Moderators: jsumali2, richierich, ua900, PanAm_DC10, hOMSaR

  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7
 
User avatar
TheLunchbox
Posts: 74
Joined: Fri Nov 30, 2018 4:31 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 12:42 am

Trk1 wrote:
Will not to be correcting in a year. No vaccine and flyers will be few and far between


Don't necessarily need a vaccine, just a reliable treatment/drug. There will surely be a few treatments by year's end.
 
baje427
Posts: 790
Joined: Mon Aug 01, 2011 12:42 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 12:51 am

TheLunchbox wrote:
Trk1 wrote:
Will not to be correcting in a year. No vaccine and flyers will be few and far between


Don't necessarily need a vaccine, just a reliable treatment/drug. There will surely be a few treatments by year's end.

Even with a treatment the economic damage done by Covid is such that few will have the disposable income to travel. There has been record unemployment around the world demand is not going to bounce back anytime soon even if they have a cure.
 
User avatar
stl07
Posts: 2361
Joined: Mon May 01, 2017 8:57 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 2:18 am

Bhoy wrote:
DobboDobbo wrote:
...the UK could not allow its only full service carrier to fail.

Is that the full service carrier that charges £5 for a cup of tea and scone? :duck:

At least Norwegian has free wifi
Instead of typing in "mods", consider using the report function.
Love how every "travel blogger" says they will never fly AA/Ethihad again and then says it again and again on subsequent flights.
 
User avatar
Revelation
Posts: 23936
Joined: Wed Feb 09, 2005 9:37 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 2:41 am

FluidFlow wrote:
jbpdx wrote:
747megatop wrote:
It's going to take more than a year for it to recover. The Vaccine needs to come and be available to the general public in large numbers.

Vaccines for these type of viruses are at best 65% effective.

That is not the point, it will give people the feeling of safety for their next travel. Right now they do not feel safe and will not travel.

You can't gaslight a virus.

Ideally we'd see efforts to start producing PPE and sanitizers in the numbers needed for it to be daily apparel.

Now we get "cloth face covering" as a nice placebo, till the number of cases and deaths tick up again.
Wake up to find out that you are the eyes of the world
The heart has its beaches, its homeland and thoughts of its own
Wake now, discover that you are the song that the morning brings
The heart has its seasons, its evenings and songs of its own
 
Opus99
Posts: 811
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 2:44 am

I want to post a comment a reader of an article related to this topic left under the article. I thought it was quite interesting and i somewhat agreed with his logic and it kind of gives you an idea why BA is the way it is today or moreso what drove it there...

"My surprise is that anybody is surprised.
BA is not the airline it used to be. Why? Because their fickle passengers chose it so by moving away in droves to cheaper airlines with low prices paid for by low service standards. It was not long ago that they were being mocked for perceived antiquated business models and “stuffiness”. Worst of all they were seen as noncompetitive.
So what did they do? They had an almighty shake up. They brought in new leadership from those “clever” low cost airlines. It was not just the leadership that changed but the lower management were charged with change or the dole queue, where many have gone.
Now they lave become leaner, meaner and proactive in matching their new competitors in service (or lack of it), staff salaries (see mixed fleet) and core product changes. Not the dear old BA we had come to love and mock.
Yes BA are shareholder driven and no I personally don’t like it. I left my last company (Hogg Robinson) after they became a PLC partly because I could not in all conscience live with the new ethos that it brings. Ethos? Yes, shareholder value to me is all about minimising risk, accurately predicting (and changing) the future and increasing share price consistently and reliably. The customer becomes an “also ran” behind the city represented by young analysts that wouldn’t know a cockpit from a tail-fin but understand EBITA and EBITDA!
So yes, I think it is wrong to get rid of jobs wholesale for no true reason but to protect shareholder value BUT, get a grip people, you made it so the day you chose cheap flights over “flag carrier” service."
 
caribny
Posts: 430
Joined: Sat Mar 16, 2019 1:47 am

Re: BA may not reopen at Gatwick

Fri May 01, 2020 3:01 am

Brickell305 wrote:
USAirALB wrote:
I would argue that many routes flown ex-LGW are simply redundant at this stage (such as LGW-AMS/EDI/VCE).

I would also assume that most of the long-haul route network would make the transition. I think most of their Caribbean network is probably safe and could easily moved, as most flights are simply tag-ons, rather than flown direct from LGW. MCO and MRU are also likely safe as well, but I see TPA and TAB dropped.

I don’t see the current tag-ons surviving. At least not initially. If leisure traffic drops as I suspect it will, instead of ANU or UVF being “strong enough” to carry their tag destinations, they may have to consolidate those in order to make flights worthwhile. In essence, instead of flying LGW-ANU-PLS, they may now have to fly LGW-ANU-UVF as demand to secondary tag destinations (GND, PLS, POS, SKB, TAB) may no longer be worth it and demand to the primary tag destinations drop where they can be consolidated.



POS will continue as its a high yield business route. BA uses the premium jet on this route for that reason. The other tags likely gone. Maybe LHR ANU POS with a lower frequency on a LHR UVF. This also depends on what happens to VS, which will have dropped UVF by the time service resumes. Will they drop ANU too, focusing just on BGI? Assuming of course that they survive.

I suspect the higher yielding leisure segment will recover to some degree to properties that have upgraded to allow social distancing, this reducing declines into BGI/ANU. These folks have the money and also now have cabin fever. The "bucket and spade" gang will not be traveling any time soon. The VFR ex London is now weak, and now fairly discretionary given that its now mainly UK born people of Caribbean descent, unlike what one sees out of JFK/YYZ.

The only other tag that might survive is GND, especially if VS drops them, which is most likely. SKB and TAB definitely gone if there is a sharp reduction of Caribbean service. Maybe PLS might return to service via NAS.
 
SCQ83
Posts: 5677
Joined: Wed Oct 03, 2012 8:32 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 7:57 am

If Virgin Atlantic disappears and foreign carriers also reduce flights to LHR (less demand) there will be available slots in LHR. In that case I can see easyJet demanding many LHR slots (I recall seeing a list of easyJet's LHR destinations once the 3rd runway was built). With BA fortressing in LHR that gives other carriers less leverage.

In any case, I suspect the London airports will look different. easyJet at LHR will be probably certain, and Ryanair and Wizz Air will expand in LGW (no BA, no Norwegian).

I wonder if Air France and Paris will look the same. AF only in CDG and ORY (when reopened) given to Ryanair and Wizz Air.
 
na
Posts: 9762
Joined: Sun Dec 12, 1999 3:52 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 9:18 am

Better than firing so many people would be an alternative where, natural retirements und an reemployment stop aside, the whole workforce would accept reduced payments for, lets say, the next three years. Something like what the LH pilots are offering.
 
lhrnue
Posts: 365
Joined: Sat Jun 05, 2010 2:47 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 10:03 am

I find closing LGW from BA a very clever short and long-term strategy.
At the moment, and in near future, BA has enough capacity at LHR to serve all destinations with the cost benefit of one base only.
LGW will be busy to fill the slots BA leaves behind … low cost carriers, in particular EasyJet, will be keen to fill them and to compete against BA at LHR.
This will keep EasyJet busy and most likely prevent them to expand into Heathrow, which was the plan with the 3rd runway.
LHR will be keen to allocate more slots to BA when they need them. This is the case for the 2 runaway and 3 runway scenarios.
With this BA will have more capacity to grow at LHR / less direct competition and is finally consolidated at one London airport.
 
a350lover
Topic Author
Posts: 863
Joined: Sun Dec 24, 2017 11:21 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 10:13 am

lhrnue wrote:
I find closing LGW from BA a very clever short and long-term strategy.
At the moment, and in near future, BA has enough capacity at LHR to serve all destinations with the cost benefit of one base only.
LGW will be busy to fill the slots BA leaves behind … low cost carriers, in particular EasyJet, will be keen to fill them and to compete against BA at LHR.
This will keep EasyJet busy and most likely prevent them to expand into Heathrow, which was the plan with the 3rd runway.
LHR will be keen to allocate more slots to BA when they need them. This is the case for the 2 runaway and 3 runway scenarios.
With this BA will have more capacity to grow at LHR / less direct competition and is finally consolidated at one London airport.


I partially agree with you but, do you guys think BA presence at LGW was just a consequence of constraint capacity at LHR? LGW is 40min drive South of Heathrow (in best driving conditions). I think LGW has its own potential to attract a huge population who lives in the South East. For obvious reasons, with 95% of travel demand virtually vanished under current conditions having two hubs that close means zero benefit, but again, isn't BA being just too negative around the future for air travel in London? We aren't talking about Milan, Naples or Hamburg. We are talking about London, one of the most lucrative air markets in the World.
 
concordeforever
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:51 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 10:31 am

Johnwaynebobbet wrote:
Canuck600 wrote:
How do people expect them to be getting rid of their most expensive staff when layoffs start at the bottom of the seniority list? They would have to off the senior people a buyout/really good severance package for them to leave? Or are union contracts Europe very different then they are in Canada?


That is not the criteria they will be using.


Can you please tell me how it is going to work then, as you seem to know.

The Union and management have told me absolutely nothing!
 
Turnhouse1
Posts: 194
Joined: Tue Jun 16, 2015 5:57 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 10:55 am

Speak to your Union Rep for full advice, but.

My understanding of UK redundancy law (my company did some on a smaller scale last year) is that other than for those with <2 years service, things like last in, first out or targeting those at the top of the payscale are illegal. They will need to split the workforce into pools and for each pool set out an objective set of criteria (clearly they can potentially skew things dependent on the criteria used) using things such as attendance, previous appraisals & skill sets which employees are scored against. Once they identify how many in a given pool are to be made redundant they can ask for volunteers, if there are fewer volunteers than roles to be made redundant, the lowest scoring can be made compulsorily redundant subject to legal and contractual notice periods.
 
amc737
Posts: 69
Joined: Mon Oct 08, 2018 11:56 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 12:06 pm

The key is slots, currently the 80/20 rule is suspended, it could be that that this is goes on for some time or when the UK leaves the Brexit transition period the UK government adopts its own rules. The reason why the slots are key is if they have to be use 80% the priority will be Heathrow and British Airways will need to use these slots, this may mean consolidating the most profitable Gatwick routes at Heathrow such as Jersey.

BA while obviously thinking of the current also has to think of the future, at some point the economy and air travel will rebound, how long this takes no one knows. The fundamentals at Heathrow remain that it is not going to expend any time soon, the only way BA will get more slots will be if it gets another carriers. The most obvious source would be Virgin should they cease trading however BA would have to buy these either prior or as part of any administration. There is no guarantee BA would be successful and they could be outbid.

I completely appreciate this is unprecedented but like previous downturns I expect BA to shrink Gatwick but keep a presence to make it easier to expend if/when there is a recovery. As a network carrier BA need an overall proposition, solely focusing on business routes from Heathrow isn't viable especially if leisure travel recovers first.

amc737
 
Westerwaelder
Posts: 223
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:27 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 2:16 pm

U2 will not be able to get enough slots to run a viable short haul operation from LHR. VS slots are not enough and won't be free. Even if sold at a fraction of the pre crisis value they will still be too expensive to run a short haul flight. Foreign carriers mainly paid top dollars for LHR access. They too will want to see money to give them up. U2 would need a big investment and for what? To compete head on with BA, KL and LH? They are much better off making a play at LGW
 
holeham
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri May 30, 2014 12:06 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 3:05 pm

Was the build up of TPA to Europe service overdone in the past few years, perhaps. And I get that all bets are off with Covid-19 and the response of all airlines.

But obviously BA found TPA to be a profitable and worthwhile destination given that they’ve been flying between the two cities for at least 20 years.
 
eagles94
Posts: 126
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 11:51 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 4:40 pm

mattyfitzg wrote:
I have a feeling that BA Cityflyer might actually benefit from this unfortunate set of events we see ourselves in.
Cityflyer are not part of the announced BA staff cuts, and have no plans to make anybody redundant, yet anyway.
With BA looking to consolidate/retreat it’s Mainline fleet back to LHR and close off LGW, and with BA Management telling BALPA that they wish to edit the scope clause (Part of the pilots contracts which states something along the lines of Cityflyer not being allowed aircraft over 100 seats, and not flying to LHR/LGW), I could see Cityflyer making gains possibly with routes out of Gatwick, or perhaps a long shot at even LHR if they really want to consolidate the fleets?


I highly doubt CF will make gains at LHR, especially since BA are considering retreating entirely back to LHR there will be no need nor room for 80 seat Embraers.
However, LGW would be interesting, since a number of LCY routes overlap with Gatwick(EDI GLA AGP FAO IBZ MAH FCO VRN, off the top of my head, might have missed a couple) so they might work favourably to “slot sit” and keep a limited BA presence hanging around until this blows over. .
 
RexBanner
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 11:37 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 5:30 pm

Westerwaelder wrote:
U2 will not be able to get enough slots to run a viable short haul operation from LHR. VS slots are not enough and won't be free. Even if sold at a fraction of the pre crisis value they will still be too expensive to run a short haul flight. Foreign carriers mainly paid top dollars for LHR access. They too will want to see money to give them up. U2 would need a big investment and for what? To compete head on with BA, KL and LH? They are much better off making a play at LGW


Good luck with those 25-30 minute turnarounds at LHR. For that reason I doubt that U2 would be seriously interested in LHR as it stands. Also a word from the inside at BA; the closing Gatwick” rumour been doing the rounds for a while. It's all part of project fear in order to twist the CC’s arm into accepting some pretty swingeing changes. Internal sources have confirmed there's no plan to close the base entirely, but it's likely to be a smaller operation. They'd be mad to close it and give up all the slots to the competition.

That BBC headline has twisted what was actually in the memo. All it said is we cannot be sure when it will be reopened.
 
DobboDobbo
Posts: 1113
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 1:02 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 5:45 pm

Extraordinary that the British arm of IAG (which I believe is historically its most profitable by some distance) is consulting with a view to axing around a quarter of its workforce (and refusing to consider any specific state aid), whilst its Spanish arm is receiving a significant loan from its government.

Why on earth are BA delaying the almost inevitable... couldn’t possibly be so it can purge the expensive parts of its workforce and see its main rival disappear first?! :lol:
 
RexBanner
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 11:37 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 6:10 pm

DobboDobbo wrote:
Why on earth are BA delaying the almost inevitable... couldn’t possibly be so it can purge the expensive parts of its workforce and see its main rival disappear first?! :lol:


Nail on head. And Willie is willing to sacrifice the financial well-being of 12,000 of his staff and their families just to satisfy his d*ck waving quest to get one over on Branson. (Oh and to give the already multimillionaire more money to feather his nest). It’s absolutely unbelievable narcissism and greed.
 
Galore
Posts: 16
Joined: Fri Apr 17, 2020 12:43 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Fri May 01, 2020 6:46 pm

Opus99 wrote:
I want to post a comment a reader of an article related to this topic left under the article. I thought it was quite interesting and i somewhat agreed with his logic and it kind of gives you an idea why BA is the way it is today or moreso what drove it there...
So yes, I think it is wrong to get rid of jobs wholesale for no true reason but to protect shareholder value BUT, get a grip people, you made it so the day you chose cheap flights over “flag carrier” service."


Well, the problem was that the “flag carrier” service was only marginally better than the low cost airlines. If I get a 32” pitch coach seat and a microwave TV dinner, I of course would like that over a 28” pitch seat and nada. But the “flag carriers” tried to charge way, way, way too much for this small improvement.

And where is the transatlantic low cost alternative to BA? BA (and all other “flag-carriers”) decided to high-densify their long haul fleet without LCC competition.I guess they figured, if Ryanair can cram people on a short London to Dublin flight with 28” pitch, BA can subject their customers to the same level of torture on London to Los Angeles.
What option is there for a non-rich person on long haul? It’s either horrible coach or extremely expensive business/first with a sprinkle of sometimes ok priced premium economy. The latter is actually a good example. It is a decent product with several airlines. If coach RT long haul is $1200, a $1700 premium coach is great. But I’ve seen these sometimes being priced 2x coach, which gets back to the situation that you described. I would then again look for the very cheapest fare.

I think what’s missing, especially in the USA, is an airline with genuinely friendly flight attendants (SW is close, Virgin was) and service that is worth a 30% upcharge from low cost tickets. I don’t really get why this isn’t being tried. I have never seen this in 22 years of flying in the USA.
 
GDB
Posts: 13670
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sat May 02, 2020 1:57 am

RexBanner wrote:
DobboDobbo wrote:
Why on earth are BA delaying the almost inevitable... couldn’t possibly be so it can purge the expensive parts of its workforce and see its main rival disappear first?! :lol:


Nail on head. And Willie is willing to sacrifice the financial well-being of 12,000 of his staff and their families just to satisfy his d*ck waving quest to get one over on Branson. (Oh and to give the already multimillionaire more money to feather his nest). It’s absolutely unbelievable narcissism and greed.


As one of those who may be one of the 12000, I don't agree, in fact I really do not think that what happens to VS is at all a factor.
The airline is in survival mode, that is BA, not VS, they have as we have discussed a lot, their own issues.
WW was good at first, he did lose his way when he 'gave' us Cruz, however in informal discussions with colleagues who have had more briefings than I, what I can say is that these figures and assumptions are not set in stone, it's very early days.

At least there will be TU consultation, (which cannot be great when one of them is that ranting thicko McClusky).
There will also be an effort to minimize compulsory redundancies, which won't make a big gap if the actual numbers are anything like the reported ones, nonetheless there will be a range of options, likely to include for those who can afford it, voluntary periods of unpaid leave, (as happened in the wake of the 2008 banking crash), again the numbers may not be high, however we don't know just what the future size and shape of the airline will be, so you can be pretty damn sure that all the speculators on here do not either.

That's not me putting my trust in Cruz, my posting history will not show admiration for him.
But this crisis is not of his making, or Walsh's.
 
Westerwaelder
Posts: 223
Joined: Fri Apr 03, 2020 12:27 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sat May 02, 2020 4:08 am

Galore wrote:
Opus99 wrote:
I want to post a comment a reader of an article related to this topic left under the article. I thought it was quite interesting and i somewhat agreed with his logic and it kind of gives you an idea why BA is the way it is today or moreso what drove it there...
So yes, I think it is wrong to get rid of jobs wholesale for no true reason but to protect shareholder value BUT, get a grip people, you made it so the day you chose cheap flights over “flag carrier” service."


Well, the problem was that the “flag carrier” service was only marginally better than the low cost airlines. If I get a 32” pitch coach seat and a microwave TV dinner, I of course would like that over a 28” pitch seat and nada. But the “flag carriers” tried to charge way, way, way too much for this small improvement.

And where is the transatlantic low cost alternative to BA? BA (and all other “flag-carriers”) decided to high-densify their long haul fleet without LCC competition.I guess they figured, if Ryanair can cram people on a short London to Dublin flight with 28” pitch, BA can subject their customers to the same level of torture on London to Los Angeles.
What option is there for a non-rich person on long haul? It’s either horrible coach or extremely expensive business/first with a sprinkle of sometimes ok priced premium economy. The latter is actually a good example. It is a decent product with several airlines. If coach RT long haul is $1200, a $1700 premium coach is great. But I’ve seen these sometimes being priced 2x coach, which gets back to the situation that you described. I would then again look for the very cheapest fare.

I think what’s missing, especially in the USA, is an airline with genuinely friendly flight attendants (SW is close, Virgin was) and service that is worth a 30% upcharge from low cost tickets. I don’t really get why this isn’t being tried. I have never seen this in 22 years of flying in the USA.


I disagree. It's consumers who shape the market and if they look for low cost travel then airlines will migrate in that direction. There will always be those hankering back to 32" seat pitch and a meal tray on a one hour flight - all for £400. Let's not forget what short haul prices were like before LCC came to Europe. And as for transatlantic: flights to NY cost £300 RT if you book in advance in off season (no idea about LA). The lowest fares have not risen significantly in decades.
 
Opus99
Posts: 811
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sat May 02, 2020 11:41 am

DobboDobbo wrote:
Extraordinary that the British arm of IAG (which I believe is historically its most profitable by some distance) is consulting with a view to axing around a quarter of its workforce (and refusing to consider any specific state aid), whilst its Spanish arm is receiving a significant loan from its government.

Why on earth are BA delaying the almost inevitable... couldn’t possibly be so it can purge the expensive parts of its workforce and see its main rival disappear first?! :lol:

Because why won’t they? They own the whole Spanish market. Iberia, Vueling ans soon Air Europa. If the government is handing out good money. Take it
It may also not be necessary for them to downsize their operation significantly.

BA on the other hand costs the group the most because relatively speaking it the most expensive to operate and not certainly because it’s the largest but because of the market it operates from. AND BA is facing heavy competition on their home front. They need to wait it out for a few more weeks so that the following can happen. It’s a very big bet but it if works they’ll seriously be in their money :

1. Virgin has to fail to free up slots/opportunity for BA at Heathrow

2. With virgin gone, they can consolidate at Heathrow removing operations from Gatwick and shedding staff along the way

3. Reduce fleet size to more efficient and needed aircrafts. Remove the 747s, 380s and 319s/320s that have leases expiring in the next six months. Allow more efficient planes to come in 77W/35K/779 - perfect for when demand begins to return to normal levels in 2022.

4. Reduce payroll significantly and Consolidate everyone under one mixed fleet contract achieving the efficiency and cost cutting goal they’ve been looking for for years.

BUT even after this, they cannot accept state aid because it means they can’t let go of the people they want to. But this is what I think they’re trying to do. However it will depend on a lot of things going “right”.
 
RexBanner
Posts: 46
Joined: Sun Nov 04, 2007 11:37 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sat May 02, 2020 11:53 am

GDB wrote:
RexBanner wrote:
DobboDobbo wrote:
Why on earth are BA delaying the almost inevitable... couldn’t possibly be so it can purge the expensive parts of its workforce and see its main rival disappear first?! :lol:


Nail on head. And Willie is willing to sacrifice the financial well-being of 12,000 of his staff and their families just to satisfy his d*ck waving quest to get one over on Branson. (Oh and to give the already multimillionaire more money to feather his nest). It’s absolutely unbelievable narcissism and greed.


As one of those who may be one of the 12000, I don't agree, in fact I really do not think that what happens to VS is at all a factor.
The airline is in survival mode, that is BA..


Of course it’s in survival mode but being one of the 12,000 at risk does not necessarily make you an authoritative voice on the subject. Would it surprise you to learn that I am also amongst those potential 12,000? Your argument ceased to have any plausibility or validity the moment Willie took a loan for Vueling and Iberia and failed to put any employees at risk in those companies. If seeing off Virgin wasn’t a factor then why did he fail to extend the same credit line to BA? Oh that’s right because he can then seize the opportunity to threaten those employees at BA with higher legacy costs with base closures and 12,000 potential job losses to force them onto brand new zero hours contracts so they’re perfectly positioned to take advantage of the upswing and make even fatter profits and bonuses. Not only that but he can then force Virgin out of business because he rejected state money as a principle.

The proof in the pudding is the attempted forced implementation of very detrimental new sickness and grievance procedures. Pray tell me, what’s that got to do with saving BA from the immediate cash crunch caused by Covid-19 exactly? I’d really like a well argued and reasoned response to that one because if you don’t provide it then your entire argument (that Willie is simply enacting necessary changes to ensure the airline survives) is invalid. It simply serves to show that, in actuality, Willie and BA are VERY confident of their continued existence after this and are using this as an unprecedented land grab to enact detrimental changes to staff Ts and Cs that they’d never be able to achieve in normal times. It’s disgusting behaviour and thankfully, the Transport Select Committee have already see through this.plthough at this point what difference that will make is yet to be seen.
 
DobboDobbo
Posts: 1113
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 1:02 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sat May 02, 2020 12:23 pm

Opus99 wrote:
DobboDobbo wrote:
Extraordinary that the British arm of IAG (which I believe is historically its most profitable by some distance) is consulting with a view to axing around a quarter of its workforce (and refusing to consider any specific state aid), whilst its Spanish arm is receiving a significant loan from its government.

Why on earth are BA delaying the almost inevitable... couldn’t possibly be so it can purge the expensive parts of its workforce and see its main rival disappear first?! :lol:

Because why won’t they? They own the whole Spanish market. Iberia, Vueling ans soon Air Europa. If the government is handing out good money. Take it
It may also not be necessary for them to downsize their operation significantly.

BA on the other hand costs the group the most because relatively speaking it the most expensive to operate and not certainly because it’s the largest but because of the market it operates from. AND BA is facing heavy competition on their home front. They need to wait it out for a few more weeks so that the following can happen. It’s a very big bet but it if works they’ll seriously be in their money :

1. Virgin has to fail to free up slots/opportunity for BA at Heathrow

2. With virgin gone, they can consolidate at Heathrow removing operations from Gatwick and shedding staff along the way

3. Reduce fleet size to more efficient and needed aircrafts. Remove the 747s, 380s and 319s/320s that have leases expiring in the next six months. Allow more efficient planes to come in 77W/35K/779 - perfect for when demand begins to return to normal levels in 2022.

4. Reduce payroll significantly and Consolidate everyone under one mixed fleet contract achieving the efficiency and cost cutting goal they’ve been looking for for years.

BUT even after this, they cannot accept state aid because it means they can’t let go of the people they want to. But this is what I think they’re trying to do. However it will depend on a lot of things going “right”.


I completely agree - it makes absolute commercial sense for BA to do what they are doing now.

However BA (and in the wider sense, IAG) are playing a dangerous game. For example, the group are in receipt of state aid in Spain. That means: (i) funds have been provided which either would otherwise have had to come from IAG resources; and/or (ii) the Spanish arm will be better placed to compete once it has emerged from this which in turn permits BA to allocate its resources appropriately for the group. I don’t think they would be necessarily be doing this if they hadn’t purchased Air Europa.

Irrespective of the ins and outs and what it can be used for, it is now going to be politically difficult for IAG or BA to oppose state aid on principle in the UK.

If however BA/IAG want to have their cake and eat it (I.e. they decide they require state aid only after VS has failed and they have opportunistically shed the expensive classes of staff) that state aid should and likely would come at a very heavy price (perhaps nationalisation and break up).

I don’t think we’ll get to that stage - it seems the UK government are weighing up an intervention now (see below).

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-healt ... ing%20News
 
GDB
Posts: 13670
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sat May 02, 2020 1:10 pm

RexBanner wrote:
GDB wrote:
RexBanner wrote:

Nail on head. And Willie is willing to sacrifice the financial well-being of 12,000 of his staff and their families just to satisfy his d*ck waving quest to get one over on Branson. (Oh and to give the already multimillionaire more money to feather his nest). It’s absolutely unbelievable narcissism and greed.


As one of those who may be one of the 12000, I don't agree, in fact I really do not think that what happens to VS is at all a factor.
The airline is in survival mode, that is BA..


Of course it’s in survival mode but being one of the 12,000 at risk does not necessarily make you an authoritative voice on the subject. Would it surprise you to learn that I am also amongst those potential 12,000? Your argument ceased to have any plausibility or validity the moment Willie took a loan for Vueling and Iberia and failed to put any employees at risk in those companies. If seeing off Virgin wasn’t a factor then why did he fail to extend the same credit line to BA? Oh that’s right because he can then seize the opportunity to threaten those employees at BA with higher legacy costs with base closures and 12,000 potential job losses to force them onto brand new zero hours contracts so they’re perfectly positioned to take advantage of the upswing and make even fatter profits and bonuses. Not only that but he can then force Virgin out of business because he rejected state money as a principle.

The proof in the pudding is the attempted forced implementation of very detrimental new sickness and grievance procedures. Pray tell me, what’s that got to do with saving BA from the immediate cash crunch caused by Covid-19 exactly? I’d really like a well argued and reasoned response to that one because if you don’t provide it then your entire argument (that Willie is simply enacting necessary changes to ensure the airline survives) is invalid. It simply serves to show that, in actuality, Willie and BA are VERY confident of their continued existence after this and are using this as an unprecedented land grab to enact detrimental changes to staff Ts and Cs that they’d never be able to achieve in normal times. It’s disgusting behaviour and thankfully, the Transport Select Committee have already see through this.plthough at this point what difference that will make is yet to be seen.


Did I claim to be authoritative? I said the opposite FFS!
I do not know what part of the airline you are from, maybe not the poor bloody infantry who saw, over decades, whenever there was a major external event that was damaging, these include the drop in air travel after the US bombing Libya in 1986, meaning the US customers took fright. Then the first Gulf War, then Sept 11th, then SARS, then the financial meltdown.
Put it this way, those without wings on their uniform, if they had one, usually got the shit end of the stick, yet did not threaten to strike (remember 1997, I do) and finally do so, where frankly WW outplayed the Unions.

It was a running bitter joke up to that point, plus other vanity projects like that Waterside place. What's the biggest threat to us not getting our profit share for all our hard work, the whole airline? Them threatening to strike, hence why the airline had no shortage of temp trained crew in 2010, for them it was payback time.

I never even liked IAG, much less our reward for being the one entity in the group that made money being getting the CEO of the worst part. I said before on here, months ago, WW should retire.

This is all history, all irrelevant in the current situation.
Since now it is not only the future size and shape of the airline, it's the whole industry, potentially for the future.
Not just BA/IAG, worldwide.
 
DobboDobbo
Posts: 1113
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 1:02 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sat May 02, 2020 3:19 pm

GDB wrote:
I really do not think that what happens to VS is at all a factor.
The airline is in survival mode, that is BA, not VS, they have as we have discussed a lot, their own issues.


Agreed - BA is in survival mode.

It may or may not be the main factor, but I would be staggered (and it would be highly unusual) if BA’s survival strategy - specifically the decision to not seek state aid at this point - was at least substantively driven by the desire to prevent VS from accessing it because BA calculate VS will go bust first and that maximises BA’s leverage in future (whether they accept state aid or not) if they survive.
 
GDB
Posts: 13670
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sat May 02, 2020 4:17 pm

DobboDobbo wrote:
GDB wrote:
I really do not think that what happens to VS is at all a factor.
The airline is in survival mode, that is BA, not VS, they have as we have discussed a lot, their own issues.


Agreed - BA is in survival mode.

It may or may not be the main factor, but I would be staggered (and it would be highly unusual) if BA’s survival strategy - specifically the decision to not seek state aid at this point - was at least substantively driven by the desire to prevent VS from accessing it because BA calculate VS will go bust first and that maximises BA’s leverage in future (whether they accept state aid or not) if they survive.


I have just read an article that almost word for word echos the points made about WW using this as a means to see VS gone and to screw the staff.
However, there are caveats, BA seeking aid have this 25% Qatar stake, as in sovereign wealth fund, which could complicate any application, as well as the calculation that you can forget anything like a return to normality, for 2-3 years.
We may have a pile of cash as boasted when this first broke, not for that long, they were talking a few months, just as we were assuming lockdown for a few weeks, which also assumes normality will return.

This also assumes no further outbreaks.
Never liked having Qatar involved either.

Who knows? WW has set his face against state aid, that position may become untenable, BA staff will rightly resent other parts of IAG getting help, myself included.
But what terms would any UK government aid have attached to it?
This is, after all, a government with an irrational phobia of all things 'European'.
Well as we are on course to likely have the highest per capita death rate from Covid in Europe, I guess you can call that 'exceptionalism'.
 
User avatar
LAXintl
Posts: 24507
Joined: Wed May 24, 2000 12:12 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 1:55 am

From the desert to the sea, to all of Southern California
 
eurotrader85
Posts: 157
Joined: Wed Oct 24, 2018 8:45 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 2:26 am

I think the tone of the letter makes it clear it's more than just 'survival'. It's a calculated opportunity to reshape the rights of workers and the cost base.
 
mandyhaslott
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:59 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 7:23 am

eurotrader85 wrote:
I think the tone of the letter makes it clear it's more than just 'survival'. It's a calculated opportunity to reshape the rights of workers and the cost base.


"Efficiency changes" -they are so brazen I'm almost impressed by their audacity.

I don't know which way to turn... A disgusting company like BA that seems to have a permanent contempt for it's own workforce because they have to actually pay them a wage and then VS that is open & honest but wants a loan from the taxpayer.
 
GDB
Posts: 13670
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 8:34 am

mandyhaslott wrote:
eurotrader85 wrote:
I think the tone of the letter makes it clear it's more than just 'survival'. It's a calculated opportunity to reshape the rights of workers and the cost base.


"Efficiency changes" -they are so brazen I'm almost impressed by their audacity.

I don't know which way to turn... A disgusting company like BA that seems to have a permanent contempt for it's own workforce because they have to actually pay them a wage and then VS that is open & honest but wants a loan from the taxpayer.


Again, FFS. This letter is aimed at pilots, may I remind you, again, that had the UK government not had a furlough scheme than VS staff were facing two months enforced unpaid leave. Dicky decided that right away, as we have seen, that would have not stopped at two months.
Stop drinking his kool aid (made from fine, tax haven water).

For a long time VS did not even have TU representation.
Amazing how a BS artist like Dicky conned so many, for so long.

None of this is a defence of the current BA management, again my posting history does not contain admiration for Cruz, or WW who IMHO should have retired some time ago.
It's called balance, not juvenile, ill-informed fandom.

I don't know where you are, I am right near a silent LHR. You might here one or two aircraft a day, not a minute.
Think on that.
 
Bhoy
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:50 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 9:20 am

LAXintl wrote:

There’s a separate corps of A318 Pilots for LCY? I thought they were just seconded from the LGW base, so should surely just be included in that Airbus number?
 
mattyfitzg
Posts: 257
Joined: Sun Sep 04, 2016 4:50 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 9:40 am

Bhoy wrote:
LAXintl wrote:

There’s a separate corps of A318 Pilots for LCY? I thought they were just seconded from the LGW base, so should surely just be included in that Airbus number?


They are selected pilots who are seconded from both LGW & LHR. Not entirely sure why it’s been given it’s own category.

There’s also no info about BA Cityflyer either, looks like Mainline will take the hit and CF might get off relatively unscathed, which would make sense considering they were already massively understaffed pre-COVID.
 
BA777FO
Posts: 570
Joined: Sun Apr 22, 2018 2:58 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 10:30 am

The A318 pilots are actually Heathrow A320 based pilots who have the LCY trips pre-extracted or bid for them at phase 1 of the 2 phase bid process. The rest of their month is made up of regular LHR A320 trips. It's the cabin crew that are LGW based. Citiflyer are not on the BA master seniority list so will be dealt with separately.

I'm not going to speculate on anything further - I'd encourage people to sit tight and wait until mid-June. It's all subject to consultation with the unions.
 
Arion640
Posts: 3058
Joined: Fri Mar 31, 2017 5:15 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 10:53 am

Good time to buy IAG stock.
 
mandyhaslott
Posts: 33
Joined: Sun Mar 05, 2017 3:59 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 10:55 am

GDB wrote:
mandyhaslott wrote:
eurotrader85 wrote:
I think the tone of the letter makes it clear it's more than just 'survival'. It's a calculated opportunity to reshape the rights of workers and the cost base.


"Efficiency changes" -they are so brazen I'm almost impressed by their audacity.

I don't know which way to turn... A disgusting company like BA that seems to have a permanent contempt for it's own workforce because they have to actually pay them a wage and then VS that is open & honest but wants a loan from the taxpayer.


Again, FFS. This letter is aimed at pilots, may I remind you, again, that had the UK government not had a furlough scheme than VS staff were facing two months enforced unpaid leave. Dicky decided that right away, as we have seen, that would have not stopped at two months.
Stop drinking his kool aid (made from fine, tax haven water).

For a long time VS did not even have TU representation.
Amazing how a BS artist like Dicky conned so many, for so long.

None of this is a defence of the current BA management, again my posting history does not contain admiration for Cruz, or WW who IMHO should have retired some time ago.
It's called balance, not juvenile, ill-informed fandom.

I don't know where you are, I am right near a silent LHR. You might here one or two aircraft a day, not a minute.
Think on that.


Just to be clear no one at VS was "enforced" to do anything. People volunteered. The boss made it clear that if everyone didn't agree, more drastic action would need to be taken. As a result The staff voted to to do this to save the airline. It was only after they'd voted to do this, did the furlough scheme get announced. Therefore, as you couldn't get this fact right, is difficult to take anything else you say as fact.

Oh and two other things... Don't accuse me if drinking anyone's "cool aid" and yes I also live next to a very quiet airport oh and, like others on here, Im directly affected by what's being discussed in this very thread.

I would appreciate it if people posted facts rather than misinformation.

My original post still stands.
 
Bhoy
Posts: 538
Joined: Tue Apr 18, 2006 1:50 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 11:14 am

BA777FO wrote:
The A318 pilots are actually Heathrow A320 based pilots who have the LCY trips pre-extracted or bid for them at phase 1 of the 2 phase bid process. The rest of their month is made up of regular LHR A320 trips. It's the cabin crew that are LGW based. Citiflyer are not on the BA master seniority list so will be dealt with separately.

Fair enough. I was just wondering why those 44 crew were specifically listed apart from the other 1060 LHR Airbus crew.
 
GDB
Posts: 13670
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 12:29 pm

mandyhaslott wrote:
GDB wrote:
mandyhaslott wrote:

"Efficiency changes" -they are so brazen I'm almost impressed by their audacity.

I don't know which way to turn... A disgusting company like BA that seems to have a permanent contempt for it's own workforce because they have to actually pay them a wage and then VS that is open & honest but wants a loan from the taxpayer.


Again, FFS. This letter is aimed at pilots, may I remind you, again, that had the UK government not had a furlough scheme than VS staff were facing two months enforced unpaid leave. Dicky decided that right away, as we have seen, that would have not stopped at two months.
Stop drinking his kool aid (made from fine, tax haven water).

For a long time VS did not even have TU representation.
Amazing how a BS artist like Dicky conned so many, for so long.

None of this is a defence of the current BA management, again my posting history does not contain admiration for Cruz, or WW who IMHO should have retired some time ago.
It's called balance, not juvenile, ill-informed fandom.

I don't know where you are, I am right near a silent LHR. You might here one or two aircraft a day, not a minute.
Think on that.


Just to be clear no one at VS was "enforced" to do anything. People volunteered. The boss made it clear that if everyone didn't agree, more drastic action would need to be taken. As a result The staff voted to to do this to save the airline. It was only after they'd voted to do this, did the furlough scheme get announced. Therefore, as you couldn't get this fact right, is difficult to take anything else you say as fact.

Oh and two other things... Don't accuse me if drinking anyone's "cool aid" and yes I also live next to a very quiet airport oh and, like others on here, Im directly affected by what's being discussed in this very thread.

I would appreciate it if people posted facts rather than misinformation.

My original post still stands.


And if the staff hadn't agreed?
I too am facing uncertainty, however I have been around long enough in his industry, I recall BA staff leaving to join VS, for many it was a chance to see how a small airline works, which is fine, some came back, others came to BA from VS for better T&C's (hence why 'SRB tribune of the workers' image sticks in the craw).

This pandemic supplants everything I have seen with boosters attached, which include various conflicts causing pax numbers to tank, two Gulf Wars and one SARS outbreak, Sep 11th 2001, I was in the air that day, the banking meltdown.
All bad, all nothing compared to this.
Through it all, BA has consulted with the T.U.s, it got 'spiky' in the wake of the 2008/9 financial crisis, well with one union anyway.
Myself and many others at BA have seen changes many do not like, in the last few years.
I have not been fan of Cruz.
For all that, we at least went into to this with good cash reserves.

But when you pull back, when I joined there were no LCC's, EK did not exist, much less more recent long haul LCC's.
When I joined a 'big' order was SIA buying some 747-300's, and A310's/757's for type comparison.
Not 100's in one go from some far east LCC.
Our competition on the North Atlantic? PA and TWA. Each with their own issues,

When I joined BA was state owned preparing to go private, LCC's were Britannia out of LTN and Dan Air out of LGW, or 'bucket and spade' carriers as they were called.
There was BCal with a few routes, railing against BA, when they went under in 1988 many of their staff joined us and became valued colleagues.

Just yesterday RR are talking 8000 jobs going.
We are in a whole new world, I do not think it is going back to what it was before, any time soon, if ever.

Don't think the environmental lobby are going away either.
People on here saying BA 'are not letting a crisis go to waste', frankly it is not them doing that they have to worry about.
They don't care about BA versus VS arguments.

I have given up arguing that modern aircraft are so much more efficient, when those gains are easily overturned by the explosion in air travel.

Maybe I'll be gone from the biz soon and by extension from here, so I won't be around to offend with some realism.
Maybe a sustainable future, economically in a world scarred by a pandemic and fearful of another, for the UK airline sector, is one rather like the biz I joined.
One major international carrier, one LCC, (I think EZY will survive), a few specialists to the regions, FlyBe Mk.2 or even doing what BA did in that area when I joined.
That assumes some kind of deal with HM Government on the future size and shape of the sector in the UK.
 
Boeing74741R
Posts: 1383
Joined: Tue Apr 17, 2007 5:44 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 12:57 pm

DobboDobbo wrote:
I don’t think we’ll get to that stage - it seems the UK government are weighing up an intervention now (see below).

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-healt ... ing%20News


Good to see the penny is finally dropping with the government that they cannot stand and watch whilst the UK aviation sector fights for survival unaided. Pity they chose not to do this a few weeks ago when VS called for billions of pounds worth of lines of credit to be made available to the whole industry.
 
GDB
Posts: 13670
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 1:20 pm

Boeing74741R wrote:
DobboDobbo wrote:
I don’t think we’ll get to that stage - it seems the UK government are weighing up an intervention now (see below).

https://uk.reuters.com/article/uk-healt ... ing%20News


Good to see the penny is finally dropping with the government that they cannot stand and watch whilst the UK aviation sector fights for survival unaided. Pity they chose not to do this a few weeks ago when VS called for billions of pounds worth of lines of credit to be made available to the whole industry.


Agreed, however, (god this next bit is weird for me), in defence of the government they underestimated how long and how damaging this would be (least of their errors but that's for another forum).
Not just for airlines either, the whole UK industry supply chain.
But it would be a transfusion, at the end of the day, pax have to return, with not only worries about traveling but a huge hit in disposable income, not to mention a lot of business travel suddenly seems less needed, due to companies adapting during the crisis.
 
concordeforever
Posts: 123
Joined: Thu Sep 22, 2016 6:51 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 4:28 pm

British Airways have so far today, May 3rd, operated 27 departures from Heathrow with 8 more still to go. These have been shorthaul ops to Glasgow, Edinburgh, Gibraltar, Frankfurt, Amsterdam, Paris, Lisbon, Barcelona, and Berlin, as well as many widebodies packed with freight and mail to Tel Aviv, Los Angeles, Toronto, Dubai, Philadelphia, Washington, Chicago, Dallas, Atlanta, New York, Shanghai, Miami, Boston, San Francisco, Tokyo, Beijing, and Hong Kong, and even a positioning flight to Istanbul. So there are definitely more flights still operating than are being mentioned, even if most have no passengers on them, so pilots are still required.
Over the next few days more routes are opening up to freight and perishables especially from Africa, and we have a new 4 weekly 787 cargo only flight to Zurich.

Obviously the airline cannot survive without passenger operations, but I was astounded by the announcement earlier in the week. Am I worried for my job? Sure I am, 20 years loyal service means nothing to this management who just see an opportunity to dismiss people at the drop of a hat and permanently change Ts & Cs for the rest of us. A 30% staff reduction announcement before even talking to the unions, shameful. I'm sure they could have asked us to take a pay cut whilst they see what the future will bring, and all the staff would have been happy to do that. Over 50% of the airline are currently on the furlough "JOB RETENTION" scheme brought in by the government for the exact reason of stopping companies making staff redundant. BA seem to think they can let the government pay the wages and still get rid of staff at the same time.
Will I still have a job in four weeks time, who knows....
 
DobboDobbo
Posts: 1113
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 1:02 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 4:48 pm

concordeforever wrote:
Over 50% of the airline are currently on the furlough "JOB RETENTION" scheme brought in by the government for the exact reason of stopping companies making staff redundant. BA seem to think they can let the government pay the wages and still get rid of staff at the same time.


I think this hits the nail in the head - BA cannot have it’s cake and eat it I don’t think.

The issue is slowly coming into the political radar in the UK, and questions like:

“Why have you used the furlough scheme for job retention for 30,000 staff only to put 12,000 on notice of redundancy and the rest for reduced terms - and why should the taxpayer continue to pay for this”

“Why have you (IAG) refused state aid in the UK but accepted it in Spain?”

“Why have the majority of job cuts at IAG come from BA (who are the most profitable part but not receiving state aid) but the less profitable parts in Spain and Ireland are not seeing the same cuts (where so far Spain has accepted state aid)?”


There may be plausible explanations for all of this, but the optics reflect very badly on BA and when the issue is a political one its often the optics that matter the most...

My best wishes are with you for the next few weeks...
 
GDB
Posts: 13670
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 5:27 pm

May I suggest you contact your respective MP's?
I am quite happy to ask those questions of mine, not a fan of the 3rd runway but until recently the Shadow Chancellor.

Same applies for MP's for the area around LGW too.

The mention of 'optics', it is possible that BA have bandied the 12000 figure to put pressure on the government, we don't know what talks they have or have not been having, if the former, how productive they have been.
 
Speedbird2155
Posts: 693
Joined: Wed Feb 02, 2005 7:44 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 5:31 pm

I will start by admitting that I am impacted by this and face prospect of not having a job in a few months and have tried to stay out of this but some of the comments just beggars belief.

Too many of us at BA have been too complacent for too long and the job retention scheme has just served to give people across the UK false hope that everything will be okay and there will be no job losses. The reality is that the longer this goes on and countries have restrictions, which all countries will do in some form for months, the more we will see companies downsizing. Read what is happening across the world with other carriers, even those getting government support are having to think longer term. As I understand it, US carriers are only temporarily stopped from making redundancies but one that restriction is lifted, expect to see them also making changes.

The UK government will not extend the furlough scheme in definitely - what will businesses do once that ends? The BA legal team are not stupid and would have investigated the ability to start this process during this period and I suspect they also got outside legal advise. Starting now means that they can act once they furlough scheme ends.

Working for BA, the reality that this was coming start with the realisation that aircraft would be retired earlier and that some where being placed in long term storage. Sending all A380s to France was unexpected but spoke volumes. Thinking about this, it meant that we would be overstaffed for a long time going forward and things would need to change. Add to this the uncertainty of when countries will reopen to passenger movements and customer confidence in booking flights. With the talk of possible second waves, that confidence will be slow to return.

People keep referring to Iberia but forget that they have been through massive changes under IAG which significantly reduced their workforce and led to drastic change in how they operate. They have become a much leaner operation than BA has under IAG. I'm not a fan of IB, but have to recognise they are in a different place going into this. Their structure is much leaner, which is why they were chosen by IAG for the launch of Level - they were able to get agreement and make level happen in less than a month, something with in the current situation, we would not be able to do at BA sadly. Getting funds from the Spanish Government is an added bonus for them but they don't have the need to make the structural changes. In addition, they have the Air Europe purchase that will allow them to make significant cuts to numbers once completed.

Is BA being opportunistic?? Without a doubt they are but they are not alone, just have so far had the highest announced number of potential redundancy and is one of the more high profile companies in the UK to make such announcements. As I understand it, Heathrow Airport has already started the process but I haven't had confirmation of exactly what they are doing. Since BA made their announcement, we have seen Ryanair and Rolls Royce.

Do I wish, things were different - yes I do but the longer this pandemic continues without a vaccine or cure, the worse I fear things will get. All I can do at this stage is to accept that I'm in a difficult situation, hope for the best and start thinking ahead and looking at alternatives should the worse happen.
 
Opus99
Posts: 811
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 6:09 pm

Speedbird2155 wrote:
I will start by admitting that I am impacted by this and face prospect of not having a job in a few months and have tried to stay out of this but some of the comments just beggars belief.

Too many of us at BA have been too complacent for too long and the job retention scheme has just served to give people across the UK false hope that everything will be okay and there will be no job losses. The reality is that the longer this goes on and countries have restrictions, which all countries will do in some form for months, the more we will see companies downsizing. Read what is happening across the world with other carriers, even those getting government support are having to think longer term. As I understand it, US carriers are only temporarily stopped from making redundancies but one that restriction is lifted, expect to see them also making changes.

The UK government will not extend the furlough scheme in definitely - what will businesses do once that ends? The BA legal team are not stupid and would have investigated the ability to start this process during this period and I suspect they also got outside legal advise. Starting now means that they can act once they furlough scheme ends.

Working for BA, the reality that this was coming start with the realisation that aircraft would be retired earlier and that some where being placed in long term storage. Sending all A380s to France was unexpected but spoke volumes. Thinking about this, it meant that we would be overstaffed for a long time going forward and things would need to change. Add to this the uncertainty of when countries will reopen to passenger movements and customer confidence in booking flights. With the talk of possible second waves, that confidence will be slow to return.

People keep referring to Iberia but forget that they have been through massive changes under IAG which significantly reduced their workforce and led to drastic change in how they operate. They have become a much leaner operation than BA has under IAG. I'm not a fan of IB, but have to recognise they are in a different place going into this. Their structure is much leaner, which is why they were chosen by IAG for the launch of Level - they were able to get agreement and make level happen in less than a month, something with in the current situation, we would not be able to do at BA sadly. Getting funds from the Spanish Government is an added bonus for them but they don't have the need to make the structural changes. In addition, they have the Air Europe purchase that will allow them to make significant cuts to numbers once completed.

Is BA being opportunistic?? Without a doubt they are but they are not alone, just have so far had the highest announced number of potential redundancy and is one of the more high profile companies in the UK to make such announcements. As I understand it, Heathrow Airport has already started the process but I haven't had confirmation of exactly what they are doing. Since BA made their announcement, we have seen Ryanair and Rolls Royce.

Do I wish, things were different - yes I do but the longer this pandemic continues without a vaccine or cure, the worse I fear things will get. All I can do at this stage is to accept that I'm in a difficult situation, hope for the best and start thinking ahead and looking at alternatives should the worse happen.

This is the most level headed post in this whole thread. It is realistic and it makes 100% sense. Couldn’t have said it any better
 
BAorAB
Posts: 31
Joined: Sun May 05, 2019 10:11 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 6:22 pm

As much as many including the UK regulatory authorities may not like it, If VS does fail, then BA & IAG would make the mot sense to swoop in and take over it's assets, routes and slots. Somehow circumstance has always benefited BA, and it could again. No other airline could as quickly bring VS's dormant staff, assets and suppliers back to life than BA. They could easily take over the 747's A35K and 789's with no major change to their existing fleet. Could easily send the A333's to Iberia and Lingus. easily absorb Virgin holidays into BA holidays and take over all UK slots. Now that sounds horrible to any competitor or traveler, but nothing makes more sense to bankers, governments, airports, and creditors than this. People worry about a monopoly at an airport, its nonsense, just look around the world. Canada, Singapore, Hong Kong, Dubai, Australia all with flag carriers and not much else as home base. If this doesn't get approved, and VS simply collapses, then yes BA will scale up over time to take advantage, but so many people lose with VS's assets just being liquidated for pennies on the open market not to mention all the job losses!

I bet over time BA staff salaries look more like VS salaries about 30% less in the back and front of the plane for starters. My uncle BA cpt 747 LHR - 180k GBP annually, my dads friend VS 747 cpt Ex LHR now LGW -130K GBP annually. Big difference there. Cabin crew VS crew still 12-15% less than BA's newer mix fleet contract.
 
DobboDobbo
Posts: 1113
Joined: Thu Mar 03, 2016 1:02 am

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 6:54 pm

BAorAB wrote:
People worry about a monopoly at an airport, its nonsense, just look around the world. Canada, Singapore, Hong Kong, Dubai, Australia all with flag carriers and not much else as home base.


This is a bad point - all of the examples are either not comparable to the UK as they are far smaller markets and/or to BA/VS/EZY et al as they involve state or substantially state owned airlines and/or because they are examples of markets with competitors (even if not comparable competitors).

Canada: Air Canada and Westjet (and until recently Transat - assuming this goes through the competition regulators). All providing short and long haul competition.

Singapore: SQ are state owned.

Hong Kong: circa 40% state owned, if you consider this Chinese mainland carriers as domestic competition, you are looking at Air China, China Southern, China Eastern.

Dubai: EK are state owned.

Australia: Qantas (Jetstar), Virgin Australia (Possibly in future?), Tigerair.
 
User avatar
par13del
Posts: 10262
Joined: Sun Dec 18, 2005 9:14 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 7:02 pm

Why does everyone believe that BA is the only one in the UK who wants to see VS fail, the staff who work for VS do not work for BA, so when the authorities are looking at whether VS should be bailed, are they consulting BA or just looking at VS and whose airline it is?

As for the recovery, the last major challenge to the industry saw the revival start at the back of the bus not the front, if my memory is correct, BA reconfigured a number of a/c to reduce premium seating, F still has not made a full recover and based on all the Y and J+ it never may. Personally, I don't think things are going to be any different this time, pax at the front who ignore ticket price are usually very risk averse.
 
Opus99
Posts: 811
Joined: Thu May 30, 2019 10:51 pm

Re: BA could make up to 12.000 employees redundant

Sun May 03, 2020 7:06 pm

Does VS actually pay their cabin crew 12-15% less than BA mixed fleet? Wow, I thought BA’s was the worst in the UK market
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
  • 7

Popular Searches On Airliners.net

Top Photos of Last:   24 Hours  •  48 Hours  •  7 Days  •  30 Days  •  180 Days  •  365 Days  •  All Time

Military Aircraft Every type from fighters to helicopters from air forces around the globe

Classic Airliners Props and jets from the good old days

Flight Decks Views from inside the cockpit

Aircraft Cabins Passenger cabin shots showing seat arrangements as well as cargo aircraft interior

Cargo Aircraft Pictures of great freighter aircraft

Government Aircraft Aircraft flying government officials

Helicopters Our large helicopter section. Both military and civil versions

Blimps / Airships Everything from the Goodyear blimp to the Zeppelin

Night Photos Beautiful shots taken while the sun is below the horizon

Accidents Accident, incident and crash related photos

Air to Air Photos taken by airborne photographers of airborne aircraft

Special Paint Schemes Aircraft painted in beautiful and original liveries

Airport Overviews Airport overviews from the air or ground

Tails and Winglets Tail and Winglet closeups with beautiful airline logos