[VintageKrug]

“airmiles” are different from BA Miles so it’s best to use the correct nomenclature i.e. BA Miles or redemption seats.

[VintageKrug]

While it may on the face of it seem sensible to ensure aircraft are as fully loaded as possible, they should not be so at any price.

Better to fly 40 people on a 747 paying a fully flex £3,000 tickets (£120,000)than 300 on redemption paying just £200 covering taxes and fees (£60,000). Bums on seats does not always represent profitability, and indeed you will often find fire sales on airlines about to fail for this very reason.

During the depths of the recent recession, BA did use this “fire sale” tactic to fill its planes with the probably never to be repeated 50% off BA Miles offer (which at least covered costs and kept planes running when no-one was actually purchasing tickets) and latterly with the 2for1 companion offers (e.g. £1000 rtn to Cairo in Club World for two). But it’s not a sustainable tactic, it just reduced slightly losses which would otherwise have been even larger.

Protecting and maximising margin is really what revenue management is all about; after all if Binman62 cannot redeem his BA Miles he is highly likely to fork out some cash to fly where he needs to go (be it with BA or another carrier); and he knows that he is probably getting a better deal by buying in the Sale than waiting any longer – hence the typically poor redemption opportunities during Sale periods. This encourages people (and especially those planning ahead for premium leisure trips) to purchase a ticket.

Keeping a single Club World seat free by blocking it from mileage redemption could permit a last minute fully flex, paid walk up customer to get on board a BA flight over the competition, and so it is not surprising that there are a few otherwise available seats held back for last minute walk ups; but also as these are effectively “perishable”, it makes sense to also offer limited redemption availability up to a few days prior to flying if it looks like the flight will have more than a few empty seats, which BA also does.

It’s really just a case of “learning” the trends on a route and getting in early, with reasonable expectations about the need to compromise on dates, cabin flown, destinations (e.g. nearby alternatives) and the possible use of other oneworld carriers/connecting itineraries.

Personally I also keep a stash of miles in various other schemes so I can redeem on Star Alliance or Virgin and that also helps with my success rates.

Sometimes there will be situations where BA Miles simply cannot be used; it shouldn’t come as a surprise to anyone that this is the case.

[MartynSinclair]

“Keeping a single Club World seat free by blocking it from mileage redemption could permit a last minute fully flex, paid walk up customer to get on board a BA flight over the competition”

…except that the club world seat in question, 60B, in NEVER released for sale…………………….otherwise I would be in total agreement with your comment. It is reserved for a Captain’s FREEBIE!

[VintageKrug]

I don’t see why you have such an issue with this.

Most airlines keep some premium seats free for crew rest; it is, after all primarily for safety reasons. US based airlines are notorious for this.

It is most certainly not a “FREEBIE” just as having a PC, company car or mobile phone might be an essential tool of your trade, so are adequate rest facilities for pilots (and to a lesser extent, crew).

It is annoying, I know, but it only happens on some routes, and newer aircraft (e.g. the 777-300ERs) have dedicated flight crew rest areas in the crawl spaces other non-public areas of the plane, so revenue impacts will be minimised in future.

It is sensible for the captain to be available in close proximity to the flight deck, it is also sensible that they should be able to rest properly on a flat bed in order to be able to perform at their peak, even at the end of a long flight, as we saw was required during the BA38 landing at LHR.

As far as I am aware these are mandated by the CAA and not something the (moderate and pragmatic) pilots’ Union BALPA has cooked up.

[Tim2soza]

I have had loads of VA UC mileage tickets by purchasing Prem Econ for miles some way in advance, and where no UC availability is on offer. I then have checked availability from 3 days before the flight to (sometimes) at the check-in desk with laptop open. I have never failed to get a UC upgrade when I tried for one, although sometimes it is very last minute. Basically the yield management software releases UC as and when the software determines that the seat is unlikely to be sold. The VA Flying Club team are also a great help on the phones. I suspect BA operates in a similar way.

[MartynSinclair]

The issue I have with using premium seats for crew seats is that it is not necerssary. Longhaul aircraft are designed with dedicated crew rest areas and were passed as suitable for such by the aviation authorities, not just our CAA but also the FAA. I fail to see why crew need additional rest areas in passenger cabins.

Before anyone asks, have I seen / tried the bunks in the 747-400 and I can assure you all, they are more than adequate for crew rest and in very close proximity to the flight deck, i.e. INSIDE!

I fail to see how anyone (BA shareholders) can accept an additional premium seat being given to the Captain for crew rest and instead being used for a family/friend/crew upgrade over a revenue opportunity.

If the longhaul Captains are that concerned and indeed this is a contractural part of their terms of employment, they should consider giving up this right so that the company can make revenue on that seat or let a a loyal passenger use it via Air Miles or miles redemption.

I doubt very much (but always stand to be corrected) that the CAA mandate for crew to have passengers seats available for rest. That would imply that the aircraft has not been designed for longhaul sectors!!!

[Binman62]

MartynSinclair…spot on……

VK the description of BALPA as being moderate and pragmatic was the funniest thing I have read this year. Please, this is the same union that have held BA to ransom in years past and who’s moderation has been gained at some considerable costs to the airline and was a specific strategic goal in order to help ensure that the cabin crew unions could be neutralised. I also think Michael O’Leary would challenge your view.

BA flight crew have these seats for all the reasons you suggested but, and this is the clincher for me; as soon as family, friends or staff require them, the crew miraculously no longer need them. The idea that they will give them up is as likely as me winning the lottery. Afterall this is the same group of professionals who have in the past delayed me because there were no pillows in the bunk area, and on one memorabloe occassion delayed a flight to Hong Kong overnight after a delay of just 30 minutes when the captain announced he was fatigued.

BALPA also have an agreement with BA that also prevents positioning crew (ie those not working but positioning to another point) from sitting anywhere other than First and Club. This despite the fact that on arrival they will have the same level of rest as if they had operated the flight. This could be as much as two local nights. Take Singapore where they for example arrive Monday 6pm and depart Wednesday around 11pm. I think most of us could recover from 12 hours in WT+ if all we had to do upon arrival was sleep or sit by the hotel pool. And this is in addition to the crew rest seat.

In theory ,and given that my safety is in their hands there could be an argument for such generosity, however I have personally witnessed BA flight crew demand and get, commercial Club World passengers downgraded in order that they be accommodated with the result that passengers in economy were offloaded. This still goes on though now behind the scenes far less publically than the situation I encountered.

Much of what you say and write is really valuable but when it comes to BALPA I am afraid they are simply another TU and are neither moderate nor pragmatic, unless of course you count selfishness as pragmatism.

[Deleted User]

The crew seat issue is an agreement between the pilots (Unions) and British Airways and is not a mandate by the CAA. Virgin crews on the HKG/LAX/SFO routes (all 10 hour +) do not have the use of the passenger cabin and as we all know are regulated by the same Civil Aviation Authoirty.

If BA removed these unwarranted perks then there indeed would be slightly more chances for loyal customers to gain seats on chosen flights.

[CallMeIshmael]

You are correct Binman62, BALPA is another TU which is neither moderate or pragmatic. As such, IMHO BALPA has been far more effective in its collective bargaining with BA in preserving their industry leading T&C.

Pilots flying mixed fleet routes have and will continue to have identical T&C as the current main fleet longhaul/shorthaul thanks to BALPA. BASSA tried to negotiate similar for cabin crew but failed.

When BA’s “Open Skies” fleet was being established BA were threatened with strike action by BALPA seeking to ensure BA’s “Open Skies” pilots were part of BA’s single pilot community with identical T&C. The IA was not seen through, not because BALPA was moderate, but rather pragmatic due to legal uncertainties.

http://www.balpa.org/News-and-campaigns/Press/BA-PILOTS-DETERMINED-TO-STOP-OUTSOURCING-OF-THEIR-.aspx

Note the BALPA’s secretary comment

‘Then the company will use this poorer paid, pilot force as a trojan horse to beat down the pay and conditions of its current pilot employees,’ said Jim McAuslan, General Secretary of the pilots’ union BALPA (British Airline Pilots’ Association).

http://www.balpa.org/News-and-campaigns/Press/BA-PILOTS-VOTE-FOR-STRIKE-ACTION.aspx

http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/317006-balpa-ba-talks-breakdown.html

And a more recent example of BALPA’s “moderate” stance. Demanding holiday pay based on what they actually earn rather than on just their basic pay without allowances.

http://www.balpa.org/News-and-campaigns/News/PILOTS-FACE-BA-IN-SUPREME-COURT.aspx

It is bemusing how a certain poster has successfully whipped up a huge amount of anti-BASSA vitriol on what is meant to be a BT forum yet not a murmur about BALPA.

You nailed it Binman with the comment wrt BALPA“who’s moderation has been gained at some considerable costs to the airline and was a specific strategic goal in order to help ensure that the cabin crew unions could be neutralised”.

My apologies for being off thread but the unnecessary emotional BALPA assertion deserved an evidential response for balance.

[Deleted User]

VintageKrug, considering all your previous posts on other threads about the importance of investor/shareholder return, I am somewhat suprised by your lack of concern over whether passenger seats should be used for crew rest seats. Surely you would prefer BA to maximise revenue by being able to sell all seats without the need to give perks to pilots and staff in the form of unecerssary additional free seats, when there are perfectly adequate and comfortable crew rest areas designed into the aircraft or am I missing your point??

[JohnPhelanAustralia]

I’m just imagining the frothing mouths and hysterical screaming that will come from BASSA when they see that VK is saying positive things about a union!!

It will at least make it more difficult for them to argue that VK’s attitude is “anti-union”………

[VintageKrug]

I am pleased to actually see an evidence based response from some posters, which is in stark contrast to their position on other threads.

I based my assertion on my understanding that BALPA always agreed to negotiate, had agreed to both cost reductions and other pragmatic working practices over a number of years, and this is in total contrast to the cabin crew Union, BASSA/Unite. BALPA has successfully defended its working practices, negotiated some very good deals, and will no doubt be called upon for further savings in the future. BA pilots have a tremendous and consistent record of both excellent flying (BA38, Eric Moody’s Volcano incident), top notch safety standards and flexibility, and are in my opinion as a passenger some of the best in the air.

It is always heartening to hear a posh Nigel on the speakers welcoming one back to Blightly after a few days in some Third World hellhole.

I am the first to set out here that that is my opinion, and I am not as well versed on the BALPA position, so I am pleased to see the (referenced) facts presented here; it’s good to be able to learn something new.

I still believe BALPA is both moderate and pragmatic. BALPA is also an effective union who know when it is appropriate to concede and when to fight; that is where BASSA’s leadership has missed a trick, and is now woefully failing its membership.

BALPA does hold a better bargaining position than cabin crew; but there are similar structural cost pressures on pilots, and these will have to be addressed in due course. I think BALPA will defend current T&Cs but they are not sustainable for ever, and especially for those joining new to the airline. BALPA has a proven track record of negotiation and settlement I expect BALPA will eventually agree to a maintenance of existing T&Cs for current pilots, while a newer fleet on lower base salaries will be introduced in a measured and “replacement” level. This will become especially relevant when the joint BA/Iberia procurement process for new fleet is concluded later this year, and particularly when new aircraft types are introduced. This is the only sustainable way to guarantee current T&Cs for existing members.

As I have stated on here many times previously, I am a supporter of pragmatic and business minded union representation. BA’s management needs it, and so do those who work in cyclical lower paid industries such as aviation. I am not against Unions per se, simply that the BASSA leadership is now both “dysfunctional” and very probably infiltrated by the Socialist Workers’ Party, which has a completely different agenda to that needed to satisfy cabin crews’ requirements for successful industrial relations.

On the specific point of flight crew rest, my understanding (which it seems was erroneous?) is that dedicated private crew rest is *not* provided in close proximity to the cockpit on most 747s/some 777s. Being far away situated above economy at the rear of the aircraft on the 747, and only close to the cockpit on some 777s; unless crew rest is near the cockpit it would be impractical for a resting captain to assist rapidly on the flight deck in an emergency situation. This is why the Club seats are used for this purpose on 747 and some 777 flights.

I don’t think it’s a great use of a potentially revenue seat, but if it is blocked anyway, and there is a reasonable safety reason behind this, and flight crew are able to use it in absolute priority for rest when required, then I don’t see a problem for any BA employee/F&F traveller who would otherwise be on a jumpseat or similar to maximise their utility by using the seat when not in use for the crew rest purpose.

This will be a non-issue in future new fleet aircraft as there is a separate flight crew/pilot rest above the First Class galley on the new 777-300ERs, so BA is addressing this issue pro-actively as part of its fleet replacement programme.

And before the brickbats start I am not connected in any way to BALPA, BALPA’s love child, or anyone who once had a “coffee” with a pilot in a Shannon on a long layover in 1958. My opinions are entirely my own, and not related to any particular alignment. As has always been the case.

[MartynSinclair]

Come come VK, a man of your knowledge pretending not to know that the pilots crew rest area in the 747-400 is not positioned near the flight deck – something doesent read right here. I dont think any “normal” aviation regualtory/licensing authority would allow a pilots rest area to be at the rear of the aircraft.

For avoidance of doubt and purely from a factual point of view, check any design plans for the 747-400 pilot crew rest areas are positioned generally behind the captains seat on the flight deck and contain more than adequate sleeping facilties for a resting pilot.

No one has yet come up with a reason why a captain needs 2 beds, one in the flight deck and one outside the flight deck. Further, why on earth, he is allowed to “give these away” as a job perk.

[CallMeIshmael]

Maybe this will provide justification for an (upright) seat away from the controls, in addition to a bed …. 😉

http://www.startribune.com/nation/112932474.html

BALPA are ahead of the game in covering off any risk to their pay T&C following the Iberia link up

http://www.balpa.org/News-and-campaigns/News/PILOTS-WELCOME-BA-IBERIA-MERGER.aspx

[DisgustedofSwieqi]

Martyn Sinclair

VK is confusing crew and technical crew and thus their rest provisions, don’t be so hard on him, as this often is not clear to those outside the industry.

You may also wish to look at this issue from another perspective, putting safety to one side.

Captains are senior managers in BA and their package reflects this. This seat is included in the BALPA arrangement.

Would you suggest that the leadership team drives around in Ford Mondeos to save money?

Why don’t BA crew stay in Travelodges?

BA is a world class company and its people should be treated accordingly.

My sister in law tells me that many senior local government officers in the UK earn 6 figure salaries, which shows how difficult it is to recruit and retain good personnel – just think how BA must have to carefully manage such senior and talented employees, whom VK says are some of the best in in the world.

I look forward to watching you raise this at the IAG AGM, hell I might just buy some shares and come to Madrid to see what the CEO says to you.

[Author]

Posts