture shock, no matter what happens. Prepare to be a number and nothing more.
At the risk of sounding like a stuck record, I hope your CC have a plan for dealing with the BA mgmt during the consultation process. BA's M.O will be to march in and tell you all how it is going to be. Prepare for the worst. I know that whatever the cheapest option is , is what BA will implement. BA flt ops don't do imagination.
Please don't come back on here in a month or so and moan about your lot. BALPA and various posters on here have been warning your CC for a while now.
Good luck....

p.s One of the reasons LHS long haul is so attractive in BA is the 20K a year pay increase for flying long haul rather than short haul.
p.p.s I suspect there wont be any outstations. You will be based at LHR. Many pilots wont want to move from NI or Scotland, hence LH suddenly starts to look attractive with a once a week commute.
None of this stuff is rocket science. I hope your CC are keeping you all informed in newsletters and on your company forum.

[Anton du Flasheart]

I'm not close enough to know for sure but even your last comment is designed to provoke.
Everyone knows that BA flight deck think that seniority is king - perhaps that is the problem....perhaps seniority isn't everything, perhaps Willie will use it against all flight deck when he can, perhaps a little broadening of the BA concept of seniority would help everyone. Seniority lists have certainly cost ALL flight dearly over the years.
Total intransegence on the BA concept of seniorty is the sticking point. bmi guys don't expect to depose anybodies seniority rights, but they don't expect to be treated like scum either.
I haven't heard a proposal from any BA person which doesn't make any bmi flight deck feel like he or she has been dumped at the bottom - as I said - how about using CRM, thinking around the problem and expressing it in a less belittling way. Mutual professionals don't deserve it.

Hunterboy - my fears and expectations exactly - thanks for putting the perspective straight. ( it also explains why, as a lower cost base option, bmiCC prefer to talk to the management directly, although I not convinced they are up to the task )

[londonmet]

Anton,

Please stop with your constant tirade of "CRM..CRM..CRM". BMI pilots have no reason to feel like scum. Nobody is making them feel like this, so maybe they don't actually feel like this?

Total intransegence on the BA concept of seniorty is the sticking point.

Maybe it's the fact that if it wasn't for IAG then it would be the bankruptcy? All the people I know in BA want the best for BMI pilots but they're very aware of what they'd be up against if it wasn't for IAG.

[JazzyKex]

Anton, as you suggest, seniority and the BA pilots reliance on it is central to our lifestyle. Fleet, seat, trips and consequently days off are all a function of seniority. A system which inherently assumes equality, as the only differentiation between pilots is their time in BA. Meritocracy and age, who you know or how much of a "company" man you are have no input into the system. There is complete transparency as to why I'm currently working next weekend and my colleague is not. Or why my command is one decade rather than a year away and is uninfluenced by whether a base Captain deems me suitable (not suggesting that's the case in BMI, but it is in some non seniority based operators).

If you choose to remove the focus, and in your opinion over reliance on seniority as a measure. What do you think should replace it?

[londonmet]

If you choose to remove the focus, and in your opinion over reliance on seniority as a measure. What do you think should replace it?

Their BMI DofJ of course.....

[Hand Solo]

Anton seems full of contradictions! Bmi pilots don't want to depose BA pilots if their seniority but want zippered seniority on joining? The two are mutually exclusive! Bmi pilots don't want to be seen as the enemy but see themselves as a 'lower cost option'?! Let me disabuse you of that notion. Bmi pilots are not a lower cost option. They are not an option at all. They are an administrative problem that BA is legally obliged to deal with. There will be no expansion of the Bmi group after integration, you will never be big enough or cheap enough to make it worth BAs while to fight the main body of employees. If you think that BA pilots are treating you like scum then it's time to man up because your toys are gonna be launched into outer space when you see how IAG will treat you!!

[sudden twang]

No Walkover,
One of the problems of this medium is the difficulty in gauging someones attitude.
Your posting suggests a very heartfelt and reasoned approach and for that thank you. My response is intended in a similar tone.
BA have a limited time to integrate. The joint bmi/ BA operation must be turned around into profit making in a very short timescale. The consultation period therefore will be brief.
The BACC have already negotiated a deal for BA pilots they know exactly what stance BA will take.
The BACC have demonstrated innovative and effective negotiating skills with BA for quite a while they also recognise the resultant deal the bmicc achieve will be their problem to deal with in the near future.

The issue of same length of service with the same paypoint isn't going to happen. BA from the outset have stated that they won't increase bmi pay. A significant number of bmi capts would be on pp24 then could Hoover up the 380 commands and take a pretty large payrise.
Any prospect let alone the threats and thinly veiled threats of court cases will have the bmi guys on a separate roster and seniority system. That may suit the senior guys but would not be so good for those more junior.
I echo your concerns for other groups of staff.

[Human Factor]

Well... my reading of what has gone so far is that bmiCC want to talk, but have only been met with dictate, so they have nothing to lose.

Well... your reading is incorrect. The BACC know the maximum that the BMI pilots will be able to achieve from BA. If it seems like they're dictating, that's unfortunate but the fact remains that BA WILL NOT ALLOW ANY MORE THAN THE BACC PROPOSAL due to cost. I sympathise for your situation and appreciate you are between a rock and a hard place which it is not a great place to be but believe me when I say that whatever the BACC have in mind will be an order of magnitude better for the BMI pilots than what BA/IAG will do to you.

There are a group of people (the BACC) who have vast experience of dealing with BA and know exactly how to deal with them. Tradition dictates that for the best outcome, it often pays to listen to the experts. :ugh:

I'll say this again for the hard of reading:

The proposals on the table are the BEST which the BACC have been able to come up with for the BMI pilots which will not add any additional costs for BA. BA WILL NOT ACCEPT ANY SOLUTION WHICH INCREASES THEIR COSTS!!


Edit: To quote our illustrious company chairman (now deputy chairman of IAG) - "If you aren't at the table, you're probably on the menu."

[overstress]

My reading of this is frustration from the BACC who want to help the BMICC, to bring them up to speed and confront BA with a joint proposal.

Not sure why the BMICC would want to face negotiations unprepared? Surely having background info on your 'opponent' is a good idea before talks?

The term 'consultation' wrt TUPE may come as a rude surprise when it turns out to be BA telling it like it's going to be. It didn't have to be quite that way.

Anton says that we are in this together, I don't think that's correct, BMI pilots are not in yet.

Best of luck to all BMI pilots in the next few days.

[4468]

FWIW

I can absolutely see that the BMICC could be considered as negligent, if they reached a binding agreement with the BACC before even meeting with their new employers!!! That suggestion seems neither sensible nor reasonable to me. The BMICC are the elected representatives of BMI pilots, and MUST be allowed to negotiate with their new employers, BEFORE reaching any recommendations. Perhaps we could call it 'due diligence'???:rolleyes:

The BACC do indeed appear sensible negotiators, and may well have much to offer by way of knowledge of 'the opposition'. However they also have an agenda, and an outcome which they prefer. A vested interest which seems to conflict with the BMICC's. An absolute cast iron commitment to their electorate that 'No BA pilot will be disadvantaged'!

The BMICC must feel that a gun is being held to their heads! Certainly damned if they do, and almost certainly damned if they don't! In their shoes, I don't see any alternative to the 'almost' route. At least they will always be able to say they examined every possibility, and they owe their members that!

In any event whatever goes on in the discussions later this week, it is IAG/BA who are holding the purse strings, NOT the BACC, who will not be included in those initial discussions.

I have no idea what the BMICC, with skilled negotiation, may or may not be able to achieve? Neither does anyone else. Yet!

Depending on how BA wish to play this, they could be in a worryingly powerful position here. To the detriment of all pilots!

[Super Stall]

4468,

I agree in general with some of your comments and in any other merger type situation what you suggest may be considered a reasonable sequence of events. But you seem to be ignoring the fact that BA and its managers are under an enormous amount of pressure to sort BMI out before the cash haemorrhage starts dragging down the parent company.

At the end of the meeting this week Willie will be on the phone to Kieth. He will want to know what's been decided. Now which is more likely?

(a) "Sorry Willie, the pilot chaps haven't come to an agreement yet, so I've sent them off to have another go. They're going to debate the situation ad nauseam on internet forums and maybe even have a vote on it. It's going to be a few weeks yet I'm afraid."

or

(b) "The BMI chaps can't agree with our chaps, so I've put them on a standalone fleet, rostered by Carmen (bit of a result there Willie!) and we've now ample opportunity to make additional savings."

Which do think Willie would be happier about?

You are correct about who holds the purse strings. In the management brief a couple of weeks ago it was stated time and time again that BMI's cost base will not be allowed to rise 1 penny. It simply adds to the purchase price and compounds the problem.

From what I've read you guys and girls at BMI seem to have been very unhappy with your management. You seem to think you've now found a benevolent employer who is going to generously shower you with goodies. NOTHING could be further from the truth. You only have to look at far as Mixed Fleet to see what the company is capable of when given a blank sheet of paper. The reason will still have what we have is down to Balpa.

Please dont be a blank sheet of paper.

[Anton du Flasheart]

4468,
Well put - thanks.

Just one other point about the cost base.......everyone seems to directly equate 'cost base' to pilot's pay......actually it reflects the entire undertaking. Yes they will screw down every last they can, but the complete package has to be addressed.
BA might find benefit by paying more in one area for a double saving in another - optimistically all pilots should be trying to be in the former group.

[overstress]

4468

Of course the BACC have a vested interest. At some point the BMICC will cease to exist and it will be down to the BACC to pick up the pieces and deal with whatever it finds.

Your :rolleyes: wasn't required. If they follow your advice then I feel that your reps will be going in less prepared than they could be. Due diligence in this situation would include taking advice from the BACC, IMHO.

Please don't come back in a few weeks saying that the BACC have sold you down the river when you don't appear to be listening to their advice now.

Once again, good luck.

[Human Factor]

... and MUST be allowed to negotiate with their new employers.

There is no legal requirement for your new employer to negotiate with you. There is only a legal requirement for your new employer to consult you. There is a world of difference with a potential world of pain attached.

You may be allowed an opportunity to negotiate with BA, you may not. In which case, if you're lucky I would suggest it's better to go in with a well reasoned and costed case. The BACC may be able to help you there. :ugh:



Just one other point about the cost base.......everyone seems to directly equate 'cost base' to pilot's pay......actually it reflects the entire undertaking. Yes they will screw down every last they can, but the complete package has to be addressed.
BA might find benefit by paying more in one area for a double saving in another - optimistically all pilots should be trying to be in the former group.

You're correct up to a point. I suspect BMIs two largest costs are the same as BA's. Fuel and bodies. Fuel costs will be reduced by combining them with BA's colossal fuel purchases. However, BA will remove any duplication of bodies so that there will be relatively few people taken on from BMI beyond the crews - and they are only being taken on to operate the aircraft being inherited. As a result, the pilots pay bill takes up a larger proportion of those remaining costs than it would have done previously, especially given that the pilots are likely to be the best paid BMI employees. Any increase to this will affect the bottom line and this will not be acceptable to BA. Sad but true.

[Human Factor]

From a purely personnel point, I cannot for the life of me see that putting the 300 odd BMI pilots onto their correct places on the seniority list, based on their DOJ, will make any real difference to the 3300 BA pilots. The planned expansion of BA over the next few years and in the future will not leave any pilot disadvantaged.

... but you also state ...

There is only one, in my judgment, correct and lawful way of merging the workforces and that is DOJ (not seniority).

Everything, apart from leave allocation, in BA is dependent upon your seniority number. Your monthly bid (so quality of work), your ability to bid between fleets (so overall ability to control your lifestyle and/or career progression), even the days you do your sim checks are dictated by your seniority number so how anyone can suggest that no pilot will be disadvantaged by anyone "jumping the queue" is difficult to understand?

Please explain to me how a BMI pilot will be disadvantaged based on his or her current position (as the law requires) versus that in a pay and status protected position at the bottom of the BA MSL? I would like to know specifically any disadvantage reference bidding for monthly work or leave based upon their current position, bearing in mind that if commands can be protected, so can other aspects.

Further, I would like to know how you consider placing BMI pilots into the BA seniority list based upon their BMI date of joining will not disadvantage any existing BA pilots who will be below them on the list.

Finally, as you seem to separate DoJ from seniority, how do you propose to recognise one without recognising the other?

:confused::confused::confused:

[4468]

101917 Thank you. Very enlightening.

Human Factor: Not only have the BMICC so far been unable to either 'negotiate' or 'consult' with their new employers, AFAIK they haven't even been allowed to 'listen'!!

That being the case, how are they supposed to make such a momentous decision for those they represent without even having all the facts??

[Human Factor]

Human Factor: Not only have the BMICC so far been unable to either 'negotiate' or 'consult' with their new employers, AFAIK they haven't even been allowed to 'listen'!!

The legal position was such that until the takeover was confirmed, BA were unable to talk to any parties from BMI. Now that it is going ahead, pilots are one part of deal so will get their opportunity (this week as I understand). Best to go in prepared. :{

[hunterboy]

At the risk of repeating the above posters point...it is not a negotiation. It is a consultation. BA will meet with the CC , then go away and do what they want complying with the minimum that they can legally get away with.
Best get onto your CC reps to get them prepared.

[Ancient Observer]

I agree with 101917.
However, as the poster noted, this has not yet been properly challenged in UK Courts. It only takes one person to challenge any "deal" done, and the 300 vs 3000 becomes irrelevant.
The "majority" may well end up being shunted further down the seniority lists - although the Courts might also rule those lists to be unlawful.
Human Factor's questions need to be sorted out in the law courts. Until they are, I can't give a definitive response to those questions.
Interesting times.

[Super Stall]

It only takes one person to challenge any "deal" done

One person with incredibly deep pockets (the holiday pay claim has taken 8 years so far!).

Risk/Reward:

Risk = Vast sums of personal wealth (as Balpa are not going to fund this).

Reward = A few places higher up a list that may be ruled illegal anyway.

Chances of success = 50/50 at best.

Yeah, go for it, knock yourselves out!! :ugh::ugh::ugh:

[ScotPilot]

Risk = Vast sums of personal wealth (as Balpa are not going to fund this).

I'm not so sure. Having pissed away over a million on an illegal BA strike a couple of hundred K for a legal fight will be cheap in comparison. There are 9000 other members of BALPA to consider as well.

[Anton du Flasheart]

BALPA isn't the only legal insurance and there is the "no win no fee" brigade!
But it won't be me!

[Big Birdie]

The possible threat to the seniority system is the very reason why BA will comply with TUPE requirements by retaining BMI crew as a separate entity. - Totally removed from the current Master seniority List.
You cannot legally challenge something you are not part of, or not entitled thru TUPE to be part of.
It sounds as if the BMICC meeting with BA will be a bit like taking on the Death Star with a water pistol!

[londonmet]

Surely that's not fair? Why can't the ex-BMI pilots have access to other fleets?

[Sygyzy]

Fair....where have you been living all these years.

Never mind the above arguments where pilots of a bankrupt company are trying to muscle in something that definitely isn't theirs to share.

[londonmet]

Understood, but what about in the future - 5 years from now? Will it be reasonable to expect the ex-BMI pilots to still be flying the A320?

[hunterboy]

Blimey LondonMet.....Haven't you been paying attention? BA will do only what is necessary in law, and as cheaply as possible. BA legal affairs will make sure it will also be legally watertight. If that means ring fencing the old BMI (like EOG when it started) then so be it. All boxes will be ticked, except the one that keeps BMI pilots happy.
I do not have any inside information, apart from having been present when Dan Air was purchased and EOG set up, however, I do hope that the majority of BMI pilots are not as naive as some posters on this thread otherwise they will not last 5 minutes in BA. We had some very bitter and upset people working for us for a long time after that takeover.

[overstress]

londonmet, that is all they would have been flying if BMI had stayed intact. With maybe a couple of A330s.

All BA pilots joining by the normal route (selection) are frozen for 5 years.

So, yes on two counts.

[londonmet]

Thanks for the replies everyone. Will be interesting to see how this one pans out then won't it! Also I wonder how those three stripers will feel loosing a stripe! I say all of this as an outsider it must be said!

[Callsign Kilo]

Stripes! Who gives a rats arse about stripes! They should be right up there with the type of aircraft that you fly - right at the top of the "I don't give a flying **** whatsoever" list. In my experience, the types who make this sort of sh1t their life priority are simply compensating for inabilities in areas that should be considered more pertinant! In this day and age job security, quality of life and a sense of feeling part of something worthwhile is everything in my book, which is why I couldn't have given a stuff about this little fact below in my pursuit to join BA.

All BA pilots joining by the normal route (selection) are frozen for 5 years.

As each day passes I get increasingly edgy about my chances. I would believe that the vast majority of bmi pilots are just more than happy with the fact that they will have jobs going forward. Being under the umbrella of one of the worlds largest airline groups may just be an added bonus. If there are infact a few bemoaning seniority, fleet transfers and a thinner epolete on their shoulders then politely wake up and smell the java! I say if because I simply can't get my head around the fact that this is actually going on?!

[Sgt Wilson]

101917,

Thanks for the input. Would you mind expanding on a couple of points please?

You stated that having a separate ex BMI fleet of pilots within BA would effectively negate any threat of legal action, but that in your opinion, and mine incidentally, that that would be an invidious place to be, but that even if BMI pilots accepted a place at the bottom of the MSL, BA and the union would leave themselves open to individual or group action in the future. If I am correct in my interpretation of your post why would BA run that risk? Would there a legal way that you can see to get BMI pilots on the MSL, other than placing them their in DOJ order, if that is their desire?

Further, if BA did place BMI pilots on the MSL in DOJ order would that not leave BA open to action by pilots of former airlines?

Thank you in anticipation and apologies if I've misunderstood.

[londonmet]

Just curious...what would have happened if BMI did fold and BA opened up a shortened fast track selection procedure for the pilots, took over the BMI aircraft leases and bought their slots at auction. Where would the BMI pilots go on the master seniority list then?

[Max Angle]

One possible way that BA and BALPA could be persuaded to place the BMI pilots on the seniority list based on their DOJ BMI is to convince them that it is the only legally correct method to merge the 2 pilot bodies.Why would BALPA need convincing, it was their idea, one that they conveniently seem to have forgotten now that one of the companies involved is BA.

[Hand Solo]

Once again, someone is missing the point that's it's not BA and BALPA that need convincing about merging seniority lists, it's BA and the BACC. Big BALPA could insist on a merged until they are blue in the face but the BACC won't sign up to it because they know the BA pilots and most probably BA themselves won't wear it.

[Anton du Flasheart]

Londonmet,
There are a lot if 'ifs' there. I suspect BA didn't go down that route because they wouldn't have got as many slots and the cost of training the new crew from scratch would have been prohibitive. But just guessing!

[Right Engine]

To all BMI mainline pilots,

I am, as a BA pilot, considerably more sympathetic to your aspirations than most, however I am observing quiet but subtle manoeuvres by key protagonists in these consultations that will make your future somewhat bleaker than your current worries about being merged on to the bottom of our MSL.

BA will very likely be approaching 737 rated BMI 'group' pilots for assessment to work out of LGW. This will further reduce the required number of Airbus rated pilots for the new combined fleet at LHR.

I anticipate a 'take it or leave it' contract to hit your doormats in the next few months that will no doubt put 'seniority issues' far from your minds.

Good luck.

[xwindflirt]

Thanks for the heads up
I would hope on the face of it that this is an attempt to minimise any potential redundancies in the event that a buyer is not found for baby. It would seem crazy to give up a resource pool, to then only recruit at a higher overall cost. Let's all hope something that is mutually acceptable comes out of the meetings tomorrow.

[Human Factor]

It may be worthwhile to seek independent Counsel opinion and present it to both parties, thereby hoping that good sense prevails.

Good sense would suggest that the BMICC should have engaged independent counsel as soon as they were aware of the likelihood of a takeover rather than leaving it to the last minute. If they did this then it was probably a good move.

The trouble is that if they haven't done it by now, BA are not going to halt the integration process to give them a chance to put their house in order. They can't afford to prolong BMI's losses.

I also see the BMI pilots being presented with a fait accompli.

[Callsign Kilo]

BA will very likely be approaching 737 rated BMI 'group' pilots for assessment to work out of LGW

Care to elaborate on that?

One minute we are hearing that BA have no intention of integrating any part of the bmi group, other than mainline. Now there is 'very likely' rumour from a BA pilot suggesting that individuals within the bmi group who hold a 737 rating may actually be integrated into the Gatwick operation, subject to assessment?? :confused:

BA have a number of 737 rated pilots in their current hold pool who have already BEEN through assessment at Cranebank. Its a double figure amount and I know a number of them! Now, I have no desire to see either Baby, Regional or the overall size of Mainline being obliterated by this merger, however there are guys here who have been waiting by the wings and who have worked bloody hard to get a place in BA. Are they likely to see their chances take a further nose dive because IAG can't find a buyer for Baby? I presume we are talking about Baby here when you mention 737 rated pilots within the 'bmi group?'

[Right Engine]

My source in true PPrune tradition, is purely 'off the record', but the business needs of a robust and dare I say it, uncaring BA management are dictated by minimising complexity.

The BA Flight Operations hierarchy seek to have pilots of a brand loyal nature from the off. Employing those who elect to accept the T's and C's without bitterness and hollow self entitlement might ensure that sentiment. With that in mind it seems the business case of opening up recruitment to LGW to the Baby pilots is under consideration thus making the guaranteed employment of Mainline Airbus pilots less likely.

Ruthless, I know, but BA want desperation from the BMI community in order to fulfill their aims of having a compliant and unbitter future ex-BMI workforce.

[hunterboy]

Mere speculation on my part, but maybe, BA's legal advice is that some of BMI Baby's pilots do hold mainline contracts? Offering them jobs at LGW reduces the number of BMI pilots that have to be offered redundancy? As I say, all speculation. more may become clearer tomorrow, though I doubt it as BA normally insist on negotiations/consultations being kept confidential until the end.
May I offer my colleagues wishes in wishing BMI pilots Good Luck. I wouldn't wish the likes of the BA negotiating team on anyone.

[Callsign Kilo]

With that in mind it seems the business case of opening up recruitment to LGW to the Baby pilots is under consideration thus making the guaranteed employment of Mainline Airbus pilots less likely.

So potentially, in a space of a few weeks, you could go from being a Captain or a FO at a lo-co operation with a very uncertain future to DEC or DEFO at BA on their 737 fleet? Hardly a 'take it or leave it' option and all based on the fact that BA management desire a no drama, subservient pilot workforce? Really?

I can see the probability of BA attempting to take those within Mainline who were once rated on the 737 into the LGW operation in order to reduce the crew composition of their 'Euro Fleet' operation. But this - this doesn't add up. In terms of waiting periods, those rated on the 737 who have went through BA's recent DEP recruitment process have had the longest wait due to BA's type streaming policy. Waiting times range between 5-10 months + for a 737 placement at LGW. There can't be that many places on the SHAG fleet surely? :hmm:

[Sgt Wilson]

101917

Thanks for the prompt response.

If I interpret your post correctly, and apologies if I haven't, then it would seem that BA have three main options:

1. Integrate in DOJ order
2. Ring fence the BMI pilots
3. Allow themselves to be persuaded that the BMI chaps should go to the bottom of the list but with enhanced rights that negates the prospect of legal action in the future (and damn the cynics).

There has been much discussion about this and it has varied from integrate in DOJ order, which would be a big win for the BMI chaps, to shoving them with a "you're lucky to have a job sticker" at the bottom of the list.

Neither of these options was fair nor likely. Both it would seem attract a danger of legal action and for that reason BA will steer well clear. Although a ring fenced group within BA is undesirable for them, it's not impossible and would probably be more cost effective in the short term than legal action.

I didn't really see the ring fenced option coming until recently. It may be a bargaining chip, but it's a good one. If the only legal way to integrate the two workforces is in DOJ order, then I think a ring fenced group is more likely. There is no reason that this group cannot operate BA airplanes as discrete crews or even with BA pilots. Industrial agreements would not necessarily preclude this as operating standards are a separate consideration.

BA pilots guard their position on the status list very carefully because it impacts on everything in their working lives, much of which has been discussed here, and whilst by no means perfect, especially when you're near the bottom, for anyone with a long career in front of them the most important thing is to be on it.

As I said, if it's a bargaining chip it's a good one. There is of course the possibility that this ploy may be a starter for ten and that further negotiation is possible.

Once again thanks for your thoughts and all the best to all

[no sponsor]

The 737 rumour is a new one!

[Callsign Kilo]

The 737 rumour is a new one!

Yes, another one to add to the melting pot. I can't help but think there will be a sense of initial relief when the masterplan is released by BA/IAG - whatever the outcome. With all this speculation and uncertainty, closure is desirable.

[stormin norman]

BA management may be in some eyes ruthless but not uncaring.

They will try and accomodate as many into the business as possible but the numbers will be dictated by the ongoing expansion requirements and nothing more.

If history is to repeat itself, then i'd be more worried about getting through my first Line and Sim check rather than worry about where i'll be on any seniorty list.

[hunterboy]

Stormin norman. To be fair, flying an Airbus around LHR is a bit different to flying a turboprop around the regions.

[SkyRocket10]

If history is to repeat itself, then i'd be more worried about getting through my first Line and Sim check rather than worry about where i'll be on any seniorty list.

As far as training goes, all new BMI entrants will follow the standard DEP short course; consisting of one weeks groundschool and four sim sessions, followed by an LPC/OPC. Line training will be a minimum of 14 sectors with line check included. In addition it has also been confirmed that all captains will be subject to a final command check. Historically during buyouts (think Dan Air/Citiflyer) this is where a number of people have struggled to make the grade.

[Ancient Observer]

Again, I agree with 101917.
The complication in addition to the points made in 101917's last post, is that even Counsel will have different opinions about how the issue of DoJ/ Seniority, (only when Seniority = DoJ), will eventually be resolved in UK law. There are multiple perspectives - including political perspectives..............so many that spelling them out is beyond my typing skills. Even the "ring fencing" option is open to challenge.

There is one possible way through, which is an opinion from an Employment QC which I received, (about a slightly different issue, and she was a left wing QC, so might not be in tune with the current Supreme Court perspective). The Age Discrimination stuff was supposed to be "sorted" by employers by late 2011, as 101917 says.
However, the QC suggested to me that an employer undertaking a "major" change after then might be able to argue that they needed 5 years from the effective date of the change to sort out all the issues. Thus, BA might be able to do some sort of deal with balpa and resist any challenges to that deal for up to 5 years.......as they were "sorting it out". As 5 years is a lifetime in Employee Relations, maybe that would do........

[spider_man]

So re-deployment of BMI baby pilots to BA mainline, subject to passing full DEP selection... BMI mainline pilots to get BA without any selection. Any news on BMIR?

[Jockster]

There is possibly another solution whereby a factoring of BMI pilot’s length of service might be acceptable. For example, if an individual’s length of service was to be notionally reduced by 3 years they could then be placed on the list at an appropriate point.

I think a factoring of about 25 years is a more realistic figure.

[Hand Solo]

There is no 'legally correct' way to integrate the two working bodies. There are ways that comply with TUPE and ways that don't. So long as any one of the multitude of TUPE-compliant methods is chosen BA will win any challenge, or the challengers will run out of money. 101917 is simply speculating like everyone else. BA employ expensive lawyers and aren't about to waste that money implementing a windfall solution that ratchets up the costs of Bmi. Those who doubt this should consider this afternoons announcement of 500+ redundancies at LGW.

[xwindflirt]

As you say the only real solution is something that is mutually acceptable to the majority. Fortunately pprune is not representative. :oh:

[Hand Solo]

Unless you are either one of, or representing one of the interested parties then it's all speculation. And even then you'd still be speculating on the intent and objectives of the other parties involved.

[BusDriverLHR]

As has been said, any method of integration that the BMI-CC are not happy with risks legal challenge. Keep in mind that it's not just the BACC that don't want BMI pilots integrated on BMI-DOJ. BA have no interest in putting a 24-year BMI pilot on PP24 and giving them the pay-rise associated with that. So the simplest method for BA is to not integrate the two groups at all.

All that BA need to do then is make sure TUPE is complied with (BMI pilots have no legal right to a place on the BA MSL).

It is becoming likely (source: people who know a lot more than me) that the outcome will be as follows:


- BMI pilots flying the BA airbus fleet, but with a separate rostering system (they may/may not fly with BA airbus pilots)

- They will use Carmen (already used at LGW) to be rostered (I gather very similar to what they have now)

- The work rostered to them will be extracted before the BA bidlines are constructed. It will consist of a fair share of trip types, weekends off, etc.

- The BMI-pilot group will decrease in size with retirement of BMI-pilots. No new pilots will join their group.

- They will have access to new commands commensurate with current career prospects. Probably on a dead-man's-shoes basis.

- BMI pilots may have the option to join the BA MSL (and hence move fleets) in accordance with their BA-DOJ.

- BMI pilots will retain their BMI-DOJ for purposes of Staff Travel and redundancy.



While the BACC were never going to agree to the full demands of the BMI-CC, they believe that they could have agreed and achieved something significantly better for the BMI pilots than what I've described above. The BMI-CC believe they can do better still by going it alone. We shall see, but I wouldn't be holding my breath...

[Jockster]

The work rostered to them will be extracted before the BA bidlines are constructed. It will consist of a fair share of trip types, weekends off, etc.
Sorry - won't work as it disadvantages a BA pilot who may want to bid for the trip that is extracted. Why do they get ANY week-ends off? I didn't get a week-end off (other than leave) for a couple of years. Why should the junior BA guys work week-ends when the BMI guys don't?

[ScotPilot]

(source: people who know a lot more than me) that the outcome will be as follows:

That is not looking difficult ;)

[BusDriverLHR]

Sorry - won't work as it disadvantages a BA pilot who may want to bid for the trip that is extracted. Why do they get ANY week-ends off? I didn't get a week-end off (other than leave) for a couple of years. Why should the junior BA guys work week-ends when the BMI guys don't?

There will be more work, hence more weekends off. They will get their fair share. The number of weekends off/ quality of triplines available to current BA airbus pilots will not decrease, hence they will not be disadvantaged.

From a legal point of view, I don't think TUPE would be complied with if a BMI pilot who currently can achieve x number of weekends off per month is now told they can now have none.

From a 'fairness' point of view (subjective, and perhaps sadly irrelevant), I don't think it would stack up either. Making BMI pilots work every weekend regardless of length of service for the benefit of current BA pilots is certainly not something I've heard suggested by any other BA pilot.

[BusDriverLHR]

That is not looking difficult ;)

I handed you that one on a platter, touche.:O

[TopBunk]

:
The work rostered to them will be extracted before the BA bidlines are constructed. It will consist of a fair share of trip types, weekends off, etc.
Sorry - won't work as it disadvantages a BA pilot who may want to bid for the trip that is extracted. Why do they get ANY week-ends off? I didn't get a week-end off (other than leave) for a couple of years. Why should the junior BA guys work week-ends when the BMI guys don't?

bmi bring a number of slots to the party, including weekend slots/destinations. Pre-extracting work from the pot to the level of weekend slots brought in does not therefore disadvantage any existing BA pilot. I suspect that existing BA pilots would quite like the experience of some of bmi's medium haul routes/nightstops - should they be available or not to BA pilots? Swings and roundabouts.

When I was on the Airbus, I know that I really enjoyed the opportunity of the 4 day trips to LCA - pseudo longhaul with out the time changes:ok:

[4468]

I suspect that existing BA pilots would quite like the experience of some of bmi's medium haul routes/nightstops
I bet they would!

For precisely the reasons outlined by TopBunk, it seems to me that BMI pilots would do well to keep ALL the MH/LH routes that they currently operate? rostered in the way they currently are (albeit working harder for their new owner). That way Jockster has no grounds for complaint, and neither do BMI's A319/320/321 pilots?

I can't imagine anybody could possibly object to the standalone operation that would result? Not that I imagine it's what many in BA would have hoped for?

Tidy! :ok:

[hunterboy]

This is starting to look more like a mixed fleet/worldwide fleet situation, where routes are rotated throught the fleets. Separate rostering systems that compy with both rostering agreements, but that also ensure the work is all covered.

[MrBenip]

The BA pilots were given a vote on whether to integrate BMI or remain a standalone. Well they voted to integrate so bring it on!

It seems that IAG were amenable to the standalone option and to save all the wrangling may just opt for that, as they surely don't have to abide by the outcome of the their pilot's vote.

So if that were the case the BACC may have a little more to weigh-up when defining their uncharitable interpretation of the "integrate" vote. Having voted to protect their futures from a standalone they seem to want to offer little in return except to tell us to be grateful - nice.

[Hand Solo]

You don't appear to have grasped who is doing what here Mr Benip. The integrate/non-integrate argument took place between IAG and BA. The BACCs concessions helped BA win the argument. That ship has sailed now. IAG listen to the OpCos, not pilots. Having helped BA win the argument for integration, why do the BA pilots now owe you? You, at this stage, have done nothing whatsoever for IAG, BA or the BA pilots. On the other hand, BA and the BA pilots have saved you from having your T&Cs savaged by IAG by bringing you into the BA fold. One might say you should be damned grateful, unless you thought Willie Walsh was going to give you a warm handshake, a warm handjob, and say "Welcome to IAG boys!".

[MrBenip]

Hand Solo, Funny how you see it from your side of the fence. If I thought the BA pilots voted to save my T's and C's I surely would be grateful but we all know why the vote went the way it did - certainly not to save my skin! So do me a favour and quit the "be grateful" line.

[Hand Solo]

The BA pilots voted in their own interests - they're not a charity and BA is not a refuge for pilots from bankrupt UK airlines. However you don't seem to be fully cognisant of what your options were. They were:

1) Go bankrupt and join the dole queue.

2) Join IAG as a standalone and play your own personal part in turning around the £1M per day losses of bmi.

3) Join BA and get some top cover while BA sorts out the basket case which is bmi. The BA pilots are paying for that top cover. To expect whistles and bells on top is dreaming.

There's nothing uncharitable about the BACCs interpretation of the 'integrate' vote. It's exactly the interpretation we voted for. If you don't like it then go whinge to the Bishop or Lufthansa. It's their fault you're bankrupt, not ours.

[MrBenip]

Quote "On the other hand, BA and the BA pilots have saved you from having your T&Cs savaged by IAG by bringing you into the BA fold."

I absolutely agree that you have voted in your own interests and why would'nt you? I i know would. So my point is, please stop writing as in your above quote as though YOU have voted to save ME, I find it very patronising. If anything has saved us it's your company's interest in more slots and the requirement for pilots to fly them, not the "BA pilots".

[Litebulbs]

As an employee in the industry, this thread really makes you think. The only thing missing is the employers point of view and that only matters if 50+1% of a seniority list is affected.

[overstress]

Mr Benip, assuming you are a BMI pilot (the joys of anonymity here on PPRuNe!) then it must have been a very stressful time over the past months. Now at least you can look forward to increased job security with benefits of continuity of employment.

BA pilots (and all employees) have been through stressful times as well, not long ago we were asked to reach into our pockets and help save the company. This time round we have been asked to reach into our pockets again. Our LGW colleagues have also done the same which has prevented them from being included in the current round of job cuts there.

So BA pilots are not immune from the financial worries of the industry, far from it.

So it is against this background that we view the integration of your colleagues. We felt that if we had the chance to prevent a Jetstar-like operation at LHR then we would take it.

As a side-effect of our self-interest, naturally those joining pilots would of course be protected from this as well.

The threat of redundancy has hopefully gone away now but be assured that IAG would have offered you far worse than your current T's & C's had the vote not been for integration.

It is understandable that you feel vulnerable in this situation, but it is not the intention of BA pilots that you feel patronised. However there is a sense that your collective expectations have not been as well-managed as they could have been.

All the best and see you in the CRC soon.

[MrBenip]

Overstress, Thank you for your post which whilst explaining the facts is pleasantly moderate and non-imflammatory unlike one particular poster on here. I certainly hope you are more representative of the people I will be flying with and look forward to that.

After our full integration of Bmed, some of whom even carried over their more generous favourable pension contributions from the company than we enjoyed and also had their training positions preserved etc, still unbelievably, there were a few dissenters. But in the main things quickly settled down to a harmonious workforce. After consultation with Balpa and the management we believed this was the only way to go and time proved this to be so.

To get to the point really, it is only management that benefits from rifts and divisions within the pilot community and in the long term is detrimental to us all if we are not all on the same T's & C's according to our aviation experience. I am therefore quite shocked at the short term view displayed by the BACC. If the BACC support us joining on the bottom of the SL together with much lower pay points then if management think we are happy with this then you can expect some very hard bargaining for keeping your own T's & C's in the future. Divide and conquer is a tactic that always wins.

Whilst I appreciate you have been fighting to preserve your terms recently I fail to see that as the integration is bringing more slots and hence expansion to your company that you would suffer, when we are only 300 or so, if we were zipped into your SL. You are not being asked to eke out what you already have but the integration is bringing more "food" to the table to eat so surely status quo. You do need extra pilots with a decent experience spread to fly the extra slots.

I really am sorry to hear on here that people think we are "lucky to have a job" (and yes we are) and if that is the feeling conveyed when we join then it won't be enjoyable having our noses rubbed in it while you guys quickly take advantage of the slot expansion whilst we sit at the bottom being made to feel eternally grateful that we are there at all. Not a good situation for pilot unity and a few short term advantages for you guys moving to LH whilst management ponder their next move.

You are probably right about the situation not being handled well but I think our BmiCC were caught by surprise at the hardened attitude of your BACC and naturally want to explore all options - not an easy task. I for one would have favoured a fleet bid freeze so you guys have first crack at LH that the extra slots provide then no BA F/O would be disadvantaged, not even much with bidline either as there would be more flying to go round and vacancies created when you guys move across to LH so again status quo.

So there are my final thoughts and I fear everyone will be losers (some sooner than later of course) the way it is all going.

[overstress]

Mr Benip: to address some of your points hopefully in the spirit of discussion rather than confrontation, I think rather than a short-term view, the BACC are looking to the future. If they were truly short-term, they would not have recommended a £10m package of cuts to their members with a view to retaining integration.

If BMI pilots were to join at the bottom of the list they would retain their current salary under TUPE until their service in BA meant that they had caught up with the payscale. The BACC had little choice over the 34-point pay scale given the pressures that retirement legislation has made on our agreements and indeed the whole industry.

You will not have your noses rubbed in anything by BA pilots, we are all looking forward to the new opportunities and everyone is far too busy for that kind of thing, it simply won't happen. You will get a smile and a handshake I can assure you.

No-one stays at the bottom of the MSL for long, expansion will continue and with it progression. Even at the bottom, stability is nearly 100% and trips can be swapped electronically to improve lifestyle.

If the BMICC felt that the BACC displayed 'hardened' attitudes, perhaps they may have pondered why - probably a reflection on their battle-hardened state!

IAG/BA are tough employers and the BACC have to be ahead of the game readying themselves for the future challenges facing us.

I will stay away from 'zipped seniority' except to say that BA would never go for it as it would hugely increase their costs at a time when they have to turn loss-making BMI to profit within 2 years - the BACC would never be able to persuade BA to go for zipping even if it supported it.

I hope this helps to explain our viewpoint.

I imagine that there will be many BMI pilots with loads of unanswered questions - people concerned about basings, nightstops, tours, commuting, A330s and much more. Those in the regions/baby must be very concerned as well. I hope you get your answers soon.

[Thick E]

I have heard a number of people talk of a "Conflict Of Interest" regarding the BAcc's chairman trying to protect his own personal long haul command aspirations, rather than the greater good of the majority and a harmonious joining of groups. I don't have access to the BALPA forums, so can not see where or why this may be speculated but if true this would be considered to be abusing their position. This could just be based on lack of information but as they say no smoke without fire!

[4468]

overstress
I will stay away from 'zipped seniority' except to say that BA would never go for it as it would hugely increase their costs at a time when they have to turn loss-making BMI to profit within 2 years - the BACC would never be able to persuade BA to go for zipping even if it supported it.

Surely BA could instantly create some of the cheapest A380/B747/B787 pilots in the world if as you also say:
they would retain their current salary under TUPE until their service in BA meant that they had caught up with the payscale

Purely on a financial, or indeed legal basis, where's the flaw for BA/IAG?

[Hand Solo]

Thick E - Hmmm, let me guess how many people talking of this conflict of interest come from the bmi ranks? All of them? The BACC chairman doesn't operate in isolation and many of the BALPA reps are already long haul captains. Perhaps you are also unaware that there is significant oppostion from BA FO's who fear that the bmi pilots are going to stitch up all progression to short haul BA commands? The reality is that the interests of the majority of BA pilots are not served by allowing the bmi pilots to leapfrog them on the seniority lists. That's the greater good of the majority.

4468 - they probably could, but would BA pilots wear it? I don't think so, and BA know it's not worth the industrial strife to try it The bottom line is money talks.

[Human Factor]

I don't have access to the BALPA forums, so can not see where or why this may be speculated ...

In which case, why repeat totally unfounded speculation?

[Jumpjim]

ThickE: Having spoken to the BACC chairman yesterday on a flight back I can assure you that his personal aspirations don't figure in his thinking as to where this is going. I think he, and most of the BACC would find that particular suggestion extremely insulting.

I gather the BACC are disappointed and a little surprised that the BMICC hasn't taken the opportunity to sit down and discuss the issues that will arise going forward, and try to come up with a package that suits both sides. I suspect that when they go in to the TUPE talks with BA tomorrow they will be a little disappointed to discover that the "negotiations" are in fact far from that.

I personally have given up a days leave EVERY year for the rest of my career, as well as voting in £10M worth of savings in order to get the BMI guys integrated into BA. This is no small give and the frankly combative nature of the responses on here make me wonder whether it was actually worth it.

The facts, and these are facts, are as follows: BA has stated that the BMI cost base will NOT increase on integration. This totally rules out any thought of a zippered seniority list, as zippering the BMI guys in would leave a significant number of them on the top pay points.

As I understand it, if they DID zipper the lists, the vast majority of the BMI guys would end up in the top 1000 out of 3500 pilots in terms of seniority.

To say this would be a windfall for them is an understatement. They would have access to the most sought after commands, best trips, best leave, best christmas trips etc. on an ongoing basis. I'm sure that they would very much like this to happen, but as we keep flagging up the concept of "Fairness" I fail to see how they can justify parachuting themselves into the top of the list, and pushing the remaining 2500 long term BA pilots down the list. Even if they magnanimously agree to a 5 year freeze on arrival which is standard on joining BA it doesn't change any of the above. When you have co-pilots like myself with 12,000 heavy jet hours, and 16 years invested in the company, waiting for longhaul commands I fail to see why somebody with no background in BA should parachute themselves in above me for the remaining 25 years of my career

Yes, they may well be experienced, but so is everybody else in BA. We don't employ crappy pilots. We don't need BMI to provide an experience spread across the 46 gained slots as we have more than enough experienced people already, and a significant number of other experienced people waiting in the hold pool for jobs.

I look forward to welcoming you into the company, but the ongoing threats of court cases, and destroying seniority/bidline etc. on arrival are frankly doing nothing but damage and generating bad feeling. Given the number of friends in the industry struggling for jobs, working in Canada and the far east etc., I think it is WHOLLY reasonable to say that yes, you should be grateful that you are joining the largest, most profitable, secure, and best aviation career in the UK, with the best prospects, and all this through being in the right place and the right time, and not having to endure the usual BA selection trawl that everybody else has gone through.

See it for what it is: The best career opportunity that you are EVER likely to come across and make the most of it. Don't destroy it with unreasonable expectations and demands.

[/rant]

[Human Factor]

Surely BA could instantly create some of the cheapest A380/B747/B787 pilots in the world ...

That was always a risk which is why the BA pilots voted in favour of the £10m savings package to prevent it. If IAG were to renege on this, which I don't expect, your cheap A380 pilots would have to be even cheaper to pay for the fallout.

[4468]

HF

What do you imagine 'the fallout' would be?

[Thick E]

HF

I have heard a number of people talk of a "Conflict Of Interest"

As you can see I never said that I heard this on the forum, merely a couple private conversations in different locations. It may be that the BMI BALPA folk are rubbishing this concept on their forum, as I said I don't know.

Jumpjim
Thanks for your candid reply. I do empathize with you on the pure numbers and figures of a zippered integration. I think there needs to be more communication and sharing of information between the two groups so we can see what the results of every permutation would look like, together with the associated lines for shorthaul command, long haul command and long haul FO. From the bmi side we should offer the names and numbers of those who have bid for long haul, all DOJs, who are full time/part time etc together with retirement dates. With the combined information shared between the two groups, it would make for a far more balanced discussion rather than nearly 20 pages on here, which to be fair is mainly conjecture based on very little hard facts.

I think once the information comes about many on here (both parties) will find that we can all discuss the matter from a level playing field rather than as we are, more like playing battleships and guessing what the other is suggesting.

[Jumpjim]

In which case maybe the BMICC should start engaging with our guys? I gather there hasn't been anything as of yet which is a MAJOR strategic cockup and one which they will rue going going forward. This has been mooted a fair few times both on here and the BALPA forum with no take-up.

Our guys have dealt with BA for years, and with the announcement yesterday of a HUGE rejig in the Gatwick base, the BMICC should wake up and smell the coffee.

For the purposes of clarity BA are not in the demonstrated habit of "Giving" anything. Your guys should be expecting to get the absolute bare minimum as an offer, and engaging with the BACC to see if they can improve it to something more palatable. I will eat my hat if BA come up with anything more than that.

[ScotPilot]

1200 job loses at bmi have just been announced. I think a little restraint might be a good idea for a while at least....end of bmi completely by end October.

[Human Factor]

I suspect it's probably moot but the fallout would probably start with BA losing the £10m savings the pilots have just agreed to. We'd probably then find ourselves in an Iberia/IBx scenario which, however it played out, would be extremely expensive.

[Anton du Flasheart]

HF
The maximum you personally will give up is a small amount in your Ts&Cs - others here have lost their entire income.
As a group you didn't give up £10m to be nice to anybody else, it was entirely in your own interest - so you have a better chance to get onto something bigger quicker - and improve your relative seniority.
I'm realistic and know that self interest is necessary in this world, but I think you are going a bit too far. Next time your luck luck might be down - don't expect any support around here.
Thankfully you are not representative of all BA employees.

[Human Factor]

Not sure what you're getting at Anton. You're right in that I suspect most of my colleagues voted based upon self interest rather than altruism but all we're hearing from our future BMI colleagues is no different.

I wish everyone joining from BMI the best of luck and look forward to flying with some of you. I will now bow out of the debate as it seems rather futile now.

The BACC knew what you would be taking on and tried to help.

[Chief Brody]

I don't have any friends.......

In BMI at least!! But listening to those of my BA colleagues that do it sounds like 99% of those coming over are good people who understand the inevitable outcome of this seniority discussion and are happy to usher in some stability
to their lives free of the sword of damocles perennially over their head believe the BMI joiners will go to the bottom of the MSL - I loose zero sleep over it, I fly happy and drive up and down the motorway smiling about what the future holds for all of us.

But my question is this for the 1% of BMIers stomping on about LH commands etc......

When you are sat next to me and contempories (FO Airbus) how is your dissatisfaction at the outcome going to manifest itself? IE are you gonna be miserable *****s festering in the knowledge that my LH command will come before yours?

Or will you say that's life, let's get to Lisbon and blow the froth off a couple?

If the former please let me know whilst we sip our Costas and I'll spare myself the agro of going through security.

Looking fwd to shaking the hands of and welcoming the aforementioned 99%

[JazzyKex]

Given what is currently going on with BA/IAG's announcements about the future of the regional bases, I'd say those in BMI with high expectations of the 'consultation' should beware.

It seems the IAG management are out to prove their ruthlessness and intend on taking no prisoners or carry any extra load that cannot be justified to the accountants.

The announcements already made: closing all regional bases, notice for all staff in those bases regardless on MSL position. Getting rid of all TRI's and management pilots (cabin crew management too apparently) at LHR. It does not bode well...

Good luck to all involved it looks like they have a plan and it's not to make friends!

[Anton du Flasheart]

Is there confirmation that bmi TRIs will not be taken into BA?

[JazzyKex]

No idea Anton.

I'm only repeating second hand information, but it seems that all BA want are line pilots so all those with training qualifications or management will be returned to the line.

It seems BA/IAG want all this sorted before any merger final date so redundancies come from BMI not BA.

The bypassing of LIFO for BMI staff is an interesting move but apparently all within TUPE legislation. Im no expert at all but another reading of TUPE apparently says If things are economically unviable, technically incompatible or operationally to the detriment of the new company there seems to be get out clauses for BA/IAG if they can prove that to be the case.

Regional bases are not part of BA's operation so could be in there, Embraers and A330's are technically incompatible and would require additional costs to bring to BA and economically maintaining the loss making BMI operation is not justifiable without wholesale changes. Who knows where they intend to wield the axe next?

This is all news to me but hearing how ruthlessly BA/IAG managment are implementing it makes me think they have a very clear plan that they are following through. I can't imagine they have done that without having it legally watertight. It's pretty shocking stuff and I fear for friends I have who are in BMI.

I hope the BMICC have some plans to somehow form a palatable outcome with a minimum of trauma. I think they'll have their work cut out but fingers firmly crossed for you all in BMI mainline, regional and baby.

[MrBenip]

Jazzy, Can you confirm whether line pilots/management are at least being returned to the line?

[JazzyKex]

Mr Benip. With my post above you know as much as me.

I'm just passing along what I've heard amongst the rumour mill from goings on today and yesterday. The only definitive answers which will have total solidity will come direct to you from either your management, direct from BA or from the company councils.

Everything else, however well heard is still hearsay. Maybe even with wriggle room...who knows? I would not bet my mortgage on the information but neither will I be even slightly surprised if it is heard very widely soon.

The shocking part has been how ruthless BA/IAG are being. As I said above I hope there is a plan afoot to mitigate as much trauma as possible.

Jazzy

[zzz]

Mr Benip,

All training and management pilots have today been given 90 days notice, as per the regional bases yesterday. What that means in reality; who knows?

zzz

[MrBenip]

Shock & Awe so far then.

[Abbey Road]

Shock and awe, it certainly is. All being conducted under the auspices of IAG, not BA. It seems, but I am not sure, that TUPE only applies when the remnants of BMI are handed over to BA? Blinking heck.

I hope the BMI pilots' Company Council, and those representing other BMI departments based at LHR, have some backup plans. If not, they are mincemeat!

[Captain Fishy]

Well this has certainly cast rather a gloom over proceedings.

Whilst few of us had imagined the IAG/BA management team would have arrived at the table emanating an aura of amiable empathy, we certainly hadn't envisaged them being fully versed in Sun Tzu's 'The Art of War!' This is a massacre. Over 40% in a very real danger of imminent redundancy.

Whilst there may have been some at BMI who were deluded enough to think this was going to be an amiable and symbiotic integration, I don't think anyone was expecting this to to resemble an assimilation by the Borg Collective!

It seems that the gloves are well and truly off, except that if this was a boxing match the referee would have stopped it almost immediately.

My sincerest commiseration's to those affected. So far.

[Max Angle]

When you are sat next to me and contempories (FO Airbus) how is your dissatisfaction at the outcome going to manifest itself? IE are you gonna be miserable *****s festering in the knowledge that my LH command will come before yours?

Or will you say that's life, let's get to Lisbon and blow the froth off a couple?

If the former please let me know whilst we sip our Costas and I'll spare myself the agro of going through security.

I think judging by the latest announcements (outstation, training and management pilots at risk of redundancy) I would spare yourself the trouble of going through security and continue to sip your Costa. Those of us that survive the purge are going to be in no mood to be happy clappy Nigel's.

[Carnage Matey!]

Perhaps not, but I'd caution that even the survivors won't be safe until they've passed the sim checks and a line check. Negative attitude won't go down well, nor I suspect will nailing the blame on BA. You are where you are because BMI are broke, not because IAG has picked up some of the pieces. Unfortunate, but still true.

[Captain Fishy]

Well thanks for that cm. Now we have something to look forward to. Decimation during conversion. Hopefully not using the Roman method. Most reassuring. Not!

[MrBenip]

Carnage Matey - and over here it is. Do you not hold your seniority list dear? M.A. is just expressing his shock at the apparent disregard for seniority wouldn't you? Have some sympathy with your professional colleagues or perhaps you feel too safe for that.

Of course when the dust settles those ones who are lucky enough to escape will embrace BA in a totally professional manner because that's what we are. We are not worried about sim/line checks as like you we are professional pilots unless you are talking about constructive dismissal?

However your finger wagging tone is duly noted and is hardly welcoming and is tactless - thank you kind sir for your advice we read you 5's.

[Carnage Matey!]

Top tip for you Mr Benip - knock the huge chip off the shoulder. We've put the welcome mat out for you, try not to sh*t on it.

[MrBenip]

Why would I have a chip on my shoulder? I agree we will be very fortunate to work for BA instead of going down the plug hole. The welcome mat looks shrouded in mist from where I sit though, just a lot of finger wagging going on from some of you at the moment.

These are shocking events please just have a bit of understanding. Please, tell me Matey if your seniority list was s@%t on in hard times would you not feel a bit grumpy? Please answer.

We have no axe to grind with you guys, so just step back until the dust settles.
After all Max Angle just may be a training captain.

[jaarrgh]

Just to point out something. At least there are jobs for BMi pilots on this occasion. For those of us that were made redundant in 2010 by BMi management, there were not. It wasn't that long ago.

[zzz]

I've been stuck in Cranebank on a course for the past few weeks and talking to the trainers about the situation, they just want to get all the BMI guys through as quickly and easily as possible. There is no agenda.

[Callsign Kilo]

There seems to be a lot of emphasis placed on the intial sim check/line check at BA. Well as far as I have noted from various postings on this thread. It even appears to be used as some sort of indirect threat to the bmi fraternity moving across. Now I am sitting out my fifth month in the BA DEP holding pool, and like so many caught up in this merger, staring at an abyss of uncertainty because of it. However this intial LPC/OPC and LCK sounds less and less like an LPC/OPC and LCK and more like an audition for the Krypton Factor. I currently fly for an organisation that bares no equivalent to BA, however sims and linechecks are treated as so - be professional and be prepared. Is there anything I'm missing here?

[Carnage Matey!]

Yes, I'd arguably feel a bit grumpy if our seniority list was sh@t on in hard times. However there are an awful lot of people who have very little confidence in BA, or indeed any other company, when the turd hits the fan. That lack of confidence has heavily influenced the career path of many people in BA, who could have earned a lot more but instead have opted to place themselves in the most recession/catastrophe proof positions in the company. I can fully understand disappointment that LIFO has not been observed, but I honestly can't express surprise.

[MrBenip]

You have missed nothing and read the posts as I have and I'm sure (no, I know)
BA is as fair as anyone. Its just some posters ought to put their beers down and re-read their posts again and get off of their moral high ground and pick up a Human Factors book. BA is just fine I'm sure.

[MrBenip]

Surely then we ought to unite not quarrel! Management have all to gain if you show no surprise C.Matey. They as you well know thrive on division.

[hunterboy]

Indeed, if I could reiterate CM's postings, there are many pilots that do not trust BA as far as they could throw them. I think experience teaches that. However, to be fair to BA they have been very good once you are in and a BA pilot. Things have been given up,lost or sold off, however there are not many other places that are better to be, especially if you only speak English.

[overstress]

Now Richard Branson is to appeal against the EU decision. He has written to the Daily Telegraph Why Virgin will continue to fight BA’s anti-competitive purchase of bmi - Telegraph (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/9203293/Why-Virgin-will-continue-to-fight-BAs-anti-competitive-purchase-of-bmi.html)

Will this drag things out further? It's bad enough for the BMI guys as it is. :(

[JazzyKex]

Read the replies to his letter....I think they sum up the general feeling quite well!

[Count von Altibar]

I think he's trying to appear the great champion of consumerism whilst realising that his airline is going to be in for very tough times if something isn't done about it and quickly. I think he's missed the boat on this one a long time ago and probably thought he'd had a better chance with the competition authorities than what has occurred. In a nutshell, they saw through him...

[Callsign Kilo]

Read the replies to his letter....I think they sum up the general feeling quite well!


I'd be careful when using the words 'general feeling.' It would be pretty hard to imply that the readership of the Daily Telegraph can account for 'general feeling.' However I am still convinced Branson has little to no answer for bmi. All this talk about the VS bid, developing a short haul product etc.....utter garbage for PR regurgitation.

[ETOPS]

Can I recommend this analysts briefing which contains some fascinating detail and may help to explain where IAG are going.........

Centreforaviation.com/analysis (http://www.centreforaviation.com/analysis/british-airways-plans-two-phases-to-bring-bmi-and-its-london-heathrow-slots-to-profitability-65333)

I would give yourself about 10 mins to read all of it.

[Genghis McCann]

If you were a 10-year BA pilot sniffing at a command, would you want to merge seniority lists?

[BusDriverLHR]

On the subject of integration - The bmi CC owes it to their membership to get a fair deal in terms of integration of SLs.

No. The BMI CC owes it to their membership to undertake an objective and unemotional analysis of their current situation and determine what the best course of action is to achieve the best (realistic) deal possible for BMI pilots.

Thus far they have failed miserably. They have come up with an unachievable list if demands, told their membership what they wanted to hear and refused to listen to those who tried to point out the precarious reality of their situation.

The error of their ways is rapidly becoming apparent. I feel desperately sorry for those who stand to lose their jobs. The number facing redundancy would almost certainly be less had the BMICC engaged with the BACC instead of bullishly chasing the pipe-dream of a zippered seniority list while harping on about the BMI/BMED merger.

If I was one of those handed 90 days notice I would be feeling bitterly misrepresented.

[red 7]

One dollar
I for one was not suggesting its one way or no way, the ba cc have stated and proven that they have very good methods for coming up with good avenues to negotiate with BA/IAG
So to suggest that the advice they would of given is bully boy like if grossly misinformed on your part.
And with regard to the 12 yr sfo from BMI being on the bottom of the BA MSL, well its better than the alternative I would guess, as has become apparent over the last few days.

And where is this legal challenge going to come from?
On what basis?
funded by who?
and to what good end would it result?

I think you should stop making wild and fantasy suggestions

[red 7]

I would suggest Branson is using the BMI/BA deal to aportion blame for some of the future bad news.
If rumour from head office is to be believed,
Bookings are poor,
Future Bookings are terrible,
and the whole operation is being propped up by takings of deposits for Virgin galactic, as they use VS aoc at the moment.
I cannot for one minute see VS taking any of these slots for domestic use, at best I would say they may take a pair of the saudi slots, but that does not really fit the leisure market they are in.

Where is the VS business model heading with no domestic operation, or tie up with a codeshare partner, I can see them ripe for a similar situation to BMi in a few short years, not that beardy would ever let IAG get their hands on VS.

[Yellow Sun]

I can see them ripe for a similar situation to BMi in a few short years, not that beardy would ever let IAG get their hands on VS.

I tend to agree with your opinion of Virgin's prospects, however I cannot really support the rest of the statement. It was said for many years that SMB would not "get into bed" with the bearded one because of a personality clash. I am sure that the only reason was the fact the Richard never had sufficient readies to make a deal, something well demonstrated by the derisory offer he made LH for bmi. I bet that if IAG made a sufficiently large offer he would be off before you could say "Sir Richard has left the building"!

[757_Driver]

Don't be brow-beaten into forgoing what is due to you under the law. And respect to the BMICC for having the courage to seek this. Unfortunately, BALPA will not help you, so you will have to get a pot of money together if it comes to tribunals/high court.Oh for gods sake. Another person who thinks the world owes everone a living. NOTHING, repeat NOTHING is owed to anyone under the law in this situation. TUPE does not even apply until IAG has finished the current hatchet job - by which time there may be nothing left to protect under TUPE. Seniority / bidline / different fleets, is not, was never and will never be owed under law. It may be something on the negotiating table but it is not legally required.
Yes, BMICC should be fighting their corner, and I'm sure they are much more knowlegable than you (or I ) about the legal matters. But alot of people have said for weeks that they are fighting the wrong corner and being unrealistic in their expectations.

Its a ****ty message, but don't shoot the messenger just because you don't like the way the world works.

This is my last word on the subject as the last thread just turned into a ping pong match between people who refused to accept the reality of the situation. And I've got better things to do to be honest

[red 7]

Maybe you should spend a little time rereading Tupe

It does protect what you have, not what you wish for.

If BMI do become merged with BA, after LH have finished the current restructuring, and after IAG have done their bit to reshape the remnants, then any merger will respect current positions, pay and terms and conditions.

It will not allow for enhanced T&c's and elevated pay, if BMI are ring fenced and retain the career path they always possesed, along with BMI doj for staff travel etc then there is no case to answer.

Anyone who is poised on the edge of the precipice awaiting to hear "job or no job" needs their head examined if they are then considering sueing the future employer for what is not there's to desire in the first place.

[Time Traveller]

If I can put it a simpler way, we made absolutely clear to our new employers, "Although this will be day one for us with you; in all respects, you need to treat us exactly as if we have been here for 8 years". So far as I can tell, thats the way it works, in a nutshell. (I seem to remember, there are a couple of exemptions, such as pension)

If TUPE applies...

[look you]

Hmmm, I'm wondering....in BACC's letter to IRSC, how many times did they mention helping out with avoiding redundancies in bmi (none) and how many times did they mention staff travel concessions, (it was 6th item on their list)? So who was ignoring the elephant?

So mr 757 Driver and mr bus driver lhr: what would you have done to save the (45) jobs currently at risk in bmi? Don't forget you have to do it without disadvantaging any of your colleagues.

How many times have the 2 CCs met over the past months? Obviously those that say bmiCC haven't engaged know the answer. Presumably the bmiCC spent these meetings with ear defenders on, so making sure they didn't hear any of the advice.

My guess is that there are only a few people who know what really has gone on, and they are not posting on here....

[red 7]

I am glad you raised the point of the IRSC proposal,
Why did the BMI cc bury that and take so long to distribute it to its members, if they did at all, I suspect that it contained statements that did not agree with the line they were feeding the members and raising their expectations.

[Tay Cough]

If I can put it a simpler way, we made absolutely clear to our new employers, "Although this will be day one for us with you; in all respects, you need to treat us exactly as if we have been here for 8 years". So far as I can tell, thats the way it works, in a nutshell.

Nearly.

"In all respects, you need to treat us exactly as we have been for 8 years" is more correct. That's TUPE.

[look you]

Ok, so what advice has BACC given that wasn't listened to regarding avoiding redundancies?

[Hand Solo]

Sign on the dotted line, take a compromise agreement which obliges you not to sue BA, then keep all your jobs.

It appears the bmi CC have instead chosen the speculative route of trying to negotiate with IAG (ha!) and instead have got their balls in a vice and their members on 90 days notice of redundancy.

[Hand Solo]

So when you say 'take BACC advice', read take BACC 'accept mywayorthehighway' offer, smells slightly of bully boy tactics. The slots that your company has wisely invested in comes with pilots and a loss making airline. Alot of the duplication will go, and watch the losses shrink as then it is just 29 airframes and well trained, efficient pilots.

It's not bullyboy tactics. It's the real world. The fact that you have been spun a line by your management for years on end that in some way you are attached to the slots is not IAGs problem. BA have enough aircraft at LHR to fly every one of bmis slots to 80% utilisation (the minimum require to keep a slot) without any bmi aircraft. If they run tight they can wet least aircraft to do the job. The financial, and hard, reality is that the slots are important to IAG. The aircraft, and people, they can do without if needs be.

It is rather heavy handed all of the BA chaps coming on here and saying that the bmi chaps should just take whats offered to them and be happy at that; buying bmi has given you the golden opportunity to expand and a hugely constrained airport,

BMI's slots (note SLOTS, not pilots) have offered expansion POTENTIAL. Nothing more.

but you give them a bottom of a list offer, have generously voted them onto a lower salary than yourselves and tell them that they should be thankful for a job!

They'd keep their current salary, and progress up the bmi patscale until they were overtaken by the BA payscale, at which point they'd join that. Please try to keep your facts even close to accurate. And yes, they should be thankful for a job because the alternative to an IAG purchase was a P45.

The 34 year pp will bite you, when the 34pp make up 51%, I wonder what the vote will be then when it comes to cost savings as effectively the airline has divisively broken the employee cohesion is one fell pay point swoop.

I'll worry about the BARPS/NAPS split first thank you. Although those actually in BA tend to recognise financial reality when they see it.


Arguments mooted about should a 10 year FO pushing at command support merging, well should a 12 year FO in bmi be thrilled about moving to the bottom of a 3000 pilot list? All that separates them both is a one day interview and circumstance. Good on the bmicc, I hope that they take this all of the way.

No, they shouldn't be thrilled. Should they be thrilled that they have a job instead of joining the dole queue? They are not seperated by a one day interview and circumstance, they are seperated by a decade of service to a company that is financially sound rather than a decade of service to a bankrupt entity.

I sincerely hope that this does result in a legal challenge of the archaic seniority system and then lets see where the cards fall.

It won't result in a challenge because if the current path continues the bmi pilots will not end up on any seniority list. They'll be a standalony, dying fleet representing the dying fleet they've come from. A great triumph for the bmi CC, sacrificing the career prospects of each of their FOs in favour of the impossible dream of long haul commands for their captains.

Edit:

@ look you - the BACC can't offer compromise agreements. They could propose them as a scheme which BA might approve. I'll give you the benefit of the doubt and assume you knew that.

@max nightstop - you are another one failing to understand who is doing what in this takeover. IAG have to offer nothing, or explore anything. Please get up to speed to spare the rest of us having to explain this time and time again.

[FlyingEagle21]

Probably a silly question but would anyone consider easyJet to take over BAs slots @ LHR? Would they be interested? I can't see Virgin making the routesviable and who else would there be to pick them up? Could it be a cheap way in?


I know this is old but has the situation changed. easyJet applies to fly BA's Heathrow - Belfast service (http://www.easyjet.com/en/news/20011003_02.html)

[Anton du Flasheart]

Hand,

Is it possible that
Quote
"The fact that you have been spun a line by your management for years on end "
might also describe you?
BA has spent a lot of effort sending it's staff on 'Corporate Identity' days in the past - just maybe you have been sucked in a little!

[Hand Solo]

@FlyingEagle - Easy could have a crack but they'd need changes to their business model. High utilisation doesn't really work at LHR due to the incessant delays.

@Anton - we go to 'corporate identity' days because we're rostered them and they pay us for them. Nobody believes the hype. Tell me your average bmi pilot doesn't believe that they are somehow stakeholders in bmi slots.

[Hotel Mode]

I joined BA over a decade ago and have never been to any remotely corporate day. Bog standard SEP annually and 2 leading flight safety cock up avoidance days. Did I miss out? (I admit to missing the gorilla)

[BusDriverLHR]

So mr 757 Driver and mr bus driver lhr: what would you have done to save the (45) jobs currently at risk in bmi? Don't forget you have to do it without disadvantaging any of your colleagues.

One option may have been a Voluntary Redundancy package (as agreed by the BACC a few years ago) across the entire pilot workforce, which would quite possibly have eliminated all mainline redundancies (VR amongst 3550 pilots is much more effective than across 300). I'm sure there are other options that the BACC would come up with. They frequently surprise us with inventive solutions. They've become quite adept at knowing what will appeal to BA.

[Megaton]

Anton

Where do you get this stuff? Corporate Identity Days? It's not us that has been sucked in!

[Anton du Flasheart]

BA have in the past sent staff on courses for corporate spirit building - I can not confirm that this included fight crew but it is a fact for many others in administrative roles.
The point is though ( and this is NOT a crtitism ), that BA do encourage a great deal of corpoate loyalty. This loyality seems to have coloured a few views. Atitudes like this were very similar in bmi for a while. M Bishop had a very loyal following which was subsequently rudely dispelled for many.

[Hand Solo]

What relevance does that have to this thread? There doesn't appear to be any BA pilot here who's been to a BA corporate identity day, and company loyalty to BA bears no relevance to the fact that the Bmi CC have grossly overplayed their hand. Even if every BA pilot on here was grossly disloyal and hated BA you'd still never persuade them that parachuting Bmi pilots in with their Bmi DOJ was acceptable.

[Anton du Flasheart]

Well....Hand, you clearly have a degree of hatred flowing through your system!
The point is quite simple....there is a lot being written here that has a lot of passion. Passion that clouds objectivity. You write from the perspective of a BA employee, influenced by the BA experience. Like wise, I am from a bmi background ( although I hope the management haven't coloured my views too much ). There is a cool rational view to these matters which MAY leave you slightly dissatisfied.
I suspect neither BACC, bmiCC or BALPA will dictate the terms of this merger, it will be management, accountants and lawyers looking for the most cost effective outcome.
That ought to make YOU worried.

[ScotPilot]

Does it bother anyone else that some of the people who post here are charged with looking after the safety of thousands of people and millions of pounds of equipment. If I was not a pilot and I looked through some of the posts here I would be seriously concerned about the state of mind of some of the people sitting at the front of my aeroplane. You know who you are and you are doing your reputation and that of your fellow pilots much damage. Joe public must be wondering what the f**k is going on.

[Hand Solo]

No hatred running through me Anton, or any other BA pilot here, but if mud slinging makes you feel better then so be it. All you've got on here are clear statements that you've asked for far more than the law entitles you to or theBA community is prepared to grant you. If you want to carry on withering on about what you think is fair, what Big BALPA ought to do, why mysterious 'Corporate Identity' days are robbing you of your birthright, or any other of the fig leaves you like to use to disguise an unpleasant reality then to go right ahead!

Oh by the way, the thinly veiled threats about the accountants worrying us don't really wash. Remember they are BAs accountants, and we've been talking to them for months. You don't think we're aware of their plans?

[Anton du Flasheart]

I've said it before Hand......we will see.
I really don't think there has been much mud slinging from this side either - no demands, no dictate, no belittling.... I'll even apologise for my colleagues negotiating in good faith.

[Hand Solo]

This is business Studi, not a socialist collective. The fact that you couldn't grasp the economic reality of the PP34/PP24 debate tells me you don't have much to add to this debate beyond a rose-tinted view of pilots hugging together and dancing under rainbows for the wider benefit of the two winged master race. It is a lovely ideal. It is, however, not the way the rest of the world operates.

[xwindflirt]

Seeing as though the pp34 and pp24 subject has come up... I have crunched the numbers and considering that BA pilots are contracted to 900 hours and bmi pilots are contracted to 740 hours, pp34 does in fact reprisent a significant reduction in salary. Any thoughts?

[NOODY]

A reduction in salary to who?

I'm missing your point, sorry.

As for the hours I'm assuming that those midland pilots that accept a voluntary transfer to the Ba msl will be contracted to 900 hrs. Those that stay on the fleet within the fleet will remain on the 740 hrs pay protected until the 34pp provides an uplift.

Have I missed something?

[xwindflirt]

A full time contract at midland is 740 hours and at ba 900 hours. Bmi pilots are being told by various people on here that they will only get tupe contracts or pay frozen until the pp34 catches up with them. However that is based on 900 hours. Tupe does not allow for the change in hours as it is a fundimental part of the contract. The bmi cc could negotiate a variation to the contract but as I stated, after crunching the numbers the 34pp would be about a 20% pay cut in hourly terms.

[NOODY]

X-wind,

The basic salary is not linked to hours flown at BA. That's paid as an hourly rate on top of your pp. Im led to believe there is no flying hour rate at midland? Regardless its my understanding that no BMI pilot will be financially worse off than he is at present by their integration into BA. Also the 900 hour limit is traditionally a bumper that only the LH come up against, or so I'm lead to believe.

Id be astounded if BA dont know exactly whats due under tupe, absolutely astounded!

N.


Ps to those having a go at Hand he's just telling it as it is as seen by most BA pilots. Personal attacks only serve to further undermine the arguments.

[LHRPony]

Gents and Gals
Argueing on here is as useful and as wise as a box of frogs on a winters day.
We do both sides no favors behaving this way and guess what? What ever is written here won't change one dot on your offer.
I will wish you all good luck and maybe ask for a little calm and restraint as a minority on both side is presenting each company in a bad light.
See you in CRC soon.
Ps its not true , we're not like the Borg all singing the company and union mantra

[XBAMGMT]

I think the bmi chaps and ladies could benefit from a bit of background to the bmi acquisition, what is currently going on in BA shorthaul, and how the pilots got involved.

I worked in what Anton may describe as an “admin” role in BA Waterside for a few years. I have never been to, or heard of a “corporate identity” day – and suspect they do not exist.

BA did not buy bmi. IAG bought bmi. The difference is significant.

IAG made no secret of the fact they are only interested in the slots from bmi, nothing else. At the same time two of IAG’s current business units, BA and IB, are in the midst of large strategic reviews of their shorthaul businesses (as are most legacy carriers). I won’t say anymore than that for BA, however the result of a similar review for Iberia was for the formation of IB Express.

Now, IAG (based on the Bath Road) wanted bmi to become the new “BA Express” for BA shorthaul. The terms and conditions would be benchmarked to Vueling, as Vueling are now the new benchmark in terms and conditions for pilots in Europe. BA were set against this and want to keep shorthaul “in-house”, a struggle they have recently also been fighting at LGW. IAG saw an opportunity for leverage here, and told BA they could only get bmi in-house if they reduce their costs by a set target, together with changes on the revenue side. A large BA project kicked-off, and the 34PP scale is but a small part of this, but perhaps the most visible to pilots. IAG were also very clear that bmi costs cannot be allowed to rise be even 1 penny. But, with cost reductions from BA and their pilots, IAG were happy to allow integration of bmi LHR into BA LHR shorthaul.

One point was very clear, bmi costs cannot be allowed to rise. If pilots were to join the BA MSL in bmi DOJ order this would imply a substantial cost increase, to which IAG would not permit. If bmi pilots want to fight for this it is my opinion that they risk blowing the whole integration deal and going over to new conditions that remain unknown.

Now, I do not know the exact details of how IAG were planning on setting up BA Express using bmi, but it was suggested by one manager in IAG that TUPE would not apply as bmi as a unit were making horrific losses, and they would not be integrated into any existing business unit. I am not a lawyer and nor is he so I can’t comment on the validity of this, but I will say that the IAG legal team, and their lawyers based in the city are VERY good and would make sure everything is legal.

As an outsider looking in I think the deal offered to bmi pilots, and BA pilots for that matter, is fair. Bmi pilots gain secure employment and lose little when many of their ex-bmi colleagues in other roles will be on the dole . If what I read here is correct they even keep grandfather rights and “dead man’s shoes” for commands – in my humble opinion a very generous offer. BA pilots gain from slightly better prospects due to longhaul expansion, but have had to lose some overtime pay as part of the deal.

Those in bmi who think they will keep seniority in BA with associated pay increases clearly have no understanding of, or respect for, how IAG works with its business units. Seniority will not happen as it leads to cost increases. IAG are ruthless and determined, they make no secret of this, and the certainly are not in the business of making friends.

[xwindflirt]

Agreed personal attacks get this debate nowhere.
My understanding is that at ba if cap is not flown a claw back of salary is introduced is that correct? I agree that ba accountants and lawyers are pulling the strings and that the bmi costs must remain neutral but have they actually defined the frame work?

[Megaton]

Having recently left short haul I can confirm that approx 750 hrs per year is a realistic figure for BA so I can't see how the BMI pilots will be working any harder than they do now.

[xwindflirt]

Ok but if ba wanted you to fly all the way up to the 900 hours is there anything in the contract to stop them? Or for you to be able to decline without penalty?
Just to draw an anology 740 hours total is a bit like 80% part time. I don't think anyone would volunteer to go full time but keep the part time pay.
The bmi pilots are not responsible to meet any monthly minimum and as an average because of inefficiencies in rostering end up flying in the region of 650 hours or so. Some obviously do more and some less. To continue on this line. Have the redundancies been calculated on pilots available for 900 hours per year or the 740 as per the existing contract?

[Tay Cough]

My understanding is that at ba if cap is not flown a claw back of salary is introduced is that correct?

Correct if you hold a tripline as you are directly responsible for ensuring you have bid for enough work.

If you hold a Blind Line (work assigned based upon what is left over after trip line construction - effectively preference rostering), you are CAP protected as it is the company's responsibility to assign you enough work.

... and make sure you don't confuse flying hours with credit hours. BA pilots are contracted to achieve 1056 (or thereabouts) credit hours per year. This includes all leave, sim duties and anything else a pilot may be called upon to do - including occasionally flying airliners. Trip construction does not automatically mean that flying hours equal credit hours so in practice on shorthaul, you will find yourself flying 700 to 730 hours per year to achieve CAP. You will struggle to do more unless you hit the overtime quite hard.

[hunterboy]

I am sure that with some swapping of routes/schedules that BA will have BMI pilots flying their 740 hours a year.
What is the ratio of synthetics in BMI with pure flying hours?

[Megaton]

Have the redundancies been calculated on pilots available for 900 hours per year or the 740 as per the existing contract?

Neither. The redundancies have been issued on the basis that BA doesn't have regional basing for mainline pilots.

[xwindflirt]

We only get credited with flight hours flown or 4 hours if on airport standby. No factoring or credit for sim. I believe the tre's do get sim recognised.

[xwindflirt]

Thanks Ham
It sounds like there is some room for manoeuvre in regards to the outstations. It is just the base/position redundant and not necessarily the pilot as long as they are willing to re-base at Lhr.

[NOODY]

The claw back is related to cap and is a function of our bidline rules. So either you will have voluntarily transferred onto the msl and you'll learn to love/hate bidline or you'll have elected to stay ring fenced and thus be rostered as close to your 740 as they can achieve.

Either way its not a trap to pay you less than promised.

[hunterboy]

It does sound very similar to the old Dan/EOG deal. There were winners and losers there depending on who you knew in rostering. Rest assured BA will get the vast majority of pilots near to the maximum ASAP.
The nice thing about BA is though that generally the trips tend to be fairly efficient, so you can get some long days, but you don't tend to waste time hanging around.

[xwindflirt]

Thanks guys for the info
I am all about efficient rostering. I don't mind doing the time but I work so I can spend time with the family.

[SR71]

With respect to merging of seniority lists, I'd be interested to know whether, if BALPA took a poll of all their members outside of BA, the result would overwhelmingly favour mergers rather than concatenation?

Perhaps even if BA pilots were included in the above vote, the result would favour merging lists not some other paradigm? The vociferous minority do not always represent the majority...

It is very difficult not to see this issue becoming a Union-busting activity, albeit, busted by the BA pilots from the inside!

Arguably, there are always those who have thought that BALPA stood for BA LPA, but I fear the insistence by some that "No BA pilot should be disadvantaged by the integration of..." might actually be a cunning plot by management to effectively split, if not destroy, BALPA.

Cognizant of the OW debacle, knowledgeable of the bmi-BMed precedent and presumably informed about the Virgin fiasco, BA have pandered to the naked self-interest of their pilots to place BALPA in an unenviable position and heap yet more pressure upon them.

Perhaps what Studi is referring to is do not be too distracted by the battle, but focus on the war?

That said, it maybe that BA pilots are quite willing to accept an emasculated Union, which ultimately does none of us any favours, as long as their status quo is not upset.

This is a sad reflection on our profession but a not unsurprising end-point bearing in mind the Anglo-Saxon (i.e., not Continental) context of the debate.

[red 7]

Studi

I like others do not get your points,

I am looking at the many times you quote about BA pilots letting the T&C's drop, maybe you should realise that the terms that existed from the mid 70's were not sustainable, the BA.cc were smart enough to see that and take the bull by the horns and re structure,
PAy and allowance restructuring, = better basic pay and less tax on said allowances, something the BA cabin crew wish they had gone for when their taxes went up.
Better scheduling and rostering systems allowing more hands on changing of trips etc.
Changes to pensions to recover what was ruined by uk government

all of the above were a better system to BA pilots and saved them suffering terms being imposed, or going down the route of iberia express.

So yes, we are happy with our lot, no its not alright JAck, I am guessing you have a jealosy of BA due failing to get in, or you are BMI concerned for your future, if neither of the above, please state your intentions,
Ze germans couldnt make BMI work in its present form, maybe IAG can, but it will mean a bit of pain for some before it comes good.

[Dom Joly]

I think SR71 raises a valid point. BALPA NECs silence is deafening to the two groups and to the membership in general. We all would expect some leadership in this hotly contested debate but alas nothing other than an I'll informed document from someone who was not tasked to make a decision, note had the facts to make a decision yet it would appear that that was what he tried to do. What do the PNs have to say?

On a slightly different subject, has there been any discussion or resolution on how the part-time pilots within BMI will be handled? BMI has quite a high percentage of part time pilots with a number of different variations of part time. None of these variations I believe share common terms with BA's part time positions.

[overstress]

We all would expect some leadership in this hotly contested debate

BA BALPA members are well-informed and led, thanks!

Don't think it's a debate?

Not sure why the general membership would expect communications at this stage? It's not the 20th yet.

I expect the part-time discussions will take place soon, TUPE has things to say on that subject, if it ever is applied.

SR71, difficult to see how BA pilots are a 'vociferous minority' in this case. Would have thought BMI pilots were the minority, surely?

[Jockster]

Mods - Forum incorrectly titled. It's a take-over / buy out / asset strip (slots) NOT a merger.

[red 7]

Unity and being alright Jack as you so eloquently put it are not linked as easily as you seem to think.
The 2 differences between all pilots in BA as far a I can see them are.
PP24 vs PP34
old pension, new pension.
Both of these came about due to changes in the law by uk . gov
ie change of retirement age and money grabbing from pensions with tax changes by gordon brown.

the pay points mean that the earnings year on year are the same just spread out over the longer career,
the pensions were a necesity due to the lack of funds left in the pot.

We may not have the sensible government that you have with ze germans so we have to make concessions,
if BA cc had not looked at the options above, many of the other terms and conditions future hires into BA will benefit from would of been lost.

Alright jack, or trying to protect as much as possible for as long as possible.

And when you talk about YOUR company being unified, yes german wings are LH but are you really on the same T&c's and pay as the big boys???

[Dom Joly]

Ok, I missed the word "UNBIASED" from the sentence relating to leadership. I pay my subscription among other reasons to get legal protection and advice for the day I may need some aviation related legal guidance.

I'm not fighting or defending either the BA or the BMI camp, merely wondering when we will actually hear BALPA NECs recommendation. As mentioned before, I'm talking about an official line, rather than an individuals view, as per the document that was circulated and subsequently been proven to be lacking significant details and facts, on which the conclusion was based upon.

Seriously having read this thread and many others, it needs some unbiased comments i.e. non BMI or BA to get some feeling as to what the wider community, armed with information about TUPE would think is appropriate. By all means, the two groups should be able to reply and correct any incorrect information that has been used to come up with a particular view point but it would be refreshing to get some other opinions, especially from the outside looking in.

[NOODY]

Studi,

Go on tell us who, or is it a guessing game.

[Super Stall]

The NEC's view via the IRSC was published weeks ago and is available on the Balpa forum for any members to view.

Please try and keep up you chaps.

[red 7]

Studi has sinced edited his post about his company being unified and standing as one, as he remembered he works for the loco subsiduary
oops!!!!

[NOODY]

Studi,
Doesn't matter a jot to me, I just thought it would be sensible to say what company you worked for whilst describing what a nirvana it is. I'm reading your posts not stalking you. As an aside I'm impressed that you've got 95% of what ML lufty get, that's certainly not what they tell us down route.
N.

[red 7]

Studi
we could bash heads on this all day,
But firstly, the change to the pay points was to embrace the change in the new retirement age, I for one see it as a minor concession to maintaining the bigger picture, also any new joiners know the payscale they will be joining so can make the choice,
the alternative you suggest would of meant all 3400 ba pilots taking a paycut for several years to embrace this change, the company did not ask for this, so where is the sense in offering it for future alleged unity?
I cannot see how you would of considered it myself.

secondly, I am pleased you at Gw have had such a good integretion, it sounds much like the eventual outcome of EOG at LGW who our now pretty much on parity with LHR, and also when the city flyer take over went through.

BUT< the point you miss is? EW and citiflyer were similer in as much as good strong going concerns,
BMI was all but bankrupt and would of been months ago if it were not for the injections of cash by IAG 15 million as agreed with LH,
hence LH making the current redundancies before IAG take over and continue reshaping.
No one in BA is looking for BMI to be 2nd class or treated in any way other than embracing new colleagues to the party,
And there is no issues with protected current commands or future commands for the bmi sfo's as the BMi slots become available.
But there is no desire on BA pilots part to open the door to a failing shorthaul operator to then walk into long haul commands.
Simple fact, again I think you use the alright jack scenario in the wrong place, we have worked hard for many years with BA/IAg to remain a profitable fluid workforce to avoid the excat scenario BMi pilots find themselves left in due mismanagement

7

[NOODY]

Red 7,

Yet again I find myself in agreement with you!

N

[Dom Joly]

The NEC's view via the IRSC was published weeks ago and is available on the Balpa forum for any members to view.

Please try and keep up you chaps.

alas nothing other than an I'll informed document from someone who was not tasked to make a decision, nor had the facts to make a decision, yet it would appear that that was what he tried to do.

Come on Super Stall - do keep up old bean! ;)

Hopefully that's the last time I will have to lower myself to retaliating. This thread needs to have more facts rather than opinions, other than some fresh external thoughts. After all, I don't think anyone really wants to read 300+ bmi comments and 3000+ BA comments slugging it out for their own personal gain.

By introducing external thoughts, perhaps we can see what the greater industry makes of all of this. Perhaps we can get some views from other Companies where a takeover, merger, buyout or whatever you want to call it has occurred. It would be interesting to see how it went, together with pros and cons and what would be could have been done differently.

[BusDriverLHR]

With respect to merging of seniority lists, I'd be interested to know whether, if BALPA took a poll of all their members outside of BA, the result would overwhelmingly favour mergers rather than concatenation?

Perhaps even if BA pilots were included in the above vote, the result would favour merging lists not some other paradigm? The vociferous minority do not always represent the majority...

What on earth does the opinion of pilots not in BA/BMI have to do with any of this?? By all means, contribute to the debate if you wish, but to suggest your 'vote' counts is barking mad.

I think SR71 raises a valid point. BALPA NECs silence is deafening to the two groups and to the membership in general. We all would expect some leadership in this hotly contested debate but alas nothing other than an I'll informed document from someone who was not tasked to make a decision, note had the facts to make a decision yet it would appear that that was what he tried to do.

The IRSC is the BALPA section tasked with dealing with issues like this. That is their purpose. They were consulted, they produced an educated opinion.
You didn't like what they had to say so you call them "ill informed".
THE BMI-CC didn't like what they had to say so they kept the report from their members.

As I've said before, this is about (some) BMI pilots trying to skip the queue to BA longhaul and using every excuse in the book to justify it.

[Dom Joly]

No, that is far from true.

Actually I believe the IRSC report was sat on by the BMIcc as they knew that the information would inflame the BMI pilots, who would have felt completely let down by this group, due to the inaccuracies.

If you read (if you have access to it?) the reply from the BMIcc chairman and actually look at what his concerns are, you would see that they are all genuine and serious issues that were not considered or based on incorrect details.

Having read the document and applying it to what I know, I can see that it is misinformed hence my point.

I am trying to remain unbiased but some people seem to take what they are told as gospel, without carrying out their own research. It makes it rather difficult to hold an intelligent conversation. Seriously, I'd be the first to stand up and fall in line with it's directive if I believed that it was both unbiased and was decided upon based on the correct details. The fact that it did not have the correct facts means that either it was biased or that the author had not researched his subject matter to any great detail, which some could argue is equally biased.

[Super Stall]

Well I've read it.

Can you point me in the direction of which facts you consider incorrect.

Honest question as nothing leaps out at me.

[red 7]

I know it is not possible to post a link to the irsc report here,
but if it is on the balpa library can you suggest where to find it, as I have looked??

[Super Stall]

I read it on the general members forum on the Balpa site.

It's on page 45 of the BMI thread.

[Super Stall]

BTW Dom Jolly,

Actually I believe the IRSC report was sat on by the BMIcc as they knew that the information would inflame the BMI pilots

I'm sorry but that's censorship by any measure.

The pilots of both groups have a right to see the findings of a report by senior Balpa officers and pilots with no connection to either BMI or BA. Just because the BMICC didn't agree with the findings is a poor excuse to withhold it from their members.

If the report was going to 'inflame' BMI members then it was because their expectations were unreasonable and mis-managed by a bullish CC in the first place.

[Megaton]

They're not "giving us the slots." We (IAG) are buying them. The 34 point payscale was always going to happen, it was just a question of when. The 24 point payscale had been in BA's sight for quite some time.

[red 7]

Studi
you are becoming tiresome now, I thinkt that is your aim

Ba are buying the use of the slots. bmi are not selling them, LH your parent company are, the parent company that could not turn BMI around.
Fact, end of I believe.

re inflationary pay rises, that has nothing to do with payscales,
the payscales exist regardless, and both or neither will increase if there is a negotiated inflationary rise.
we all took the jobs knowing the payscales, we all assumed we would get an inflationary rise, if there were inflation that year....

lastly, why would anyone say yes to restructuring of payscales to suit longer working years, and then take a 10/20% immediate pay cut, I don't believe for a minute anyone would.

If all you can do is shout, " i am all right jack" at everyone and everything then please move on, you have stated you have no desire to work here, and apparently its nirvana at GW.

As has been commented the pp24/34 decision was made long before the bmi takeover, it is just they are the first ones in.

We could bang on about changes to conditions due employment law all day, like the change to working to 50 and then to 55 and the increases in pensions with pension crystalization, some guys did amazingly well out of that, yes they were allright, but it is right time right place and we have to move with the times, we cant look back and go and cherry pick the best bits from the past.

Now I await the next reason I am allright, and failing my future unborn collegues..

[Super Stall]

Studi,

Your replies are becoming increasingly incomprehensible and to be honest are just creating a lot of noise. As in the PP34 dbate you show a complete inability to grasp the facts.

Is there any chance you can end this rather odd obsession with BA and let the BA and BMI pilots discuss their future.

Why you are so interested is beyond me.

[max nightstop]

Studi, nice try but I'm afraid you are trying to apply long term German Union socialist principles to short term, fat cat, British mentality. When the response is "our management didn't ask for a united work force so we didn't give them one" I think you might have to admit defeat. By the way, it is obvious to me why you and all other pilots should be interested.

Come back in a decade and you'll be able to say "I told you so" maybe with a certain sense of what we call " schadenfreude". Do you have a word for that in German?

[BusDriverLHR]

If you read (if you have access to it?) the reply from the BMIcc chairman and actually look at what his concerns are, you would see that they are all genuine and serious issues that were not considered or based on incorrect details.

I have read both the report and the BMICC comments (which only came after the BACC published the report).
Like everyone else here, I am not privy to all the information the IRSC are but I certainly found no inaccuracies or cause to doubt their findings.

The BMICC reply states that "speculation and/or unverified information" was used to create the report but they make no attempt to qualify these comments whatsoever.

[NOODY]

Max,
I think you'll find BA has a pretty united pilot workforce. It's resulted in not a single job loss in our history.

[red 7]

Studi
happy for debate when it is remotely sensible, but when you advocate taking a pay cut and other fanciful ideas it is not reality
It flys in the face of your recent LH strike when you all walked out do to sharing the work with other members of your group who were alledgedly on lower pay,
why did you not take the pay cut to unify as you suggested for us.
BA pilots whilst having subtly different contracts pensions, and now pay scales are very unified and generally stand up for each other, I think most at BMI will be happy to secure a long and succesful employment in BA and to be rid of the black cloud that has long been over thier heads,
But I am sure there will be the few that are not....

[red 7]

As you say agree to disagree, but you say you never mentioned a paycut but then you wrote...


Quote:

... the alternative you suggest would of meant all 3400 ba pilots taking a paycut for several years to embrace this change, the company did not ask for this, so where is the sense in offering it for future alleged unity?

Yes, that is exactly what I would advocate. I am astonished how astonished you are about my stance.



round and round we go

[sudden twang]

It doesn't matter what anyone thinks here! It doesn't matter what the bmiCC think. It doesn't matter what the BACC think reference seniority.

It does matter what BA thinks.
They think if bmi pilots join the msl on bmi doj then they will be entitled to the respective paypoint. That means quite a few pilots will get significant rises in basic pay.

BA are on record for all to see that they will not permit this.

Unless of course BA pilots accept a reduction in Ts and Cs to cover the costs.

[SR71]

As studi and max appreciate, this is not just about BA and bmi.

It would be short-sighted in my opinion for BA pilots to ignore the ramifications of how they conduct themselves during this integration/merger/takeover on the wider fraternity. They are no doubt a formidable force, but still a minority in terms of the UK pilot workforce.

And to accuse other contributors of ignorance when they have been at the sharp end of protecting payscales that are far more generous than BA's, seems to me, odd.

One wonders what result a BALPA referendum on "The Method of Merging Seniority Lists" would yield? It might serve to neutralise at least some of the vested interest by involving the "silent majority" who, whilst they do not have an immediate interest in the debate, are watching carefully to see what happens.

:\

[red 7]

SR71
to whom do you refer when you say it is not about BA/BMI
The thread IS, BA/BMI

The only people to lose or gain in this is BA/BMI, and whilst it is nice to consider the global view, the only people affected in this will be BA/BMI pilots for the life of their careers,
I would gamble on less than 20 pilots leaving BA by choice unless for illhealth/retirement in the nxt 5/10 years, so it very much is an inside view people are taking.

[overstress]

short-sighted in my opinion for BA pilots to ignore the ramifications of how they conduct themselves during this integration/merger/takeover on the wider fraternity

Well 99.9% of us are conducting ourselves by going to work in accordance with our rosters and waiting to be told what has happened, which I expect applies to the 'wider fraternity' as well, assuming they are interested in the first place?

In terms of a referendum, as UK law applies differently depending on the nature of takeovers, buyouts, mergers etc, then a BALPA referendum on seniority lists would serve no purpose.

[MrBenip]

Even more sh!t for BMI pilots. DLH dumping FS pension into PPF! See BALPA website.

[Say again s l o w l y]

:ugh:

There are likely to be some seriously aggravated people today.

[MrBenip]

New news; it now seems DLH paid £84m towards pension deficit before going into the PPF as the UK Pension Regulator would not allow DLH to keep the deficit!

[RJ100]

"Peter Simpson will become bmi Managing Director. He will be responsible for ensuring safe and secure operations
and overseeing the transition of activity to BA."

This was announced this afternoon it's not greatnews for BMI.
He is the one person most out of touch with he work force within our company.
Most people outside of HQ think he is a Muppet. (ie. also a puppet)

[Barcli]

does it matter now ?

[red 7]

Interesting to appoint the MD of city flyer to the Job,
A short term position though until its all integrated.
Is there more to this? the integration of BMI regional into city flyer??

Re the pension announcement, anyone know if this is LH decision or if it was imposed by the pensions authority?

[skip.rat]

-The Pensions Authority.
Despite a credible plan drawn up between DLH & the trustees to fund the scheme broadly in line with current investment strategies, the regulator still would not agree for the scheme to continue to be funded.
- someone remind me whose side they are supposed to be on?

[juan toogo]

DLH have shafted bmi, the pension scheme has all but collapsed and BA are doing there best to put us at the bottom, pay us the minimum and make this stressful time as difficult as possible.
Just remind me why the hell I'm doing this job? It used to be a fun and respected profession, now it's just massive hassle. I for one am not looking forward to the merger with BA, I get the impression that bmi will be resented by the BA workforce. It's ironic that this is probably the best thing that could happen to BA and it's workforce, but you wouldn't think so.

[Juan Tugoh]

Just remind me why the hell I'm doing this job? It used to be a fun and respected profession, now it's just massive hassle. I for one am not looking forward to the merger with BA,

Do not feel obligated to complete the move. I am sure that others in BMI with a redundancy having over them will happily swap places with you and ease your despair at being given a future by this take over.

[skip.rat]

Skip.rat - it is bmi trustees and bmi group who are relevant. LH is not the relevant sponsoring company, simply the shareholder, albeit 100% owner.
City Flyer:
understood; I mentioned them as they have volunteered the cash to help fund the shortfall; as I understand it they were not under any legal obligation to do so, despite having a strong moral obligation to do the right thing;- it's just a shame that the plan was not accepted by the regulator.

[FANS]

This should not be a surprise to BALPA, if they had seen the deal structure proposed.

It seems that BA have told DLH that they consider the pension scheme to be akin to debt for which they will not assume any liability or future liabilities.

DLH may have been in a position by which they could have legally walked away from the complete (£180m?) liability, albeit the PR implications would have been massive. Instead DLH have negotiated with BA and the PPF an £85m one-off payment, to try and keep the workforce at least half motivated and avoid any potential legal challenges to DLH for full recompense.

The PPF was aimed towards helping those pension schemes (i.e. unsecured creditors) affected with companies (and parent companies) that have gone bust e.g. Woolworths etc.

Whilst BMI was in no way a going concern, it was acquired by DLH which knew full well of the huge pension scheme liabilities upon signing its various purchase agreements and from the sounds of this deal, Lufthansa (a fully solvent group) is able to walk away from this liability.

[NOODY]

Juan,

Firstly you've got the entire community's sympathies re your pension situation, it's a worry for all of us and your anger and concern is understood completely.

There may be some incredulity amongst BA pilots that the BMIcc is demanding so much but I've yet to encounter any resentment, that's been a one way emmotional highway from you guys. Likewise it takes some lateral thinking to imagine that your acquisition, and the hopeful employment lifeline it will bring you, is the best thing that ever happened to BA's employees!

As you should know, and its been repeated ad nausem, your not being stuck on the bottom of the MSL. Your CC may have ensured that your not even offered that option anymore. Yet again despite they now OBVIOUS INSOLVENCY of BMI there's somebody spinning a totally disingenuous line about both what they feel they are owed as an outcome of the insolvency and the responsibility that BA pilots have for the predicament that BMI pilots find themselves in. Whilst bemoaning the state of the industry your really demanding the rest of us give do you don't have to face the consequences of your career decisions. We've to many ex BMI guys at BA to not understand that many stayed in the hope you'd be handed the keys to the kingdom elsewhere. I resent not your decision or belittle the logic or the rational, but it's you who must live with the reality of the outcome.

Every BMI pilot who is lucky enough to be at BA by the end of the year will be made feel very welcome and without doubt the expansion it brings is great news for all at IAG. It's expansion we paid for and your going to get to share in. A continual harping on about your jackpot wishlist, whilst already keeping at least what you got even ignoring the added bonus of the most secure job in the uk market, meerly leaves those of us at BA feeling not resentful just mystified.

Good luck to those facing both pension and employment Armageddon. I sincerely hope that the appointment of the new MD will provide an opportunity for IAG to seek a way forward that protects your jobs.

[FANS]

cityflyer - agree that LH would have had great difficulty taking cash consideration without further contributing this to the deficit.

I suspect however that the cash consideration paid by BA may have been driven by how much it was felt was appropriate to put into the pension deficit.

[MrBenip]

I have been talking to the PPF and they said in general terms that just because the pension regulator has rejected a plan to keep the scheme running they have to examine the facts and there have been cases where they have rejected applications for PPF entry and it has gone back to the table to sort out a plan that the regulator approves without entry to the PPF.

It will amaze me if they manage to offload the pension liability to the PPF as IAG/DLH are no financial lightweights and a share sale took place not an insolvency as such. The PPF does not exist for companies to abdicate/reduce their liabilities and just because the regulator is not happy doesn't mean they will accept the fund for their responsibility.

[ScotPilot]

Thanks for the info MrBenip

[RHINO]

you maybe right Mr Benip however it still does not explain why the Pension regulator should sever the financial link between Lufthansa and the scheme. Certainly a bleak day...

[MrBenip]

Rhino - presumably because Lufthansa did not come up with enough readies for him to be satisfied the scheme had enough cash to discharge it's future liabilities despite the trustees being satisfied with the deal after receiving independent financial advice.

The amount Lufthansa has "volunteered" (£84M) to give now, to part way supplement the PPF scheme, is the same amount they had pledged to keep the scheme running as was. Guess they won't stump up any more.

[RHINO]

What was the PPF deficit at the last valuation? less than £84M I hope....:sad:

[bluenose boy]

Pretty sure defecit was more than twice that if I remember correctly! :eek:

[bluepilot]

I blame Gordon brown for raiding the pensions in the first place back in 1997, this country now no longer has defined benefit pensions as a direct result (unlike the rest of europe). May he rot for what he has done.

[FANS]

I'm not privy to the details of the transaction, but the substance of what is happening here is not what the PPF was set up for.

There now also exists a situation whereby there is talk of a £60m+ black hole, but that is misleading as it is based on accounting estimates that can change millions on a daily basis, depending upon the value of the assets in the scheme and the liabilities (based on life tables and discount rates).

I find it highly questionable that LH & BA can be involved in a transaction that ultimately results in a reduction to contractual pension commitments, and think this should be of concern to every (private sector) member of a DB scheme.

[Ancient Observer]

A someone who benefits from a decent pension scheme, I feel really sorry for the bmi folk. What has taken place is appalling.
I'm afraid, though, that the Trustees did not get solid enough guarantees from the various Companies that have owned the airline. They appear to have let the owners off the hook - not recently, but back when the deals were done.

You cannot blame "shareholders". If I were stupid and rich, I might chose to buy lots of IAG shares. That does not give me a liability of any sort for the IAG pension scheme.

Remember that IAG is a HUGE pension scheme, with a very little airline trying to fund it.

No. Way back when, someone took their eye off the ball.

If it does all go tits up in Pension terms, I do hope it generates lots of publicity. Folk need to focus on this Pension lark!

[MrBenip]

FANS _ couldn't agree more. Sold down the river by the big boys. Pension regulator would not approve what DLH had to offer so PPF here we go. But, there are questions starting to surface about the regulators decision see link; Analysis: Why isn't the Pensions Regulator chasing Lufthansa? (http://www.efinancialnews.com/story/2012-04-19/analysis-lufthansa-bmi-pensions)