Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR
8herveg wrote:operationally - it's the same as BA mainline
Nickd92 wrote:Different Ts&C's, different cost base, and different AOC. Thats why.
Nickd92 wrote:Sorry that came across really blunt apologies.
The BA connect sale to Flybe didn't include the LCY operation as BA didn't want to give Flybe the LCY operation. BA CityFlyer was born out of that i believe.
8herveg wrote:Nickd92 wrote:Sorry that came across really blunt apologies.
The BA connect sale to Flybe didn't include the LCY operation as BA didn't want to give Flybe the LCY operation. BA CityFlyer was born out of that i believe.
No problem. I was aware that the BA Connect sale to Flybe didn't include the LCY operation, but why didn't BA just setup their own operation with the same 'rules' as mainline rather than setting up a subsidiary?
skipness1E wrote:The BoB is coming to LCY. BA had a high and uncompetitive cost base. They ended up taking an axe to ts&cs at regional and LGW. The problem was staff were making flying a career and expecting to be well paid. They also had in house handling with staff having been around more than a single season.
To mitigate this foolishness and to allow us to fly for silly money to eveywhere at a whim, BA cut and cut and kept every other part of the operation seperate from high cost and unionised LHR. Then came mixed fleet and the final attack on the looney left at BASSA.
Ahh we live in better days. Well, I can afford to fly more, so "yaaay".
There is NO entry to the BA seniority list via CFE, you go in at the bottom if you somehow manage to get into BA proper. #sarcasm
Remember BA originally bought out CityFlyer at Gatwick, there was no need to set up another subsidiary, they had CFE, BRY and BRT all in one giant Union Jack liveried mixture...... That's before you consider just how many different aircraft they flew. Simpler now
TheLion wrote:You sound like you really don't care about the workers. A freemarketeering arch-capitalist at play
TedToToe wrote:TheLion wrote:You sound like you really don't care about the workers. A freemarketeering arch-capitalist at play
More than a little sarcasm in Skip's post!
BawliBooch wrote:Airline Business is all about cutting costs. Plain & Simple.
CityFlyer is BA's take on the outsourcing model to cut costs. Delivering services with a subsidiary operating on a lower cost structure.
If you dont see a difference between CityFlyer service & BA mainline, it just shows they have have been doing a very good job with it.
8herveg wrote:
Ok, understood. So why doesn't BA mainline have/copy/follow the same t&c's as CityFlyer so they too can cut costs?
skipness1E wrote:@8herveg Hey old chap, mind doing your company a favour so we can hit profit targets for shareholders please? Fancy losing your pension, benefits, restricting staff travel and double digit % terms pay cut to a market rate driven by Ryanair? SERIOUSLY? #facepalm
8herveg wrote:skipness1E wrote:@8herveg Hey old chap, mind doing your company a favour so we can hit profit targets for shareholders please? Fancy losing your pension, benefits, restricting staff travel and double digit % terms pay cut to a market rate driven by Ryanair? SERIOUSLY? #facepalm
So how do they get away with it at CityFlyer?!
LHRFlyer wrote:8herveg wrote:skipness1E wrote:@8herveg Hey old chap, mind doing your company a favour so we can hit profit targets for shareholders please? Fancy losing your pension, benefits, restricting staff travel and double digit % terms pay cut to a market rate driven by Ryanair? SERIOUSLY? #facepalm
So how do they get away with it at CityFlyer?!
There is a union agreement in place which limits CityFlyer to aircraft that have fewer than 100 seats. That's why the leg room on BACF's E-190s is so generous.
skipness1E wrote:In fairness your question was : "Why don't they just slash everyone's wages?" My answer was blunt and direct, sometimes couching in nicer language is unhelpful.
They got away with it as the original companies that made up what became BA CityFlyer lacked a powerful union like BASSA to prevent a slash and burn cost cutting strategy. However given Ts & Cs weren't as high as BA to start with and Rod Eddington and Willie Walsh were tempted with simply closing all regional flying, cuts were accepted for survival. From the sold remains of regional BA, what became BA Connect at the end was a reborn BA Cityflyer flying RJ100s out of LCY. With this operation kept at arms length from mainline and unable to operate regular ops from LHR/LGW as all Hell would break loose with BALPA with the pilotsunder threat.
Remember the mainline Cabin Crew have already been broken as a force with new hires on nee Mixed Fleet contracts focussed on getting young good looking people who will leave for better paid work elsewhere after a few years of world travelling and before their crows feet show. It's the Singapore /Cathay business model.
8herveg wrote:skipness1E wrote:In fairness your question was : "Why don't they just slash everyone's wages?" My answer was blunt and direct, sometimes couching in nicer language is unhelpful.
They got away with it as the original companies that made up what became BA CityFlyer lacked a powerful union like BASSA to prevent a slash and burn cost cutting strategy. However given Ts & Cs weren't as high as BA to start with and Rod Eddington and Willie Walsh were tempted with simply closing all regional flying, cuts were accepted for survival. From the sold remains of regional BA, what became BA Connect at the end was a reborn BA Cityflyer flying RJ100s out of LCY. With this operation kept at arms length from mainline and unable to operate regular ops from LHR/LGW as all Hell would break loose with BALPA with the pilotsunder threat.
Remember the mainline Cabin Crew have already been broken as a force with new hires on nee Mixed Fleet contracts focussed on getting young good looking people who will leave for better paid work elsewhere after a few years of world travelling and before their crows feet show. It's the Singapore /Cathay business model.
Actually, my specific question was 'So why doesn't BA mainline have/copy/follow the same t&c's as CityFlyer so they too can cut costs?' - and what I meant by that was, how comes CityFlyer doesn't benefit from the same t&c's as mainline.
But thanks for your explanation.
vv701 wrote:BA CityFlyer crew do not benefit from the same terms and conditions as BA Mainline crew because the CityFlyer terms and conditions have developed from an entirely different base to those of BA itself. This base was the terms and conditions pertaining to CityFlyer Express crew, This airline was an LGW based BA franchise operator until it was bought by BA in October 2002.
Back then an agreement was reached between BA and BALPA that this situation was acceptable provided what evolved into BA CityFlyer did not operate any aircraft with 100+ seats.
This has resulted in BA CityFlyer operating their E190s with 98 C/Y 34" pitch seats. This is of course very generous for Y Class passengers. It is the same as that for W Class passengers on BA Mainline long-haul configured aircraft.
OPDRVR wrote:BTW is there a aircraft size limit to operate from LCY? In other words can a BBJ (737) operate from this airport?
PatrickZ80 wrote:The concept isn't unique by the way. KLM also has KLM Cityhopper who operate the smaller aircraft (Fokker and Embraer) for them. Lufthansa has Lufthansa Regional, Iberia has Air Nostrum. Also in America the US3 got seperate airlines for their regional operations.
BA Cityflyer isn't strictly bound to London City by the way, they also operate flights out of some other airports like Stansted.