-
Posts
-
why shud new starts get less pay , worse conditions than others doing the same job ? like pete says shud they just roll over and get thier bellies tickled ?
Some interesting (and perhaps predictable) points – but consider the following figures which appeared in today’s Daily Telegraph and were sourced from the Civil Aviation Authority;
Airline
Total flight crew cost/flight—- Average incomeBA …………… £15,051 ……………………………. £29,900
easy Jet…….. £3,016 ……………………………….£20,200
BMI………….. £1,645 ………………………………..£18,400
Monarch…….. £1,313 ……………………………….£17,500
Thomas Cook..£1,718………………………………. £17,400
Virgin Atlantic..£4,378………………………………. £14,400
Thompson…….£2,174 ………………………………. £14,100
From the above ‘average’ salaries (across all aircrew) you can readily see that the ‘blue’ coloured ones pay below the average ….. the ‘green’ coloured ones pay around the industry average …….and BA pays way over the top of any of its competitor airlines.
What is particularly significant is the total cost of all flight crew PER FLIGHT.
BA pays nearly FIVE times as much, in crew costs per flight, than its next highest salary paying airline (easy Jet) and an amazing TEN times more that the average salary paying airlines.
In essence, BA has to pay some £65 + per passenger per flight in crew costs alone compared with an industry average of some £10.55 per passenger per flight.
These numbers alone tell you why it is essential for BA to reduce its crew costs as well as the actual number of crew per flight if it has any hope at all of remaining not only competitive – but in business at all.
But BA “introduced” it’s pay structure and now are saying we f*cked up so what we want is some job losses. Of course they have to reduce costs but it’s a mess they got themselves into and its some of their employees who have to “suffer”
Pete, to the extent that somebody else didn’t introduce BA’s pay structure for them, then I guess you’re right.
However, again to put this issue into context, it has to be remembered that BA was originally a “state sponsored” airline and was run along traditional civil service lines for decades. Their current situation has come about by all the “old practices” (and that includes all the enhanced pension schemes and ‘traditionally’ high salary and benefit structures) being incorporated into the current public company, way back when it was originally privatised.
They managed for years to survive and make a profit, facing competition only from ‘foreign’ airlines, until the market was ‘de-regulated’ and the current batch of “low cost” airlines sprang up.
These airlines work on a much tighter business model with lower levels of staffing and substantially lower costs. Result is they charge lower fares and therefore are taking business away from BA.
Well now it seems that, in spite of voting for a “strike”, the simpleton BA aircrews didn’t realise that this meant 12 days of industrial action and over Christmas as well.
Guess who has just become the world’s most HATED airline???
Meanwhile on tonight’s news – apparently a cheap airline based in Edinburgh has just been put into Administration. Thousands of passengers stranded and thousands more, who have paid for seats, will lose their money.
Also, 700 staff have all been made redundant as at today. This is prety bad news for the airline industry and even worse news for striknig BA aircrews – one less potential employer when they and their beloved union, drive their current employer under.
thats just typical of ppl , posts not being delivered so hate them , flights cancelled so hate them , a little inconvenience compared to peoples livelyhoods “but hey ” im alright jack “
ive sed in previous topics involving strikes would ppl be saying the same if it was thier industries and colleagues that were involved
competition has knocked BA off its flagship perch, the economic climate ? more are flying than ever. why shud the workers suffer.@tictax wrote:
…………competition has knocked BA off its flagship perch, the economic climate ? more are flying than ever. why shud the workers suffer.
I guess that this is the nub of it eh? BA’s competitors are delivering a service to THEIR customers substantially cheaper that BA can currently deliver to its customers. Thus BA (and their staff) have to adapt to the way the market currently is – and not to the way it used to be many years ago.
If they refuse to do so, then eventually, as their customer base is eroded, the airline will contract (and a lot of the staff will lose their jobs) and ultimately close (and then ALL the staff will lose their jobs). The Italian airline Alitalia is an excellent current example of this.
This dispute appears to be all about the union ‘Unite’ ( and thus the staff of BA) refusing to accept any modification in their terms so as to allow their employer to compete in a highly competitive marketplace.
Get involved in this discussion! Log in or register now to have your say!