bhaexpress
New member
Busiest yes I know, I've been there many times. However, as I said, the busiest INTERNATIONAL airport is still Heathrow.
Got something to say or just want fewer pesky ads? Join us... 😊
British Airways management - TWATS
- Thread starter Icy Gull
- Start date
Busiest yes I know, I've been there many times. However, as I said, the busiest INTERNATIONAL airport is still Heathrow.
adrian29uk
New member
- Sep 10, 2003
- 3,389
Nice to see the Boss is prepared to do this. I need to work for 3 years to get the same salary he does in a month, w*(ke*
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,722
Letting people take extra holiday unpaid is fine, better than losing your job, but working for nothing ? Sorry, not really.
Only if..
1) The missing pay would be returned to me if the economic situation improves
2) The missing pay was included in any redundancy.
Morally as far as I'm concerned a temporary break in pay is a temporary break in contract, I should be allowed to look for other work during that period, even if it was working for a competitor.
Another major problem I have with this is that is that could create a division in the managers eyes of who is willing to work for nothing, those who would rather take the holiday or neither.
Only if..
1) The missing pay would be returned to me if the economic situation improves
2) The missing pay was included in any redundancy.
Morally as far as I'm concerned a temporary break in pay is a temporary break in contract, I should be allowed to look for other work during that period, even if it was working for a competitor.
Another major problem I have with this is that is that could create a division in the managers eyes of who is willing to work for nothing, those who would rather take the holiday or neither.
bhaexpress
New member
It would make more sense if BA were not going to pay any dividends but that is hardly going to happen is it ?
The Spanish
Well-known member
This could create a culture of paranoia too unless its made clear that those who do take some form of pay suspension or work unpaid, are not favoured over those that simply cannot, if it comes to future redundancies.
This is an odd and sinister form of pressure on employees that just accepting and claiming they are uncooperative and selfish for not simply accepting, is harsh in the extreme. This is a giant organisation with massive capital assets. Simply saying well my company did it they should take it, is not that smart.
This is an odd and sinister form of pressure on employees that just accepting and claiming they are uncooperative and selfish for not simply accepting, is harsh in the extreme. This is a giant organisation with massive capital assets. Simply saying well my company did it they should take it, is not that smart.
clapham_gull
Legacy Fan
- Aug 20, 2003
- 25,722
Exactly.
It depends what you measure, I wrote "in terms of passenger numbers" because that's what Wiki says but as BHAExpress tells me it's all made up anyway as it's written by BA themselves.
Did anyone see the prog on BBc2 last night at 10:00 about the 2 engineering companies struggeling through the last 6 months?
Many employees were being paid for a 3 day week but coming in for 5 days to work. Interesting stuff which showed the resolve and commitment many people have for their employer.
Pinkie Brown
Wir Sind das Volk
British Airways haven't paid a dividend for years.
Who thinks they're getting a deal by flying with so called 'low cost airlines'? Think again.
Value Calculator - Ryanair | Easyjet | British Airways
Not forgetting the fact, in many cases you get dumped (literally sometimes) in some remote airfield miles away from the City the low cost airline claim to serve. There's a couple of European destinations that aren't even in the same country! Yes, those low cost airlines will provide transport from that remote airport to the City at an inflated cost. Of course, the airlines are also taking a nice rake off the bus company too. The 'low cost' airlines are winners all the way whilst the customer who thought he was getting a bargain is fleeced as he/she goes along.
As for Willie Walsh working for free during July - Being on a basic annual salary of £674.000 (without other goodies and perks) means he's hardly going to be lining up at the soup kitchen during that month. Cheap stunt by a CEO who's screwed up with bad choices in the past and has clearly lost the plot. The myth that BA staff are well or overpaid is just that - A myth. Added to the fact, they are laden with some of the most brutish bullyboy management in UK Industry, it's little wonder the staff have revolted at times in the past.
Despite his many faults, Walsh still has more scruples than Branson who's done nothing but cherry pick other people's idea's throughout his business life. People who bitch about BA's customer service should experience Virgins shoddy and amateur customer service when things go wrong.
I worked as an engineer for B-Cal before the takeover and then for BA until 2001. What many have said is correct but please allow me to put my version.
When BA took over from BCal at Gatwick frankly they were complete arseholes. Not being a union man as it were we felt let down by not just Heathrow management but also union officials who BA had in their pockets (nice 1st class tickets for you and your wife touch).
Over the years things did settle but always BA top level management had their heads in the clouds. They loved to promote themselves and the airlines ideas to the troops, never missing a glossy training day to hit this home. Very much people who had never done a proper job they were from university backgrounds and very much swallowed the latest dreamt theology on making your business great. Having attended many of this shows down the years, the only true benefit was you were able to meet people from other areas. One thing kept cropping up, low moral. BA never attempted to do anything about this. Their attitude was, if you don't like it then f**k off. Pay, unlike what people believe certainly is not the highest especially engineering, where you have highly qualified personnel (Virgin paid higher, most of their engineers are ex-BA).
They have tried this work for free or take extended leave before back in 2001 when I took it for 6 months, loved it so much I didn't go back! Before this I ended up as lower management at Gatwick in engineering which is equivalent to middle management in over sections due to the level of qualifications etc. I hated the job because you took crap from above and shit from below. Really soul destroying.
Back to what some have said about BA and cherry picking. Virgin are the worst by a long way for this. BA have always had a duty to the regions and this was only compensated by their preferential treatment at Heathrow. Virgin and Branson have bleated about unfairness for years but they have only ever wanted the best bits and throw toys when they don't get them. BA have always played on the Britishness of the Airline and when at some distant place people see the aircraft and feel safe and at home. No other British airline achieves this. I don't say I totally agree with this but it a perception you get from surveys etc.
The downturn has hit BA but if it was just a case of struggling for a couple of years I believe they would be fine but it is not. The biggest issue for BA is its pensions. They are 3 billion in debt to them. This will affect all past (such as me) and current employees. For years the company has been taking payment holidays believing that the growth predictions would be sufficient to keep the funds going. This is now near collaspe. For years the deficit has exceeded the asset value of the company and the city analysts have worried. Its not the recession that has done this but BA themselves for not investing properly for the last 15 years.
As for their employees I feel very sorry for them.
When BA took over from BCal at Gatwick frankly they were complete arseholes. Not being a union man as it were we felt let down by not just Heathrow management but also union officials who BA had in their pockets (nice 1st class tickets for you and your wife touch).
Over the years things did settle but always BA top level management had their heads in the clouds. They loved to promote themselves and the airlines ideas to the troops, never missing a glossy training day to hit this home. Very much people who had never done a proper job they were from university backgrounds and very much swallowed the latest dreamt theology on making your business great. Having attended many of this shows down the years, the only true benefit was you were able to meet people from other areas. One thing kept cropping up, low moral. BA never attempted to do anything about this. Their attitude was, if you don't like it then f**k off. Pay, unlike what people believe certainly is not the highest especially engineering, where you have highly qualified personnel (Virgin paid higher, most of their engineers are ex-BA).
They have tried this work for free or take extended leave before back in 2001 when I took it for 6 months, loved it so much I didn't go back! Before this I ended up as lower management at Gatwick in engineering which is equivalent to middle management in over sections due to the level of qualifications etc. I hated the job because you took crap from above and shit from below. Really soul destroying.
Back to what some have said about BA and cherry picking. Virgin are the worst by a long way for this. BA have always had a duty to the regions and this was only compensated by their preferential treatment at Heathrow. Virgin and Branson have bleated about unfairness for years but they have only ever wanted the best bits and throw toys when they don't get them. BA have always played on the Britishness of the Airline and when at some distant place people see the aircraft and feel safe and at home. No other British airline achieves this. I don't say I totally agree with this but it a perception you get from surveys etc.
The downturn has hit BA but if it was just a case of struggling for a couple of years I believe they would be fine but it is not. The biggest issue for BA is its pensions. They are 3 billion in debt to them. This will affect all past (such as me) and current employees. For years the company has been taking payment holidays believing that the growth predictions would be sufficient to keep the funds going. This is now near collaspe. For years the deficit has exceeded the asset value of the company and the city analysts have worried. Its not the recession that has done this but BA themselves for not investing properly for the last 15 years.
As for their employees I feel very sorry for them.
Lush
Mods' Pet
My take on all this is that if you take a bit of time and trouble to make your employees feel valued (and it doesn't necessarily mean paying the highest wages) then you're more likely to find they support you when the going get tough.
If you treat your employees like shit - or as if they're some kind of enemy, then you can expect no favours back. Thanks to the credit crunch, perhaps companies will start to realise this ...
If you treat your employees like shit - or as if they're some kind of enemy, then you can expect no favours back. Thanks to the credit crunch, perhaps companies will start to realise this ...
Icy Gull
Back on the rollercoaster
- Jul 5, 2003
- 72,015
- Thread starter
- #52
Not sure if this will work, but here's a link to Branson's take on BA's woes
http://www.ttglive.com/c/portal/lay...eTitle=Branson urges gov't not to bail out BA
http://www.ttglive.com/c/portal/lay...eTitle=Branson urges gov't not to bail out BA
An excellent post, thanks for taking the trouble to type it.
- Jul 7, 2003
- 47,499
I've previously worked for both BA and Virgin: each has their good points and what's usually described by flannel-spouting analysts as "developmental areas".
I was with BA back in 2001 when we were all asked to take a salary cut for a period of time- it was either six or three months, can't remember which. It was pretty crappy at the time but the alternative, post 9/11, was given as compulsory redundancies. Airlines always struggle when economic times are hard, because the business travellers who subsidise the rest of the passengers start to cut back.
Virgin are and have always been in a very different position to BA because they're still a privately owned company, and one that trades on its slightly maverick, off the wall image. BA have to stick with their "trusty old favourite", quasi-establishment status because they are still seen as the national airline whether privatised or otherwise- witness the fiasco when they changed all their livery back in the late 1990s. Anything they do leaves them open to stick from the likes of Richard Branson, who never misses an opportunity to capitalise on their perceived failings.
And regarding the staff salaries- well at the lowest employee level, travel industry salaries tend to be appalling anyway, so the fact that BA may pay their crew or ground workers slightly more than others is for my money neither here nor there. I know that when I worked for them (or for Virgin, in fact), I could never have got a mortgage on the salary I earned, which was a contributory factor in getting out of the industry. The perceived perks of the industry is what draws people in, so all airlines, tour operators and travel agents can get away with paying their staff ridiculously low wages.
Which reminds me, I really must get my pension out of BA's hands, given the post above
I was with BA back in 2001 when we were all asked to take a salary cut for a period of time- it was either six or three months, can't remember which. It was pretty crappy at the time but the alternative, post 9/11, was given as compulsory redundancies. Airlines always struggle when economic times are hard, because the business travellers who subsidise the rest of the passengers start to cut back.
Virgin are and have always been in a very different position to BA because they're still a privately owned company, and one that trades on its slightly maverick, off the wall image. BA have to stick with their "trusty old favourite", quasi-establishment status because they are still seen as the national airline whether privatised or otherwise- witness the fiasco when they changed all their livery back in the late 1990s. Anything they do leaves them open to stick from the likes of Richard Branson, who never misses an opportunity to capitalise on their perceived failings.
And regarding the staff salaries- well at the lowest employee level, travel industry salaries tend to be appalling anyway, so the fact that BA may pay their crew or ground workers slightly more than others is for my money neither here nor there. I know that when I worked for them (or for Virgin, in fact), I could never have got a mortgage on the salary I earned, which was a contributory factor in getting out of the industry. The perceived perks of the industry is what draws people in, so all airlines, tour operators and travel agents can get away with paying their staff ridiculously low wages.
Which reminds me, I really must get my pension out of BA's hands, given the post above
[/quote]
Which reminds me, I really must get my pension out of BA's hands, given the post above[/QUOTE]
I agree, Ive been monitoring it for years but as I'm now self-employed it has always been better to leave as be because of the phantom money put in by BA. Moving the pension will alter the figures. Now however with the plan being in so much shit its most probably worth taking it and moving it into a personal investment plan
Which reminds me, I really must get my pension out of BA's hands, given the post above
[/QUOTE]I agree, Ive been monitoring it for years but as I'm now self-employed it has always been better to leave as be because of the phantom money put in by BA. Moving the pension will alter the figures. Now however with the plan being in so much shit its most probably worth taking it and moving it into a personal investment plan