Appears BA have delivered on this earlier threat:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8584720.stm

Continues...

BA clearly said that they would remove this perk for the crew that decided to join the strike movement. They had a choice.

"The joint leader of Unite, Tony Woodley, had told strikers on Monday that he believed the long-established discounts were not just a perk but "custom and practice".

I have been split in this dispute as I think both parties have their arguments, some more valid than others, but this is utter nonsense.

The BA staff have become accustomed to this over the years, that does not change the fact that it is still a perk and can be withdrawn at anytime.

I am by no means an expert in strike negotiations however they've lost the plot. At the end of the day, if BA will fail to drastically reduce their costs and get a grip on the pension deficit, there will simply be no BA as we know it today in a few years time.

I guess the question is, do you up your pay and benefits short term or do you try and secure your job long term?

It's sad to see such a great brand diminish into nothingness because of its own employees and their absolute lack of understanding the seriousness of the situation.

Continues...

Here is Unite's official press release on the subject - BA has yet to send out a release.

Unite condemns BA's attack on cabin crew travel

Unite has condemned the move by British Airways to withdraw travel benefits from striking cabin crew - many of whom rely on the travel assistance to get to work following BA's decision to close its regional bases and require the vast majority of cabin crew to operate out of Heathrow, no matter where they may live.

Unite said: "This is the clearest possible example of BA's bullying and contemptuous approach to its employees. Cabin crew showed last weekend that they will not be intimidated. Unite will challenge this vindictive move in whatever way seems appropriate."

Continues...

So Unite, BA are the bullies now are they? I am not working for BA myself but I have a vast number of friends who work as Cabin Crew for BA. Some of them have decided to go to work last weekend and will do so again next weekend. The real bullies are those striking Unite members and the Union Reps who verbally attack any staff who chose to go to work out of a personal choice. I had reports of Crew being sworn at in the Car Park, in Terminal 5, and being verbally abused on social networking sites. So who is the bully then here? All BA Crew knew they would have their staff travel revoked should they go on strike, everyone made their choices, surely not all of them lighthearted but they did. So whatever they chose to do they will now have to face the consequences. End of!

Continues...

At the end of the day, BA is trying everything to intimidate their staff, shouldn't they try to solve the issue in the first place?

As I understand, the perks (which in fact are a good money making scheme for all airlines as it helps them filling empty seats) are discretionary. However, it is illegal to punish staff for participating in a legal strike, and by removing staff travel to those who were in the strike, BA is in effect punishing those staff. (therefore acting illegally)

If the company decided to remove staff travel, then they should do so for everybody not just to those who were legally striking.

Continues...

I assume these perks are taxable at full NI and PAYE rates on the total of the discount?

90% of a F ticket would be a lot of tax.

Continues...

i'm a layman, i'm not in a union and i dont work for an airline. I'm one of those long suffering travellers who get caught up in it all and ultimately one of those who get affected by whatever goes on..........

To Unite and their members on strike............join the real world, take a step back and look at what you're doing to BA and the people you need to have support from....the travelling public, and those who ultimately pay for travel, and your jobs! We're fed up with you and we'll travel with someone else as a result. That will cause passenger numbers to fall, reduce the need for flights, reduce the need for crew and reduce the need for jobs! At what point do you win in that.

To BA - Hold your ground. Reduce your costs, make travel cheaper, increase passenger numbers, increase flights, increase jobs when you can.

As for the latest news on perks, well that's what a perk is.....it's an extra you get if you're lucky, or not foolish enough to jeapordise it.

This country is falling apart again............and i seem to recall it was unions who brought it to it's knees a few years ago by not understanding one of the basic rules of business, you need to cut costs when you're losing money.....or go bust!

And it's just embarrassing to hear union leaders or representatives talk so much rubbish in the media...........seriously, it's embarrassing!

Or am i wrong to speak out of turn!!!!!!!!????? Probably!

Continues...

Well I think people are right to fight for their rights. Why do they have to lower themselves to other airlines (in terms of pay and conditions), when in fact the others should improve their conditions. Incidentally, it is said that a BA crew earn double than a Virgin one, what everybody fails to highlight is that Virgin crew get their allowances cash in hand!

Do you really think that BA will lower their prices when they can afford to charge a premium for leaving from LHR and they are more convenient in term of routes....well think again. They will just charge the same and will continue reducing the quality of food... on board as they are already doing now.

Bet you in around 3 years time, they will claim they have hit the £1billion profit (remember it was not that long ago that they had a profit of £800 million), and who will get all the benefits, greedy CEO, shareholders but nothing for lower workers.

This world is being run by a bunch of greedy pigs.

If you compare salaries on the continent, the disparity between top managers and lower paid workers is not as high as in the UK or America, why because people fight for their rights.

we are in 2010 and if we let all the big companies let whatever they want to do, we would be living in 1960s style!

Good on them for fighting for their rights.

By the way why aren't all tube workers, civil servants, train drivers... talked about so much: WELL BECAUSE THEIR COMPANIES DO NOT TELL THE PRESS WHATEVER THEY WANT TO AND MAKE ALL THE DAILY MAIL READERS BELIEVE ANY RUBBISH.

Continues...

Complete and utter drivel, markymark.

Continues...

I have never heard such rubbish as the above statement. Whilst not a fan of Willie Walsh, I think he has handled the situation in an excellent manner and is standing up to Unite. These are tough times and WW is trying to help the airline survive unlike Unite.

As for service, there have been some cutbacks, but New Club World is still an excellent product and on the whole excellent service. If it requires a few cutbacks on the champagne, I do not think this is the end of the world, and is not unique to BA. If anything does go wrong, BA are one of the best at helping you with onward connections / rebooking or providing hotel accommodation even when they strictly may not need to. I am happy to pay a slight premium for knowing that I will not be left stranded.

I have booked Club flights at the start of April and 2 in the summer for holiday to San Francisco and have every confidence in BA.

I think Willie Walsh has handled this excellently of recent, and the union are frustrated that he arranged strong contingency plans, thus limiting the impact of their strike.

Continues...

Markymark that has to be the the biggest load of rubbish on this forum. If you want to start a thread about tube drivers then go ahead, but civil servants aren't travel providers.

I agree with exbatraveller, Willie Walsh is right not to give in to the union. I have every confidence in BA and will continue to support it even if I have another choice. The very good breakfast in Club Europe this morning, with a good cup of tea, served with a smile and a nice greeting is hard to beat.

Continues...

THE FLIGHT ATTENDANTS AND GROUND AND TERMINAL STAFFING PERSONNEL MAY NOT MAKE ALOT OF MONEY. BUT THE PERKS CAN ADD THOUSANDS OF STERLING/DOLLARS TO THEIR PAY/VALUE WITHOUT HAVING TO PAY INCOME TAX ON SUCH FREE OR VERY VERY DISCOUNTED TIX.. AND, OF COURSE, FAMILY MEMBERS FLY (WITH AIRLINE PERSONNEL) AT SAME LOW RATE. YEARS AGO, IT WAS NOTHING FOR A TWA FA (STEWARDS/STEWARDESSES THEN) TO FLY TO PARIS FOR A 1 DAY VACATION (FLYING FIRST CLASS OF COURSE) FROM THE U.S. COST PERHAPS $25.00 IN TAXES. OF COURSE, THEIR HOTEL WAS AT A DISCOUNTED RATE TOO. PEOPLE WANT THEIR CAKE AND TO EAT IT TOO. HOPE WILLIE DOES NOT GIVE IN.... BUT HE WILL.

Continues...

As a long-retired member of BA staff, it's arguable how valuable staff travel privileges might be to me. I have to buy multiple tickets to cover the possibility of not getting away, and then stand around at the barrier until it's time to run to the gate. I'm unable to travel in a class other than the lowest, unless I am very lucky. When travelling with my wife, it is unusual to be seated near her. And the tickets are emphatically not free. In fact, it is often cheaper to fly one of the low-cost carriers on a firm booking.

Continues...

ah, but lets not forget how many BA crew commute from places all over the UK, and even the continent ( in this case, at preferencial tax rates). How many of us can expect our companies to pay for us to commute 100's of miles from our place of work. not many i'd wager. I expect this will be the biggest pill for the strikers to swallow if this is also included in revocation of staff travel.

Continues...

It appears that most of the posts are by people who read the newspapers..especially the DAILY MAIL who have it in for the hard working Cabin Crew..How many of you have actually read the agrrements..All the C/C I know are NOT striking just for money..There is more involved. What Walsh wants to IMPOSE are what they are fighting for..Less days off..quicker turnarounds..new fleet employing labour at much lower rates..loss of seniority..Lots of other smaller things..Walsh wants to run BA on a Ryanair basis..Is that what you want..I certainly dont..Maybe there shouldn't be a strike, but thats what everyone has the right to do..He also wants to break the Union..If this happens then all the people writing here who belong to a Union had better watch out..Once this starts then there is no end..Yes..Everyone should get round the table but it is NOT all the Union and C/C's fault.. BA has a lot to answer for as well..As to the perks..Anyone who uses these knows what problems are involved..Staff Travel is based on Seat Availability..You have to wait aroundnot knowing if you can travel or not..We understand this and appreciate this but don't think it all plain sailing...maybe others should try this and then see what it entails..I agree with oldbold entirely..I will continue to support the C/C but would be happier if they all got around the table AGAIN..

Continues...

I dont read the DM.........i dont belong in a union...........i dont work for an airline..........i dont get 'perks' of free/discounted flights......i dont get perks full stop...........i'm just of the unfortunate people who rely on an airline to get me to where i want to go. Funnily enough i flew with Ryanair last weekend. We got away on time, we returned on time, it may have beeen a little short on leg room, it may have been cattle class, but it got there.......unlike a few friends, who didnt!

The point is that the general public, who are fed up with it all, will eventually stop booking with BA and the union will then be fighting on the grounds of redundancy, and then probably strike as a result......and so it goes.

It's modern economics and business practice to cut costs. Striking is not the answer, when will the unions ever learn.

Continues...

I have asked my flatmate to check how much it would cost him to go to Brussels and Berlin on standby: return tickets £81.90 and £79.00 respectively.

Well if it is what you call heavily discounted, think again, you can go for similar prices on low cost airlines. Don't forget that if the flight is full, they don't get on board (therefore when downroute, you might have to pay for a hotel at the last minute since you will only find out whether you get on-board or not just when the flight is closing).

They have to pay airport tax like anyone else too

So as Brushes said $25 to go to Paris, that was 25 years ago, things have changed and airlines have realised that it is a good way to make money and fill in empty seats. REMEMBER, these are standby tickets, if the flight is full, you don't get on, so the airline has nothing to lose!

Oh and they have to pay a non-refundable fee of £1.95 per sector per person for website maintenance.

The bottom line is that BA is punishing staff for participating in a legal strike, they are therefore acting illegally.

Continues...

Ichtop1% - We can't help it if you are on the dole!!!

Removing a 'perk' for going on strike is quite simply blackmail. No two ways about it.

Anybody who hasn't travelled standby cannot make a comment on the 'value' of the perk as you do not understand the despair of being stuck at an airport for day after day. Try that and see if your opinion remains the same.

Continues...

RedFlyer. you say "removing a perk for going on strike is quite simply blackmail", then you go on to say how hard done by you are for having to travel standby, and the inherant dangers that entails.... well I guess you wont mind losing them then.

Continues...

Redflyer....is it possible to have a discussion without being insulting! I've worked for the same company for 25 years, never been out of work since school, well paid, and well mannered!

It's talk like that which causes the unions to have such a poor reputation, warrented or not.

If the perks arent perks, then there will be no problem losing them, so what is your argument there?

Oh, and i have spent time at an airport.....waiting..........for a BA aircraft to take me home.............it didnt........guess why? Yep, strike action!

Continues...

Ichtop1% - Sorry if you took my attempt at humour as being insulting. I apologise.

Your work record sounds commendable. I believe there are probably thousands of BA crew who have just as impressive a work history.

My point about the travel perk is that it is not the fantastic benefit that every one seems to think. I still retain my point of view that WW is wrong to use it as a stick against striking.

To those in this forum who are harping on about taxing (As if Brown's APD stealth tax wasn't enough!!!) staff travel benefits. Why shouldn't passengers who earn and redeem FF benefits be taxed as well, or that's different I suppose?

Continues...

"Bet you in around 3 years time, they will claim they have hit the £1billion profit (remember it was not that long ago that they had a profit of £800 million), and who will get all the benefits, greedy CEO, shareholders but nothing for lower workers."

The point is a business of this size should be making £1bn profit. The fact is BA, like any other public company, is using shareholders money to invest in its business. And just like any person lending money to another, shareholders have every right to ask for a return and prospects of their money growing. If not - why not invest it somewhere else? There are plenty of other businesses with prospects that promise decent returns.

And who are these 'greedy shareholders'? Oh thats right - its you and me that hope to have some basis of a secure future in our old age.

BA is not run for the sole benefit of its staff. They are an important stakeholder, but they are not the only ones. The most important feature of this is to make BA a successful and sustainable business moving forward, that can attract capital and reward its people well.

Continues...

ichtop1% - You are spot on.

Continues...

Hey Tim2sms

"I assume these perks are taxable at full NI and PAYE rates on the total of the discount?"

Happy to pay this on your next FFP redemption?

I believe that would be on a 100% discount though!!!

GoonerLondon - Very well said.

Continues...

I disagree with MarkyMark your post on 24/03/2010 17:39 GMT.

Come on.. I am not working for an airline but my parents own a company and there is a reason why the upper people got more perks. For once, managing a big company like BA is not easy! So does the journey to get there! Starting with your study in a university, and so on, the process is very long!

Why don't you put yourself as a CEO and feel the stress and then put your self as a cabin crew, where your job is only make sure you done the checks and serving people with food! I have nothing against cabin crew but hey, you got a nice life and a relaxing job! You go on holidays and so on. If you think you deserve more pay, than show them how good you are! I love BA, but your services are still not as good as SQ or CX or even GA!

If you said you deserve more pay cos you can't meet your family during your job, well, so does the CEO! When someone stress due to their job, they become distracted from their family and as I experienced their attitude towards the rest of the family will go negative as well! And believe me, my parents were so busy that they did not know I went to London for the first time from Asia, Alone when I was 17! And also, I have been spending my Christmases on my own so many time since I am young, to the point that now, Christmas is just another holiday.

You guys should really learn about why there are pay contrasts between levels (Higher and Lower)! And those unites people should be grateful to work as BA cabin crew especially BA pays you generously.

Continues...

The problem with this thread is that it is getting too heated. In part that is because a surprisingly large number of people - cabin crew and passengers among them - really care about BA. THAT is why we have this debate about BA's strike and not about the strike on the railways and the tubes - RMT are just as destructive as UNITE but put simply, we don't care so much about the tubes.

Let me summarise:

The cabin crew care about BA - and are having an awful time of it

Passengers care about BA - and are having an awful time of it

Shareholders care about BA - and are having an awful time of it

Management care about BA (let us be generous here) - and are having an awful time of it

UNITE ... doesn't care about BA (or their members very much, despite the faux protestations on the TV), and isn't getting hurt.

There is no hope of a sensible solution when the union causing the mayhem is the only participant who isn't hurt by their actions

Continues...

Markymark, you say "This world is being run by a bunch of greedy pigs." Did I miss something? When did Unite start running the world??

Continues...

Good on Willie Walsh for removing staff travel perks for the striking crew, they were warned about this prior to the strike so I don't see how they can complain about it now. BA long haul LHR crew have had it too good for too long. Their terms, conditions and allowances have been amongst the best in the airline industry. The striking crew are currently acting like spoiled children, most probably because they have unfortunately been overindulged by BA in the past with regard to pay, allowances and rest time. In comparison to other airlines their working environment and conditions are excellent, as are the allowances that they get for time away from base. I can see why crew would have issues, anxieties and anger over the fact that they will have to work harder because of reduced crew numbers on board and less rest time down route. I also understand that people have financial commitments and may find a cut in their pay and allowances hard to cope with. It does however infuriate me that the crew being affected by the proposed cost cutting measures don't seem to realise or care about how precarious a financial position BA is in at the moment. We are currently in a worldwide recession and many people have either lost their jobs or have had to cope with new ways of working in order to hold on to the positions they do have. Why are BA crew so arrogant to think that they should be exempt from changes to their terms and conditions during such a bad economical climate? Life stinks, but you sometimes just have to get on with it. An alternative would be to leave the company but as an ex Virgin Atlantic crew member, I worked with a lot of crew who wanted to leave flying but had become very bitter because they were trapped in their jobs as they weren't particularly skilled, educated enough or of an appropriate age to make the move. I think that could also be the case for many of the striking BA crew, so perhaps leaving their jobs isn't a viable option. It certainly won't be if or when their selfish strike action ruins the airline.

Continues...

The_Flying_Nurse - Being warned about removal of a benefit prior to strike action doesn't necessarily justify it.

Whether you agree with the crew striking or not it is a legal right for unions to take strike action following due process and that should be without prejudice.

The alternative is that all strike action is illegal and workers don't have any rights.

Continues...

Once again (in case you missed it the first time) staff travel is not a benefit. It is not part of the T&Cs of employment.

No matter how Tony Woodley would like it to be, it forms no part whatsoever, nor ever has done, of the BA Employment Contract. Perhaps he would like to take his third case to court against BA and lose for the third time, possibly costing his members yet another £1.2m in the process?

Continues...

Although it is stated by Airlines as a 'privilege' in reality it forms part of the package in the eyes of someone entering into the industry and is one of the key reasons why the Travel industry is generally able to pay below median market salaries.

It is a benefit, much the same as Banks used to provide discounted mortgages to staff. Not a right but a privilege.

At the end of the day they don't offer staff travel out of the goodness of their hearts.

Continues...

A benefit is a strictly defined term, and Staff Travel is not a benefit, no matter how much it might seem to be.

Continues...

VintageKrug Taken from BA's own recruitment webpage

"Your remuneration package will be determined by your individual contract of employment. Whilst this varies from business to business, typical benefits include:

Opportunities for reduced air fare travel and travel discounts* Generous holiday entitlement Contributory pension and private healthcare schemes Profit share scheme* Bonus* Employee share scheme* Superb sports and social amenities & opportunity to join BA Clubs Subsidised staff restaurants * at the company's discretion "

Continues...

RedFlyer - My FFP have always and only ever been used to redeem flights for business travel. My company paid for my business flights, so they are entitled to the benefits, not me.

Miles earned from my credit card company for personal expenditure are deemed by HMRC to be a discount, and therefore not taxable. These I have used for personal travel, which in all cases has been to bring my family to see me when I have been working abroad for long periods.

I have also always carbon offset my flights at my own personal cost.

European employment law is weighted heavily in favour of the employee, quite rightly. Not sure what the unions add to the equation these days except job insecurity for it's striking members. (How ironic!)

Continues...

Redflyer - the last three words in your quote of the BA recruitment blurb... "at the company's discretion "

Continues...

As are "Profit share scheme* Bonus* Employee share scheme*"

They are all however described (in BA's words) "Typical benefits"

Continues...

RedFlyer - Indeed so. I think also BA should have added the line 'The way it works is you have to show up for work in order to get these benefits, perks, profit shares etc, if you wouldn't mind.'

The employment contract of each employee will specify exactly what the remuneration entitlement is, and what is discretionary.

Continues...

Redflyer I'm afraid you have lost this argument in your own posting, "Opportunities for reduced air fare travel and travel discounts" the word opportunities says that it is not a right but the potential employee has the "opportunity" for the privileges.

Most travel providers will offer some scheme for employee travel, but it is not a right. If you join the railways, you only get discounted travel on the company you work for, but if you joined 20 years ago you get a discount on any company. Disappointing that may be for a new employee.

The travel industry has never been well paid and having travel discounts are not "part of the package" or a way to pay people less.

Getting back to BA the company has every right to withdraw these privileges to anyone at anytime and it can give a greater benefit to certain groups if it so wishes. They were warned they would loose the perk, they had the option of working available. Do you think that Tony Woodley cares if his members loose their perks, no chance.

Continues...

Quite right NTarrant.

Staff travel is NOT a contractual benefit in kind and these discretionary perks form no part WHATSOEVER of the contract of employment.

End of.

You can see what these discretionary benefits entail here:

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/8586933.stm

If you illustrate the "benefit" on a domestic flight, the saving is paltry as the fare component is often as low as £10, with the remaining £70 made up of taxes and fees. So a £9 saving would result.

But on a £600 economy fare to Sydney, for the BA employee and friends/family plus potential to upgrade depending on seniority, the perk could add up to thousands.

Continues...

At the back of my mind, I always wonder what would have been the consequences if after the 1st strike ended and before the 2nd strike commences, WW changed his tactics a little and say for those strikers who took part in the 1st strike but not taking part in the second strike, would now have to pay let say 25% for their standby ticket instead of losing the perk all together, I wonder if this will encourage more crew to get back to work ?

Not holding it as ransom, but opportunity for those who might think twice about going on strike.

My view is clear, everybody in the same boat, either keep the boat afloat or everybody sink.

Continues...

This strike very bad for British AIrways and is good to see Mr Walsh taking firm hand.

But, 9,000 vote for strike and cause big damage through put off customers from booking, only those who do not work punished.

So people who cause damage to company by vote for strike, then just come to work don't get punished.

Is this right?

Continues...

I flew to the USA on Thursday March 18 ... out of the 14 'suites' available in the airline's most premium cabin, there were 7 of that airline's staff.

Before the aircraft had left the gate, the noise level & banter was as if the cabin was their own living room. Lovely people but 'very unprofessional' for the remaining passengers.

As regards the airline whose staff are 'stupidly' striking, I would suggest :

"three strikes & you're out" ..... simple and effective

Continues...

Seems simple...

When the strike is over, If the Airline does survive, some staff wont get to work. Many live outside of London, the UK, or regionally, as Company policy introduced to cut costs sometime ago. The damage being done abroad is really quite devastating i hear both from friends views in different continents, as well as their press. The reputation of BA will never recover. I see BAA cancellations on their site this morning to Africa, Far East, Middle East, USA, Europe and its only 9.50am!

Other Airlines are already getting B A's advance bookings VS being one...and running ad's stating their contented staff & reliability of no strikes...

Whatever yr view here, it seems hypocritical to degrade the staff that enable or not, yr travel experience to be good or bad. There are such terms used they express near hate & derisory comments. So why don't those people cut up yr gold cards & fly someone else if you detest the staff so much?!!!

Any "Company" in such a state with its staff is one of failed "Management". The other Airlines are taking B A's Business, & all involved are responsible for the demise of B A, & its road towards failing...But then every BA CEO has been pushed out eventually...!

Continues...

I'm not surprised that the issue of perks is becoming a hot topic. A friend who has worked in a ground-based job for BA for many years recently took his family in F to SFO for a long weekend for the cost of a short break to Rome for the rest of us!

This has got to be a big bargaining tag, as other correspondents have said, and, depsite WW's inistence that perks are now lost permanently for all strikers, I wouldn't be surprised if some restitution of them is offered up as an eventual olive branch settlement.

Continues...

I wondered how long it would be before we got Mark Roberts anti-BA diatribe, whipped up by his mate. "BA will never recover" so what about Lufthansa? The pilots are striking, does that mean the reputation of LH will never recover? Oh no of course not as I think LH is one of Mark Roberts favorite airlines.

If you read through most of the comments on this and other threads related to the BA strike you will read that in most cases it is not the crew people detest, it is Unite. The union that has an inability to represent its members properly and lets face it the whole affair is political and the cabin crew are the pawns in the game.

Continues...

My sisters friend who works as BA cabin crew and her buddy went to Malidives this year. They paid a total of £320 each for a week in a five star hotel all inclusive. My husband and I went to Maldives last year for our dream holiday. It took us two years to save up and we paid over £1000 each for a week in a three star half board. If their life is too hard I will swap!

Continues...

Then if Mr NTarrent takes the time to read all the threads, the language is derogatory, patronising, & specific to the members of Unite, who ARE the cabin crew you so praise. Some comments promote hatred, political be-littling, & you might find is investigated for content on BT (YET AGAIN!), breach the law in facilitating discriminatory comments, that preach, inept & incapable of sensible discussion. Clearly they are not very business like in their occupations by their behaviour, & angy bitter individuals! No wonder BT has had so many complaints about such people on here to their office! BT seem to be impotent at the record they create in allowing these comments expressing such hate for others, or Organisations made up of the people, they hypocritically want to fly them.

As per usual, these are people who fly few other Airlines, in limited areas of the world, Bitchy & bitter in how & what they write. Completely unable to debate a subject, in a professional let alone a business like manner. Sad, unhappy, & inadequate in their capability of independent perspectives, it shows clearly in their words. They reveal more of themselves than anything to do with the subject.

I have no favourites in terms of Airlines, but merely those with consistency, those managed well, safely, With years of stable services, trusted & respected. B A Have the worst record of Mis- Management disasters, this being just the latest. So they are not, nor will be, as many others are now concluding around the world, one of them.

Continues...

British Airways' reputation will recover; indeed many posters here clearly support the strong leadership of Willie Walsh necessary to cut Unite down to size and restore sanity to remuneration in the round.

I think it is very sad that Union leaders have led their members to lose this staff travel perk, but lose it they will, and this is further evidence of how striking simply doesn't work.

People will continue to value the excellent fully flat beds in Club World, the regular, direct flights at convenient times, the superb lounges both at LHR (where there are no less than eight) and most importantly consistent branded lounges abroad, as well as innovative services such as direct flight between New York JFK and London's City Airport.

British Airways. Since 1924.

Continues...

Mark I do feel that in your second paragraph you actually describe yourself in the way you write about BA. Yes I do fly on other airlines occasionally but they are not a match for BA. The points VK make are highlights as to why I prefer BA over other substandard service.

Your problem is that you don't fly BA and listen to third and forth hand information and speculation. I would suggest that you read your posting again, you use words to describe other posters which actually describes your tone and style. I wouldn't make comments against any airlines or other operators I don't use and nor should you.

Continues...

I suspect that Unite's argument that travel perks were "custom and practice" as opposed to a perk will not stand up in court. The company I worked for changed it's pension scheme rules 3 years ago and restricted pension increases to the lower of RPI or 2.5%. Under the previous scheme rules increases were at the employer's discretion and the Scheme Trustees argued that as past increases had been granted at RPI for over 20 years "custom and practice" applied and the company could not restrict increases to a maximum of 2.5%. The Trustees took legal advice from a major city law firm specialising in pensions and the advice was that a "custom and practice" claim would not stand up in court.

Continues...

MarkRoberts comment adds very little to the thread.

There are many supporting BA and Willie Walsh (within the UK and abroad) and who recognise that the unions need to be addressed, and who appreciate the quality of BA's in flight product and lounges etc. I still fly long haul BA 6 to 8 times a year to America and use them domestically, and they would still be my first choice by a long way.

Continues...

SamPatr - Would you be as willing to swap if there was a chance you wouldn't get on your flights? A good perk yes but not without it's con's.

CharlesRhona - You are right it wouldn't stand up in court. However did your company use the changes to the pension scheme as a threat against going on strike?

Continues...

Redflyer: The company had few union members and any strike would have been a token gesture only. The proposed changes actually improved the scheme by guaranteeing the lesser of RPI or 2.5% as opposed to the company previously having discretion only to grant increases. The company stated that they would retain discretion for increases where RPI exceeded 2.5% but each year since the new scheme came into being and where RPI was greater than 2.5% they have refused to provide a discretionary increase on top of the 2.5%. Of course the company's argument has been that under the previous scheme rules they might not have granted an award at all and that we are actually better off. This despite them providing a RPI increase each year for at least the last 20 years.

Continues...

Why do people keep comparing BA with low-cost airlines, BA is a full frills airline.

Perhaps BA crew earn more than VS, what has not been mentioned is that VS crew get their allowances cash in hand, so off course it has not been included in the salary.

You should compare BA to LH, AF or IB then you will see that BA crew don't have the best pay nor terms and conditions after all.

The public is so ill informed as to how much crew earn and as to why they are striking.

A friend of mine said to me a couple of days ago and she was totally right:

"At the end of the day, the British public will get the airline they deserve!"

Continues...

Willie Walsh salary is competitive with others at his level. He should not be criticised for making a success of his life, and through hard work being rewarded at an appropriate level.

I can't be bothered to check his salary details in my Annual Report now, but in salary terms he earns nothing like £750,000.

Crew are not being asked to take a pay cut; it was Unite which proposed a pay cut as the solution.

When I last chatted to him, he mentioned he had just returned from a holiday with his family. This came up as I was discussing the WT+ predict and he stated he and his family flew World Traveller Plus.

Hardly a huge "travel perk" as unlike many families on holiday as he mentioned he spent most of the flight meeting customers and speaking to crew.

Cost cutting is not an offence, demanding excessive pay and the continuation of outdated BOAC-era working practices is indeed offensive to passengers and most right-minded working people.

The Union leadership are the ones who have stirred up and mandated a strike. It is quite plain for all to see that there is only modest support within BA - centred at LHR - for this action. The Union is weakening and knows it must fight to survive, and striking is the frightened response of a dying beast.

While there has been some disruption, this has been successfully kept to a minimum, with 75% of passengers booked to fly being flown throughout the strike. People "unfortunately" don't seem to get to see all this disruption exactly because it has been kept to an absolute minimum and BA has continued to run a schedule using its own and other aircraft, booking people onto competitors where necessary.

BA and WW spent one whole year negotiating with the unions; they failed to agree a settlement.

BA continues to report accurate legally audited statistics while Unite/Bassa peddle lies and mistruths.

I think the public did have support for BA Crew. Many continue to support the right-minded crew who have continued to support the airline and travelling public during this strike.

However, it is clear from reading the paper, TV news and forums such as this that the public has little time for crew who have decided to strike, and do so at a time which has caused distress over the traditional Easter break, a period over which Unite said it would not take action.

To cite your example of Cathay, that is not a highly Unionised airline, and staff are paid far less than is the case at BA. A lower cost base, and co-operative staff led by strong management who can focus on the economics of running an airline rather than distractions from Union dinosaurs will lead BA back into profit. Despite all this, there is still industrial unrest at Cathay, so your argument holds no water at any level.

Let's not forget WW managed a 10% margin just two years ago, has put in place a (fully funded) Fleet Replacement Programme which is already underway with 777/A320/Embraer deliveries and 787 and A380 on the way, managed an operating PROFIT in Q4 2009 and has presided over improvements to the hard products in First and Club World as well as the merger with Iberia and further alignment with American Airlines.

You seem to think another CEO would handle things differently. I can tell you they would not, and if I have any criticism of WW it is that he held back standing up to Unite for too long. In an AA/IB/BA conglomerate I can tell you that BA unions would get short shrift in demanding the perpetuation of outdated working practices.

I continue to fly British Airways, and have signalled my support for those hard-pressed crew who in choosing to work through the strike face bullying and intimidation from BASSA and others by booking next month's flying programme exclusively on BA.

The City is also in support of WW and BA Management, as you will see from the share price which continues to upward spiral (up over 25% in the past six months).

I am proud to support the hard working cabin crew at BA, and to support the airline with my own flying spend.

Unite lacks the intelligence and the support to break BA, and it must be stopped.

Continues...

Couple of points.

BAs customer base is global not solely UK based so the comment about the British getting the airline they deserve is meaningless. Indeed the public and in particular the reactionary press in this country love nothing more than knocking BA and have done for years. They continue to do so via comments that BA has cancelled 37% of flights. That means 63% operated and that is frankly better than on a foggy day. BA success has been gained through offering products and services that are world beating and are delivered in a consistent and professional manner by well paid and motivated staff. The staff, including crew, now enjoy some of the best facilities, pay, uniform, subsidies canteen facilities, and benefits of any organisation in the UK, if it were not so then the airline would not be doing as well as it is.

Comparisons with Cathy are ridiculous as that airline cut everyone’s pay down to 3 weeks for every 4 worked without agreement just last year.

BA has not made an employee redundant through anything but voluntary means since it was privatised. Indeed they go to incredible lengths to protect staff in major re organisations. In recent times this included all non London based ground staff being offered 3 choices when ground handling was contracted out. These choices included jobs with the ground handler, crew jobs or generous redundancy packages. Those who took crew roles also had a year in which to change their mind and take redundancy.

Current crew have been reduced by 1 on 747, they will have to work that bit harder but the hours spent in the crew bunks on long range sectors will not be cut. For years they have held the firm to ransom and their intransigent representatives are now being taken on. It was cabin crew who 3 and 4 years ago regularly forced BA to close the First Cabins on flights as they would not operate 1 down. Passengers were inconvenienced and it added to Bas costs and damaged it reputation. No business can tolerate being held to ransom like this and how many of us have to daily cover for colleagues who may be ill or simply having a duvet day.

63% of crew who should have been on duty reported for duty last weekend. That tells me all I need to know. A minority of very vocal aggressive and badly led staff are on strike, many more spineless individuals will have gone sick rather than stick to a principle or show where their loyalty really lies, but over 63% want to work. Enough said..

Good on WW on this one. I am voting with my feet and cash. I fly BA this weekend in F and looking forward it immensely.

Continues...

Hello Everyone,

it is nice to be back again from another trip to see that the BT forum is alive and well and the all of the usual suspects are at each others throats again and as usual, or it seems as usual, about BA.

There have been some sensible well argued contributions to this thread and some that frankly just do not make any sense to me at all.

As regular contributors to this forum are aware, I am no fan of BA but that does not mean that I want to see it brought to it's knees by a union leadership that seems to care more about it's own well being than that of the people who pay their subscriptions to keep them in their jobs in the hope that they will look out for their best interests. I have to question the wisdom of calling a strike at this time when the damage done could actually end up costing many Unite members's jobs if BA cannot get their cost base to a more competitive level and redundancies end up being the only solution.

Geoheuveuk- how can you possibly argue that WW is single handeley responsible for the strike? Are you honestly saying that Unite bares no responsibility at all?

I have on many occassions on this forum disagreed with VK and the content of some of the threads he has written. I have always tried to do by stating my side of an arguement without becoming personal or abusive as there is no place for that kind of post on this forum.

I do however find myself agreeing with most of what he has had to say on this thread as it makes sense. Is VK bias towards BA, yes he is and that is his right, but he is no more pro BA than MarkRoberts is anti BA. that to is his right.

I have no axe to grind here as my travel plans have not been affected by the strike.

I have also talked to many friends who work at BA as i have kept in touch with a number of excellent people who did a great job for me both on the ground and in the air a few years ago when I did use BA and had a Gold Card. They are all working through the strike, all are LHR based, as they are not prepared to have the airline hijacked by a union leadership hellbent on achieving their own agenda.

For me, it is great shame that their voices cannot be heard more loudly as they are the one s that matter. They would all rather accept the necessary changes that would keep all of them in long term employment than the lottery tht will exist if things are not sorted out quickly.

I wish everyone a Happy long Easter weekend and safe travells,

Jonathan

Continues...

Account deleted

Continues...

Geohoveuk - While I am truely sorry that your partner feels aggreived, one cannot deny that staff were warned of the consequences of striking. There was a choice to be made.

Beyond the Unite/BA PR is an airline in serious financial trouble, and all parts of the business being asked to help out. Some have; others seem to want to cling onto 'rights' and 'entitlements' despite the economic circumstances.

Sustainable income and benefits are incompatible with inflexibility. I truely believe the Union is not serving your partner's long term interests, putting politics first.

I also feel UK employment law more than sufficiently protects the employee (this is a good thing), and that it serves employees well. I think Unite have expectations that simply do not fit in the internationally competitive market that we are all facing.

WW's salary and benefits are pulbic information. You only have to go to Companies House online and pay £1 to get the info. It is also probably on the BA website for free.

I sincerely hope your partner comes out of this in the right place for them, despite my personal disagreement with the strike. It can't be nice going through this. I have always been treated so well by BA cabin crew and have high regard for them.

Continues...

Its not a full frills airline on short haul that's for sure. On a recent flight to Turin all we got was a drink and small bag of salted raisins, biscuits and bird seed! I was expecting at least a sandwich but all the crew were interested in was selling duty free, which they recieve handsome commission on. At least on easyjet we are able to buy a sandwich!

Continues...

An excellent move on BA's part. Well done!

Continues...

I totally agree with WW on this point. However we must recognise that the striking crew are only part of Unite. For my part i flew as crew with the original BCAL (god bless her) as an IFD and we had to work the cabin. By the time BA took us over I had got fed up of serving SLC on the Africa routes so got a ground job, needless to say BA walked in and we were made redundant . So although I was a regular traveller with BA many years after and was a Gold level memeber I have never been a fan. perhaps WW can instill a new worth ethic in this micreants

Continues...

Geo, A lack of respect for your CEO/senior management is not a basis on which to strike. BA management may well have some arrogance, not just in its dealings with Unite. I have seen it myself. Unfortunately this seems to be clouding some people's opinions because the reality is that whoever is in charge at BA has to be taking tough action to secure the long term survival of the airline. In case you were not aware, the industry is fundamentally unprofitable - overall IATA member airlines only achieved one year of profit in the past ten. I'm afraid, cabin crew need to wake up and smell the coffee before its too late.

Continues...

So BA is loosing money because of its relationship with its workforce? I think you will find Geohoveuk that it is the global recession that is causing BA to loose money as passengers are either not travelling as often, travelling in lower cabins then before or moving over to low cost carriers or other means.

Sadlt what your partner experienced after 21 years is not a lot more than many employees in other industries receive. The letter of thanks is your pay slip each month and the deposit in your bank. That may sound hard but in a large organisation it is hard to treat people the same as an SME would.

I am sorry your partner has lost her free travel but she did have a choice to strike or not just like the many crew that did work. I think that you are looking at this with emotion and from one side only. I continue to support BA by flying with them, the majority of crew do an excellent job, my wife won't fly with any other airline (unless she has too). There are a lot of people who have made comments on this and other threads that they will not support BA in the future and that directly affects you and your partner in job security.

I hope your partner is able to press Unite to talk again with Willie Walsh and not have anymore strikes.

Continues...

Geo, if only running a business was that straightforward. Silverjet had a fantastic highly motivated workforce but it still went bust. The economics were just not right and at the moment the economics for BA and most 'legacy' airlines is not right. JAL has gone into administration and many US airlines have declared chapter 11 in recent years.

I am sure there are a lot of things wrong at BA at the moment but going on strike is not the answer. If I was WW I would have made a concilliatory gesture and told all cabin crew after the first strike that they would retain their travel perks if they did not strike a second time.

Continues...

Account deleted

Continues...

It is really sad Geohoveuk, that you see this as requiring cutbacks in other departments other than cabin crew. You are going around in circles blaming everyone. I don't see miserable staff on the flights I have taken.

Don't you see that your partners job is at risk for ever if this continues. Why should those that work keep strikers in a job? Your blindness is silly

Continues...

Look the people going on strike knew the perks would be withdrawn and so it has proved.

If you can't stand the heat, get out of the kitchen.

The same people causing misery to thousands of travellers are upset that their own travel perks are in turn damaged.

Pot. Kettle. Black.

Continues...

Geo, tech crew at BA have already accepted a pay cut. So too did Willie Walsh and at least some of the senior management. So they have already done what you suggest.

BA is not advocating a pay cut for cabin crew (though Unite suggested that approach!) but rather a pay freeze and new hires starting on a different pay scale. So other branches of the airline are accepting they have to bear some financial pain. Why should cabin crew be any different?

Unfortunately, it seems you have a hatred for Willie Walsh and BA management which overtakes all logic. Perhaps you should just look at the issues, rather than the personalities ....

Continues...

Actually BA crew deserve every penny they get, because for too long have crew put up with pathetic passengers who act like children.

The likes of Ryanair who are the scum of the earth I have to add, have dragged the industry down to the bone. An industry that once had class and appeal is no longer that as a result of these low cost ethos carriers.

Good on BA crew you stand up for what you rightfully had and deserve.

Continues...

Geohoveuk...as your partner is BA cabin crew, by your own admission, obviously your views are biased. I dont think this is the website to voice your own political views about BA management, or the your vitriol about the pilots and their agreement. This is Business Traveller..... not PPRUNE.ORG

flybdlhr....I am not keen on the likes of Ryanair either, but the sad truth is that, because of their profits, they will be in business long after to likes of bmi have gone.

Continues...

It's interesting to have your perspective, geohoveuk, though I do think some thorough independent research on your behalf would be of value so you can distinguish facts from BASSA spin.

I hardly think the introduction of AVOD fleet wide, Next Generation Club World seats, new First, CWLCY, over 100m invested in lounges at T5 alone, the superb and reliable functionality of ba.com, dramatically improved punctuality and new fleet deliveries of airbus and embraer shorthaul aircraft, longhaul 777s with A380 and 787 coming in a few years are symptomatic of a management not focussing on the needs of passengers.

You may think it's BA management which lacks genuine interest in passengers, but actually this is all about cutbacks across the board at national, corporate and individual level.

It's not BA management driving this.

Speak to passengers and ask them how many travel policies still permit Club Europe travel within Europe, or Club World return for East Coast flights. Many prohibit fully flex tickets all together. Five years ago I wouldn't have throught twice about booking fully flex when on business. That's not the case now.

Increased prices (due to the rise in the cost of of oil and the fall in value of the pound), diminishing margins as taxes encroach on previously profitable shorthaul and longhaul business routes, and last of all the increased level of competition from low-cost carriers and start up carriers such as those in the Middle East which hire crews well below the salaries paid to those who work at BA, and precisely because of this are able to maintain margin and offer a modestly improved in flight experience are the real culprits in all this.

And there is not much BA management, or indeed BA cabin crew can do to influence the economics of the oil price or the popularity of low cost carriers.

Getting a more realistic pay structure for future cabin crew employees is all part of ensuring BA has the cash to continue to invest in its product and its people to better serve customers.

Please note that the possessive form is its, while "it is" is abbreviated to it's.

Rather confusing, as one would assume the apostrophe did indeed signify possession. However, if this common error is not nipped in the bud, it will become endemic.

Continues...

More gloom for crew who put their trust in BASSA and were lead to believe Staff Travel could not be removed from those who chose to strike.

It has been, and that policy starts today. Someone called Bill Francis who is head of Cabin Crew communicated this to Cabin Crew:

13 April 2010

Further information for crew who have lost staff travel concessions from 14 April 2010.

Q I have a trip booked for travel on British Airways, but I don’t return until 15 April, will I still be able to use the ticket to come home? A No, the loss of staff travel concessions applies from 14 April 2010, therefore all travel must be completed before then. If you choose to travel out on a rebated ticket before that day, you will be responsible for arranging alternative means of getting home after 14 April 2010. Any unused tickets for yourself or nominees will no longer be valid and the reservations will be cancelled, please apply for a refund on these tickets in the normal way.

Q I am travelling on my partner's concessions and we are booked on their 100% rebate ticket to travel in May. Will I still be able to go? No, you are unable to travel as a nominee of another serving or former British Airways employee from 14 April 2010.

Q I am a commuter, how will I get to work? Staff travel is a non contractual, discretionary concession, there is no contractual entitlement. It is your responsibility regardless of where you work to ensure you are able to report for duty. Prior to the ballot for industrial action and again before the strike, it was clearly communicated that any individuals choosing to take strike action would lose staff travel eligibility.

Q My friend is travelling on my concessions and is due to fly back on 21 April, will she be able to fly? No, the loss of staff travel concessions applies to your nominees from 14 April 2010. If your friend decides to travel, they will need to arrange alternative means of travelling home.

Q I have a staff travel ticket booked with another carrier for travel after 14 April, am I allowed to use it? No, all travel must be completed by 14 April 2010. Any unused tickets for yourself or nominees will no longer be valid and you will need to cancel the reservation and apply for a refund on these tickets in the normal way. Any travel that takes place on any another carrier (including Oneworld, franchises and subsidiaries), after 14 April 2010, or contacting other airlines directly to request rebate travel will be considered misuse of staff travel and will be managed using the appropriate disciplinary procedures.

Q If I change jobs, will I get my staff travel concessions back? No, the loss of staff travel is permanent and applies to any future jobs you may move to.

Q I have completed over 15 years of continuous service with British Airways. When I leave, will I be eligible for staff travel concessions? No, the loss of staff travel is permanent, therefore you will no longer be eligible for former staff concessions.

Q I took strike action on the first dates, but came to work during the second strike dates, do I still lose my staff travel concessions? Yes, the loss of staff travel concessions applies to all crew who took strike action.

Continues...

IM sure the BA crew will get the perks back again, but it will take some times... NO company want their staff to promote for other competitor. Just imagine a newsline come up with one of the BA Crew in their uniform in a BM flights. and the comment from the Crew: I book this ticket coz is the cheapest way to come to work! Is WAR time BA R into now and NO one is winning on this, Management, Crew, Passenger but so far in this WAR I pass my vote to WW and the BA Management. The Union and the Crew should have fight this battle in a much more smarter way.

Continues...

I actually don't think they will ever get staff travel back - certainly not without offering concessions which would make any offer cost neutral for British Airways.

I often see VS crew flying bmi domestically, have seen BA crew on BA flights and vice versa. It's really a non issue.

I would agree that WW is winning this battle, though especially with the General Election hiatus the War is not quite yet won....

Continues...

VK

Well IM not sure about that coz we all know that VS dont fly short-haul, and that for years BA has a strong image, that the company is ONE and united, dont think is a good PR for BA that this pic is changing. But hey they R merging with Iberia , so really IM very confuse what way BA is heading. Ex SAS did this for some times back from a Business company to a company with NO clear Identity. Many of SAS hardcore start to think is this a low-cost or full service airline? PR is a tricky world ....

Continues...

I don't think the loss of staff travel for the very few Cabin Crew who chose to strike will have any impact whatsoever on the image of the company.

I think BA has indeed to be careful in its positioning between low cost and full service; but the fact is that right now cost is almost always the single most important factor as dictated by corporate travel policies and individuals' travel budgets.

So BA must be competitive on price, while still investing in hard product improvements (new aircraft, new lounges, new cabin fit outs etc.) while seeking ways to reduce its cost base to generate the margins and profits which permit future investment in products and services.

BA has a very strong identity, and the merger with Iberia (and pending merger with American Airlines) will not change this.

Continues...

WW has well and truly drawn a line in the sand by removing staff travel concessions.

So there it is BA employees. If any other division within your company ever considers strike action is warranted WW has no option other than to remove your concessions also.

And next step is it will be used as a stick in contract negotiations. "Accept these terms or we will withdraw staff travel".

Fantastic for staff morale within the company.

Continues...

RedFlyer...I couldn't agree with you more..Next time it will be Check in Staff ...then the Loaders...then the rest of BA...WW will not stop until he has changed BA completely...I know that eventually my wife will be forced to accept a new contract or leave...As you say WW is a genius at handling people and keeping up morale..!!!!! ...God help the rest of BA staff..

Continues...

VK The BA crew that have lost their concessionary travel will get it back the day after WW leaves.....no loss of face and all that. It is just a matter of time. A new CEO will reinstate it.

Continues...

On what do you base that assumption, openfly?

It's not just WW who made this determination. The Board is fully behind WW's actions in this regard. To re-instate Staff travel without delivering on signiifcant concessions from Cabin Crew would be madness.

Continues...

Metmanmart - most of the check-in staff are not employed by BA but are employed by people like Serviceair or Aviance but wear BA uniforms. The same goes for the loaders, the only exception is really at LHR and LGW, but that is not to say it could not be put out to tender at these locations.

Openfly - I would not think that it is a forgone conclusion. It is unlikely that a new CEO would change much that WW has done, its the same in any company. There are no certainties.

Continues...

There is a rumour going around (and just a rumour) regarding the settlement & staff travel - the strikers will be offered ST on one route (a "get you to work" route) and an unlimited number of tickets at the equivalent of ID50... poor show if this is true...

Continues...

I agree. It would be entirely wrong to back down on the issue of staff travel for those small numbers of crew who did choose to strike.

I can see that offering it on a get to work route might be prudent, but again I really think it undermines the very clear statement made at the begining of the proposed Industrial Action if that was to happen.

Continues...

I am sorry, but your posts are increasingly irrational.

1. I highly doubt crew will be either determined or prepared to purchase full fare tickets. A return to EDI full fare runs almost £500, while a lower cost flight is about £100. Which do you really think hard pressed cabin crew (who have already had a week's wages docked for striking) will choose to purchase?

2. Competitor airlines will not make "a killing" as the sort of routes you illustrate (bmi and Aer Lingus) are low margin, with the actual fare component often as low as £10 while the price runs to £90+. Deduct actual costs from that and you will see just how tight budgets have to be right now.

3. I have picked up some disgruntled crews over the past few months who are determined to provide the bare minimal service, whipped up into a frenzy of militant grandstanding by BASSA. The blame for this attitude lies firmly at the door of BASSA/Unite for giving crews unrealistic expectations, telling LIES and mismanaging negotiations to the point that they engineered a wholly unnecessary strike. Frankly, if these are the ones who have taken strike action and lose staff travel, then so be it. I don't want them working a cabin in which I am flying.

4. Thankfully I have also seen alongside one or two bad apples (and that just one or two in 20 sectors these past two months) some excellent dedicated and determined crew.

5. The proportion of striking crew at LHR was relatively small; volunteer crew had to be turned away, and hardly anyone took industrial action at Gatwick, none at London City. Your stats of 60% of crew striking at LHR are just wrong.

6. BASSA has engineered this disgruntlement, and it has also caused its members untold suffering and hardship, not to mention stress, as a consequence.

BASSA is a busted flush, any further strike action will cause minimal disruption as further people are trained on both 747s and to serve hot food to reduce the impact to catering seen in the previous IA. They have lost their key bargaining tool, and are now being kept under lock and key by Unite until after the (Unite funded) Labour Party completes its doomed campaign to seek re-election for another decade of mismanagement of this country.

The suggestion that BA crew will break the airline by purchasing full fare shorthaul and leisure tickets on competitors demonstrates a very shaky grasp of the economics of running an airline with nearly £1billion turnover per annum.

Continues...

VK

Dont get upset , this kind of comment cant come from a business person with logic thinking in a business world..... but is fun to read thoose kind of comments....

Continues...

Well said VK. I am at a loss to see where all these disgruntled crew are giving rubbish service. Returning from DXB on Tuesday morning having travelled Club World on the upper deck, the crew were brilliant.

Continues...

I don't get upset; I am genuinely sorry to read statements as set out by geohoveuk as it demonstrates the naivety and limited grasp and understanding of the facts on which cabin crew have based their decision making process.

These are decisions which will affect the rest of their working lives and I am really saddened that they have put their faith in the Union which has misrepresented and mismanaged the situation with the consequence that ALL BA Cabin Crew have now lost out and will receive worse terms that were on offer this time last year.

Add to that the losses to BA, the impact to the country and the inconvenience to customers (people missing funerals, weddings etc. as well as business people missing important meetings) and it's clear IA has been wholly disproportionate as well as unnecessary.

Continues...

So best internet fare is more in the £10 fare plus £80 taxes and fees on a typical shorthaul staff travel "commute".

One illustration of 8 crew having stated they took industrial action out of 12 on a single flight may be accurate, but that single illustration is not proportionate to the actual numbers of right-thinking crew who actually turned up to work.

In many cases people have stated to others that they went on strike simply to avoid the BASSA bullies who have victimised those who chose not to strike.

The redirection of the fares of the few staff who chose to strike knowing they would lose staff travel is immaterial.

The very modest number of crew who did not turn up to work at LHR failed to impact the BA schedule to the extent they believed they would. With fewer cabin crew willing or able to afford to strike yet again, coupled with greater numbers of volunteer crews, crewing both 777s and 747s, and able to serve customers the full range of hot food on board and further action will only serve to underline the weakness of the Union and the flakey support for BASSA amongst the crew as a whole.

Neither of these issues are going to matter one jot in the scheme of things.

Continues...

Hello everyone,

Geohoveuk, you say that VK's BA rhetoric is 'too much for (any) one to bare'!!

Well I have to say that I, and possibly many other contributors are beginning to feel exactly the same way about you continual anti BA rhetoric!

Regular contributors to this forum know very well that I am no fan of BA but I do not wish the carrier ill will either. I have also had my disagreements with VK, i do however find myself agreeing with what he has said in this thread.

It seems to me that you are as anti BA as VK is pro. you are both absolutely entitled to the views that you hold. Your views however seem to me to be more emotional than logical. CC were warned that if they went on strike they would loose their staff travel perks. Those that went on strike can not say that they were not warned.

I am also not sure why crew on days off are relevant as they would not be on strike and so would not have lost their perk. I am also not sure what you mean by crew who were not in the position to show up for their flights. If they had good reason not to show up and were not on strike, then again, they would not loose their perk.

I would be most interested to hear what you would do if you were running BA to sort this out. I know many CC who did not want the strike and never will as they know very well the likely long term impact of their nunion continuing along this disastrous course if ID.

On a lighter note it would seem that my plans to go to Tel Aviv may be on hold for longer than I expected. the supreme irony for me and this will not be lost on regular contributors is that EL AL have offered to book me onto BA tomorrow night in CW if our airspace is open as they cannot fly due to the Jewish Sabbath.

Who would have thought that I would end up on BA due to a volcanic eruption in Iceland.

Safe travels everyone,

Jonathan

Continues...

can someone explain to me why BA's cabin crew is making all this strikes when in the same time Lufthansa announces 800 jobs to go for Bmi and no-one reacts?

Continues...

Quite right Potokas. It's because a few of them live in a union induced cloud-cuckoo land where recession does not exist.

And to geohoveuk's last post, I promise not to bare anything unless provoked!

And it would take a "plenitude" of provocation for that to happen! ;)

Continues...

Now it seems alll this has focussed the attention of HMRC. As a perk it's OK for staff to use the discounted travel for business purposes.

If indeed it is a contractual benefit, as BASSA is busily asserting, then indeed iot would be necessary to pay tax and National Insurance on the value of the benefit.

Another own goal for the Union imbeciles.

Continues...

What will happen to crew who went on strike but are still able to book personal travel or indeed hold a current booking for the coming months?

Surely this must me hard to manage and police?

Continues...

VK - BA Staff Travel Policy specifically bars use for business purposes.

If HMRC does pursue this how would the taxable value be calculated given the pricing/revenue management policies of airlines and given that travel is on a standby basis, ie there is no single or comparable commercial fare. Also, in some cases on shorthaul it is possible to buy a commercial fare from a LCC that is lower than the BA concessional fare.

I also imagine BA (and all airlines) would be opposed to it becoming a taxable benefit as it would be a nightmare to administer. The additional costs would also be passed on in higher concessional fares.

Continues...

When I say "business purposes" I mean in connection with doing their job at BA e.g. commuting from EDI to London for report for duty.

It would be easily policed by comparing the market price at the time of booking and using the difference to define the benefit in kind. Simples.

Continues...

VK - I don't believe there is or can ever be a 'market price at time of booking' when airlines are increasingly adopting dynamic pricing. And who exactly is in a position to track the market price given the multiple channels and airlines involved?

There maybe an argument for confirmed staff travel to be a taxable benefit based on the employer airlines lowest commercial fare but not standby travel. Its complicated because even confirmed concessions can be downgraded to standby.

Continues...

How many of the BA Crew need to travel by air to LHR to get to work ?

Isnt strange that U apply for a position that is far away from your home?

Well for me is the crew problem to find themselves in this situation, if they were smart, as someone state here .... they should have force this.

Continues...

JackyLek

Isnt strange that U apply for a position that is far away from your home?

Isn't that a bit of a silly question I mean it's everyones choice where to live and work, a lot of people do not wan't to live in the areas surrounding LHR.

Also can you imagine how crowded London would be if nobody commuted to the city from out of town areas to work.

Continues...

This is a bit of a grey area and HMRC works in mysterious ways. Travel concessions provided to bus and rail workers are not taxed, the HMRC tried to go down that road many years ago, but could not find a suitable way of taxing it as a benefit. It is a bit like companies paying for mobile phones, its not taxed because its too difficult to prove.

However, air travel is a lot different to bus and rail travel and accounting for it is much easier. I would agree that finding a market fare would be difficult, although there is no reason why a formula could not be based on the flown mileages. So the flown mileage for LHR-EDI is 333, therefore the tax would be worked out on a multiplyer of the miles. Yes it sounds complicated, but so can HMRC

Continues...

flybdA330

I do think is strange if U lived in Manchester or Newcastle and your work is in LHR, and U need to travel every 2 or 3 times every months. But its your choice to do that but, but then U have to think of the fact that U have choosen that. For me commute is taken a train or bus 1-2hours not 6-8hours.....

Continues...

When employees travel on bus or rail concessions they are travelling the same as everyone else who paid a commercial fare. Standby air travel is not the same. It is possible to standby for hours if not days to get on a flight to your destination.

Its not as if HMRC has not been aware of staff travel. Its been in existence for decades and they have not targeted it before. I think its just hot air.

Continues...

When BA closed the regional bases, staff would probably have been offered either redundancy or a job in another location. A job in another location is just that, an employer does not have to offer subsidised travel or disturbance allowance.

That is not strictly true Billyfreedom, the fact someone might be on standby for hours would be irrelevant to HMRC, once on board then they are travelling the same. HMRC are aware of many perks in all manner of industries but lack the staff and resources to look more closely which is why this has probably not surfaced before. You might be right in that it is all hot air and something far more juicy might appear for HMRC to play with!

Continues...

Very touching Geohoveuk, but as you have demonstrated, the guy had a choice and sensibly chose to work to protect his concessionary fares. I am sure in time your friend will realise that he made the right choice.

Are you advocating that these disaffected cabin crew give poor service to the customers? They are paid to do a job and have been trained to give a good service. If I receive poor service from a member of staff in any organisation I will complain and I am sure many others on this forum would do as well. Continue to give bad service and it won't travel perks to worry about but the stigma of being dismissed

Continues...

Hello Everyone,

Geohoveuk, I am afraid I just do not undestand the point that you are trying to make! Are you really suggesting that in the current climate that BA management should do nothing to try and cut their very high cost base but that if they do then the CC should not share part of the burden.

With my recruitment and HR background one of the things that I am doing at the moment is, on a voluntary basis, is working with Volunteer Centres to run workshops to help the long term unemployed back to work. among my clients their are many ex-cabin crew who have lost their jobs. They would be overjoyed to have the opportunity to go back to an airline like BA on the new terms being offered and some of them used to work for BA.

I agree that a job is not just about being paid and that job satisfaction is important but I agree totally with Nigel, if staff really are that disaffected then they should leave and see what life is like being unemployed at the moment. I can assure you that no matter how bad they think things are and how unfairly they believe they are being treated, they will find it a lot harder without their salary coming in.

BA management are not blmeless in this dispute but the union are doing their members no favours and may ultimately have to explain to them why so many of them end up on the dole if they continue to try and drive the airline into the ground.

Now that my rant is over for this evening, I am really hoping that the volcano behves iteself and that I can get to my cousins Barmitzvah in Israel this weekend.

Safe travels everyone,

Jonathan

Continues...

Matzeltov Jonathon. I hope you make it.

One of my friends who commutes each week to Tel Aviv - London, is considering going to catch the El Al flight from Madrid to Tel Aviv tomorrow. Just a thought.

And BA strikers thought they had problems!!!!

Continues...

Hi Martyn,

thanks for your kind words. I am looking at Madrid or possibly Rome Tel aviv if all else fails.

I will let you know how I get on.

Cheers,

Jonathan

Continues...

1. Offering a potential pay cut "for some while" would not solve the fundamental misalignment of the BA crew cost base.

2. Offering a temporary pay cut has not delivered any savings to the company. Other parts of BA's workforce have delivered on cost savings, crew has not delivered on any cost savings which is why (after ONE YEAR of opportunity to negotiate) some changes - reductions in crew numbers - were imposed.

3. Comparing the role of a CEO to that of a cabin crewmember is flawed; no crew works 6 or 7 days a week or has the sort of responsibility of a CEO. Daft to make salary jibes on that front.

4. As we have all found when flying with other carriers (and yes I am also a Star Alliance Gold card holder, and spent the majority of last year's jaunts on Star Alliance flights in premium cabins) the amount paid to crew bears no relation to the quality or dedication of good crewmembers. BA's Union is kidding itself if they think this is the case.

WW is not trying to break the union - BA needs a single union with which to negotiate efficiently. Even Unite is distancing itself from the actions of the LA-resident BASSA Chairwoman.

Anyway, this is all moot as there will not likely be any discussion from Unite/BASSA until after the UK General Election on May 6, more evidence of the politiocal motivation for this strike rather than any focus on delivering a good deal for cabin crew.

As a consequence of BASSA intransigence and refusal to negotiate, Cabin Crew WILL receive a far worse deal than would have been the case had their Union negotiated properly and agreed the original offer, table 18 months ago.

It is very sad that many people still demonise WW while not understanding BASSA's role in all this.

Continues...

This morning I stumbled across this forum and your comments.

I am furious with BA and have been so for a couple of weeks now. Let me tell you why.

1. I was one of the fortunate passengers to be on one of the first Friday flight from New York to Glasgow during the eruption fiasco of late.

2. Unfortunately, I was sat in a First cabin with 8 or so BA managers who had somehow managed to take the place of 200 or more stranded passengers (some of whom were my colleagues all the while being accommodated in Hotels at BA expense). They were not discreet and initially laughed and joked aloud, my suspicions of their passenger status was later confirmed.

3. Furthermore, there were 50 odd empty seats in Club and Economy combined which could easily have been filled by desperate passengers wishing to return to the UK.

4. I thought British Airways were currently concerned about costs. Surely having staff parade around in paying passenger entitlements is not appropriate!

I have since taken up my grievances with Willie Walsh, but my concerns have not been acknowledged.

Continues...

HiFlyer - I can understand why you would have taken offence at this seemingly irrational response to a crisis situation but all is probably not as it seems.

Firstly the reason why your flight operated with numerous empty seats will have been because of the need for BA to start operating flights at extremely short notice in relation to when they received clearance to operate.

It will have been imperative to get airplanes flying and getting the schedule moving again asap coupled with the revised slots they would have been given. Logistically it would have been impossible for BA (Probably local US staff) to contact enough passengers, including allowing time for them to organise themselves and get to the airport, to fill the first flights in the timeframe available.

Secondly the BA staff in the First cabin were probably displaced Flight deck crew who are contractually entitled to confirmed seats in First class and again needed desperately by BA back at home base to enable them to start flying planes again asap.

Even if they weren't tech crew they would have only got seats in First class on a standby basis because seats available per my remarks above. Again it makes sense for BA to get staff back to work asap if seats are available (probably had been helping out at JFK operations whilst stuck there anyway).

Whilst I can understand your initial reaction I think it's a little unfair to make assumptions about the character of BA staff when the vast majority will have been working their a***s off trying to mitigate the situation for their customers in an unprecedented crisis of no making of their own.

In other words "Cut them a little slack".

Continues...

RedFlyer, to set you straight, these staff members in First were apparently from IT and they certainly weren't working their a***s off mitigating any situation whilst enjoying the first class service and Bordeaux.

What angers me the most, is that my colleagues (intending to travel with me) and countless others in the same Hotel as which I was staying were informed the flight was full and they would be rebooked as per flight operation. Quite inappropriately and unnecessarily, it was the British Airways IT managers who were taking precedence over other desperate passengers, and for what, to be home for the weekend!

On top of this, us first class passengers were simply bundled into busses with all other passengers on board and made to feel like cattle. I would have thought some more appropriate and comfortable separate transport could have been laid on considering the fares charged. Needless to say, the managers were not with us.

BA, although I am grateful for having got me home, seems never to truly put the passengers interests at heart. Did I mention my Video Monitor did not work? Oh, and that I found the crew very pleasant indeed. Somehow, I think they are all BA really has going for it. It would be a shame for Willie Walsh if he cuts his nose off to spite his face.

Continues...

RED FLYER - it concerns me greatly to read comments such as flight deck crew are "contracturally entitled to confirmed First class seats" - you left out two words .....and club.... flight deck are permitted to refuse travel in a class below club "whilst on duty". That does not mean that they have to refuse. I sympathise with HiFlyers comments becasue I still have collegues stuck in S Africa, and parts if USA. Stuck pax should be prioritized over staff.

Please do not excuse the antics of BA staff with half truths.

Continues...

Ok, so in the biggest operational disruption in the history of BA (and most other airlines) they have decided to purposefully deny carriage to their highest value customers to ensure some non essential IT staff can get home for the weekend.

MartynSinclair - I guess that's why you still have colleages stuck overseas. BA probably want to ensure their staff get a well deserved break so are blocking all spare seats.

HiFlyer - I would be interested to know why you were chosen as the lucky customer to get a seat on the flight over your colleagues and they were told the flight was full. Were you the first to be contacted? Did you speak with your colleauges after you had been confirmed on the flight?

Also I wasn't referring to the BA staff on your flight when highlighting the efforts put in but in general (once on a flight you are a passenger after all).

In relation to the bus transport. I would assume (and I'm sure MartynSinclair will put me right on this) that it was a logistical issue again i.e. trying to organise transport in a very short timeframe.

At the end of the day if it is your judgement that BA did not provide an adeqaute response to this crisis then anything they provide to you in terms of justification of their actions will be irrelevant as your point of view will remain the same.

Continues...

Hey Red Flyer

Do i sense you are swinging both ways in this debate???

Cant quite work out which side of the fence you are sitting

...and yes i do believe that revenue pax should get preference over BA staff and further that BA staff should only use F on an approval basis. As you well know, non approved upgrades can result, quite rightly, in a criminal charge of theft.

Now, Red Flyer, careful as you land!

Martyn

Continues...

MartynSinclair - I am merely hoping to offer some possible rationalization for what can appear sometimes to be ludicrous actions by airlines.

I have some previous experience in the airline industry and am basing my assumptions on that knowledge.

I know that most tech crew for positioning purposes are entitled to be booked in Club or First and that makes sense. It's like any of us booking company travel at whatever entitlement we are allowed.

I don't know about BA perse but apart from positioning crew most airlines do not allow any other staff other than the Exec Board to confirmed premium seats. Everyone else who is entitled will have an onload category that only kicks in when spare seats are available on the day.

I am not trying to question HiFlyers experience of the situation but when looked at objectively we all have to admit that if BA purposely acted that way it is just incredulous, in fact beyond incredulous and I have to believe and give the benefit of the doubt that there were mitigating circumstances.

Perhaps HiFlyer you can provide details of BA's response when received?

Continues...

It may also have been the case that knowing the aircraft was destined for Glasgow and than it may not even have made it that far, a decision was taken not to fill the plane up with passenger who would have ended up far from home, and need to be accommodated.

Another example of how the EU regulations mitigate against what would seem to be the right thing to do (filling the plane up to the gills).

Staff behaving inappropriately is unacceptable, whether or not they are entitled to the cabin in which they are seated (and many are entitled to travel in premium cabins).

Continues...

VK - i think you are wrong on the point about airline staff being 'entitled' to travel in premium cabins. There are very few staff that are entitled, however, many staff do travel due to favours being called in!

Continues...

Groundhog Day? I am certain I have seen this post before.

All people reading this know it is Unite/BASSA who will cause this industrial action; the very same Union which refused the request by BA management to assist passengers recently stranded overseas during the Volcanic Ash crisis.

To pretend the Union has any interest whatsoever in passengers being inconvenienced is, frankly, nuts.

Please remember, these passengers are also the Cabin Crew's passengers, and the people who pay their wages and pension contributions.

There will be a vote on Friday of Union members the day after the General Election (funny that, given that Unite is the Labour Party's largest donor, and Gordon's best buddy Charlie Whelan works for them).

However, appetite for a strike is likely to be diminished after striking crew have lost out on pay during the first strike, and also during the ash situation.

BA is ensuring ALL staff (not just the diminishing band of BASSA affiliated crew) get the opportunity to have their voice heard.

I would suggest third week in May or second week in June as the likely strike periods; either way any strike action is likely to have even less effect than was the case last time round as additional volunteer crew have been trained in the interim, including 747 crews, and catering provision should be significantly improved.

Please do keep giving us your perspective geo, it is interesting to hear your point of view even if not everyone agrees with it.

Continues...

Full details of the BA offer to the Staff is available at www.uniteba.com even to the public!

Continues...

Geohoveuk

"Additionally, there is the constant threat of suspension/sacking through an ambience of Nazi-style communication between all on-board crew members… afraid to speak-up for fear of consequence".

If your statement were true, it would mean BA management issuing orders to round up cabin crew and take them away for execution in the gas chambers and work others in the concentration camps. It would mean BA cabin crew having all rights taken away and there freedom removed. I t would also mean that all relatives and anyone associated with them suffering a similar fate.

I for one find your comparison extremley offensive and would appreciate you maintaining your creative jornalistic skills in a more appropriate manner.

Martyn Sinclair

Continues...

Freedom of speech is an entitlement in Britain, but where it offends, it can still be an offence. Try telling a racial jole at work and as we saw a couple of weeks ago, a man commited suicide!

References to "Nazi styles" have far wider implications than freedom of speech!

I accept that no offence was intended trust you accept my comments in the manner they were intended.

Continues...

i agree Geo, this is a public forum but that does not mean i am able to use terms that are socially unacceptable. I would not refer to a black person as a "nigger" or describe a homosexual as "poof". In the same vain, it is just as unacceptable to use the term "Nazi" in a context where quite clerly it is inappropriate. Please educate yourself on the meaning of the word NAZI and understand the meaning to the far wider number of people, other then the 6 million that were murdered. To term BA management as using "Nazi style" is way out of context.

If you ever go to Israel go and visit Yad Vashem - then you may understand.

Martyn Sinclair

Continues...

Geohoveuk,

I am sorry but Martyn's scrutiny is not harsh at all. Please be very careful how and when you make comparisons to the 'Nazis' or 'Nazi styles'. As the grandchild of a survivor, my family was directly affected by what the 'Nazis' did during the second WW.

Like Martyn, I am sure that you meant no offence, i am simply suggesting that in this case your comparison is totally inappropriate and therefore in my opinion that is why Martyn's scrutiny was not harsh at all.

Safe travels everyone,

Jonathan

Continues...

I would strongly recommend a trip to Yad Vashem www.yadvashem.org , and indeed closer to home the Imperial War Museum has an excellent exhibition:

http://london.iwm.org.uk/server/show/nav.00b005

Well worth learning more, and then deciding for yourself whether such comments are appropriate.

Continues...

VK,

thank you very much for your last post, I should have thought of it myself.

I have been to Yad Vashem many times and recently saw the exhibition at the Imperial War Museum. It is indeed excellent.

Best to all,

Jonathan

Continues...

I suppose it's noy just the strikers who may lose travel perks; here is an excellent Alex cartoon which as ever cuts to the heart of the matter:

http://i.telegraph.co.uk/telegraph/multimedia/archive/01636/Alex14_05_10_1636631a.gif

Continues...

Not sure where this leaves those who took strike action now; if the action was illegal, they could lose a lot more than staff travel....which would be a shame for all concerned.

Continues...

Geo, you clearly have no idea what you are talking about.

I left BA just over a decade ago and was one of the 'miscellaneous' . I am pretty certain and happy that my job was worthwhile and needed, as was many of my colleagues in similar 'miscellaneous' roles.

Also, do you have any idea how much cost has progressively been taken out of the company since privatisation? Obviously not. The employee structure and cost base today is unrecognisable from the 70s and 80s. If it is still bloated now there are no words to describe how fat it must have been before privatisation.

Dear oh dear

Continues...

Geo, are you suggesting that BA should change its business model to be more like easyjet?

Continues...

Walsh's priorities are certainly not aligned with yours, geo.

Were you to be CEO of BA, what would your priorities be?

Do tell.

Continues...

Hello VK,

a very good question which I think we have asked Geo several times. Perhaps this time he will share his thinking with us.

Continues...

Still not answering the question Geo, that is the trouble with Champagne Socialists, no business sense

Continues...

Geo,

let me make this as simple as possible. You are clearly very unhappy with the way that WW and his team are running the airline, we all get that loud and clear.

Can you please then tell us, if you were the CEO of BA what would you do? It is manifestly unfair of you to continually attack BA's management and there handling of the situation while refusing to tell us what you would do differently to make things better.

Please answer the question as there re many of us who are genuinely interested in what your solution would be.

I would go as far as to suggest that if you are not prepared to offer your solution to the problem then you should stop posting your attacks on WW and his team!

Continues...

Geo, the 'miscellaneous' department I worked in had 240 staff when BA was privatised. It had 110 when I left a decade ago. It has 25 now.

I'm afraid the facts just dont support your views. There is a large school of thought, which can be backed up objectively, that its the Cabin Crew who have not had to take as much pain as the rest of the airline until now. This may come as a big surprise to you and you may find it impossible to accept. But please dont bleat that BA management are victinmising Cabin Crew and that its only Cabin Crew who are having to change. Its simply not true.

Continues...

Goe has hit the nail on the head.." Waterworld" is full of people walking around with bits of paper in their hands pretending to run an airline.Sure, there are many people needed on the ground to run any business, but as in my job ( not flying ) we have been reduced from 4 to 2 on the "front line" and in the" background" increased from 4 to 6..One of the answers is to cull the "office managers" of which they breed like rabbits and are given titles that come straight from a Carry On film. Any business manager worth his weight knows that you DO NOT sacrifice the front line representatives of the airline in favour of cost cutting..Yes all the crew know that they have to make sacrifices,of which they have done, but where oh where are these cost cutiing examples coming from the " background ".. In my job I have found to my misfortune that they once again haven't listened to us and have let the backroom jobs multiply causing ill feeling and more work for the likes of myself...In my old job one of my managers told me..." Walk around looking important with a piece of paper in your hand, and nobody will bother you , but do a good job and stand out, and you will be the first to go "..This is true of Cabin Crew....Keep up the good work CC

Continues...

Complete rubbish, metanmart.

In 2008, BA cut its Management by 600 people, that's 35%.

Further cuts have happened since then. I would estimate there are about 1000 managers in BA right now. Not that many when you consider both the numbers previously and also the size of the organisation.

Source linked below, factual and referenced information, not just plucked from the ether:

www.msnbc.msn.com/id/10263115/

The cabin crew reductions proposed by BA would bring staffing levels into line with those at BA Gatwick.

Staffing levels with which Unite itself has agreed.

Continues...

Metmanmart, I just gave you an example of a 'back-office' being dramatically reduced over the timeframes mentioned by Geo.

Admittedly I left a decade ago and am not so familiar with the current situation and your own examples do sound bad. Perhaps its a case of some departments are better managed than others.

But please can we stop all this nonsense about Cabin Crew being vistimised whilst the rest of the airline are pampered. Its absurd.

Continues...

*gets on high horse*

As absurd as leaving out the apostrophe when you mean it is = it's and mistakenly use its which is the possessive form.

*gets off high horse*

Continues...

Be careful with you own grammar and spelking from know on VK!

Continues...

I am always happy to be corrected on my "spelking", billy. I make as many errors as the next person, I'm sure.

The its/it's thing is so often misused, and so easy to get right, it has become something of a bugbear.

We all make typos, or misspell words, but it takes just a moment to learn the its/it's thing and then it's correct for ever!

*jumps back on steed and heads to pub* *

* with apologies to NTarrant, the pub would not be my first choice, but there are no proper wine bars in the vicinity, and I shall be adjourning for a proper repast later.

Continues...

Yes VK you are right,jobs have been cut ,even though the article was up to 2008, Unfortunatelly, we are in 2010 and in my capacity I am still falling over managers on all levels. Maybe we all should read the article that was published on March 24th in the Times, from Mohammad Kashani-Akhavan.....Now HE KNOWS what he is talking about and is someone who is respected and SHOULD be listened to..

Continues...

The referenced 2008 article was to illustrate that the number has historically fallen significantly to counter the argument that it had not.

Even if the number was still 1000 (which it seemed to be in 2008, and has likely fallen since then) that is not a large number.

BA still needs managers, whatever you may think of them.

Continues...

I understand there may well be a judgement today for the Staff Travel court case.

Continues...

We've just received this statement from BA:

"We are pleased with today’s Court of Appeal judgment, confirming that the modest changes we made to onboard crew numbers on flights from Heathrow 12 months ago were reasonable, did not breach crew contracts and can remain in place.

"The changes have made a substantial contribution toward easing the company’s financial position, and our crew have accepted these working arrangements without difficulty."

Continues...