Raffles

On the other hand, for office staff with chunky commuting costs, they could be better off at home on 80%. People who can now cut childcare costs because they are at home and doing no work can be substantially better off. Swings and roundabouts.

zanderblue

I’d suggest your friend should check out what is on the official UK Gov website. It clearly states that payments will be based on 80% of average profits reported on last 3 years, not 3 months.

1010101

After the last recession the employees took pay cuts and gave up benefits to help the airline through a difficult period, on the understanding it would be made up for when things got better. When things did get better, the employees were treated like dirt as profits were raked in and given straight to management and shareholders instead. I'm totally against unions in most circumstances but they have every right to fight for all they can get here.

mmxbreaks

In month one, yes.
But as it's "under monthly review" for almost every company that I know, I largely suspect this will drop to the 80% (to 2,500pm cap per employee maximum, i.e. 36k/pa = employee full salary) when there's actually no/limited money left in the bank.
We'll see how it plays out.

navylad

Very sad day, thoughts go out to all of those affected and praying for a quick recovery.

Bohinjska Bistrica

Agree, but it is a starting point. If this goes on for aong period of time then inevitably reductions will need to be made to the 80%

The government scheme isn't indefinite either - I think it's for an initial three months.

1Aturnleft

Correct. And this was also the case when Unite negotiated regarding Easyjets recent furlough. In their case it has agreed to 80% salary plus 80% of average monthly allowances of cabin crew calculated from the previous 12 months allowances received. I'm not certain the cap of £2500 per month is on the salary component alone or a combined total but I'm sure it'll be things like this that Unite will be looking to secure on behalf of its BA members. And not withstanding the pilot strikes of last year, I can completely understand why it's best to have everything water tight from an employee perspective. I wouldn't trust the airline as far as I could throw it in terms of its employer obligations unless EVERYTHING is mandated with minimal wiggle room.

A P Yu

I wouldn’t trust Unite either. Agreements made tend to favour their union reps the most. They’re probably arguing about how payments for union responsibilities will be maintained, having agreed the terms for the bulk of employees days ago.

jonas123

Probably an expected move, but IAG have today withdrawn their proposed dividend:

https://otp.tools.investis.com/clien...newsid=1384003

T8191

You beat me to it! I was surprised, amidst the chat, that nobody had mentioned that aspect.

My sympathies go out to all BA Staff, of whatever persuasion, in this very difficult time.

And indeed to all here on BAFT who will have been impacted or inconvenienced in one way or another. Stay safe!

jonas123

It's stressful and uncertain, but I think the government scheme is actually quite good, particularly for the lower earning cabin crew. They retain 80% of their salary (and presumably allowances) and retain their jobs. (my job is also on the line, so I'm glad there is this safety net if it comes to that)

I do think BA should perhaps have a floor though on this, something like if your salary is below the £2500/month max, they will top up the remaining 20% so that the poorest aren't hit hardest.

rockflyertalk

Businesses can top up the rest to give the employee 100% of their pay if they so wish. However this is BA!

It’s tough out there right now. Let’s hope there is a brighter for all affected by this.

Oaxaca

The government guidance to employers is very clear that bonuses are not included (my bold):

Any employer including bonuses in this will risk not being reimbursed by HMG for that element. For BA staff, the situation with all the allowances for those who fly particularly, makes this a bit more complex, i.e. it's not clear whether these would be reimbursed as "regular wage" (the guidance to date makes no reference to "average pay"), although they are not bonuses in the usually understood sense. I wouldn't blame the union for pushing on this point, if this is the point at issue. The way the scheme works, the employee needs the commitment from the employer, who then has to get the money from the govt.

V10

The right decision. Continuing with dividend payments given ongoing economic uncertainty would be deeply irresponsible.

ahmetdouas

The issue for lower incomes is the debts they are in, as they will not be forgiven just delayed. I think you can get away with not paying rent for 3 months though, as they did say that you cannot be evicted for non payment of rent due to COVID 19 for 3 months.


It's a shame travel, hospitality and food are the worst affected by this by far, and travel should take a while to become normal. They really need to think of cost vs. benefit for locking down the whole country, this cannot go on forever.