cauchy

I obviously don't have the data, but it could be that they are worried about even a relatively small drop in very-high-yield travel? Could the loss of even a couple of last-minute full-fare CW clients per flight turn the flight from profitable to unprofitable? I imagine things like tickets booked to go on a work jolly / attend a conference are often booked months ahead at a much lower margin.

lpoolrob

I think most of us can agree that business travel will remain at lower levels for years to come. Lower, but not non-existent. Some functions HAVE to be face to face. However, to those who say online conferencing is not as effective, could it that (this will be controversial I know), that you are just not very good at it - because it is out of your current skillset? Does this make you afraid that if you no longer travel, you will be of less value to your employer as you can't get deals done?

Bear96

This is how the US majors do it (at least UA with which I am personally familiar; I am pretty sure DL and AA are similar). All F/As are qualified to operate all aircraft types and while they can bid their preferences based on seniority, if it comes down to it they can be assigned any route to any destination.

Of course structurally they are different with multiple crew bases / hubs flying domestically and internationally instead of one huge one doing everything, but it definitely gives them operational flexibility especially in irregular operations.

Young82

I agree on this. The conferences and 'Jollys' are booked 6 months out on a sale fare when we know they are cheap. To New York on a new project is booked the Thursday before.

Waterhorse

Except the training costs far outweigh the cost of additional hotac, there are no pilot number savings as the crewing ratios are linked to hulls operated.

13901

They do, especially in the current situation with a fleet shrinking and another growing. There's an incredible amount of logistic overhead involved in assigning routes to crews, running at least 4 parallel rostering schemes (LGW, LHR MF, LHR WW, LHR EF) each with different rules of what constitutes an acceptable trip and what isn't, what is the right length and what isn't and so on. Also, on the day, it makes for complicated management of standbies - you might have plenty of WW standbies but no MF, or the other way round, and you can't mix-and-match.

Having everyone on the same roster, flying the same routes in the same way is going to be a saving (they currently have 3 sets of people doing rosters, people doing admin, people doing management... see where I'm going?). Having everyone on the same regulations - so that a JNB flight is a 3-day-trip for everyone and not a 3-day-trip for MF or a 5-day-trip for WW - is going to be a massive saving. The (possibly apocryphal) story that was circulating at the time of the end of the Qantas JV and the move of the BA15/16 trip to 77W and Mixed Fleet was that the reduction in the trip length alone was enough to bring the route to break even: I've never seen the data and I can't vouch for its correctness, but I've heard it enough times and from different people to believe it.

It goes without saying that this is, yet again, a levelling down of the work conditions in the industry. But we passengers want cheap tickets; City wants big dividends; managers want fat bonuses. Something is got to give and unfortunately it's the employees. Unless we collectively change our attitudes... but I don't see it likely.

Bear96

OK I just read the article.

Despite the headline, "Why cheap air travel is NOT going away, despite what you may read," the author then goes on to explain why the cheap air travel of the past few years IS indeed going to go away. It just won't be as expensive (relatively speaking) as it was in the 1970s and 1980s.

Ancient Observer

I feel for the impacted staff. I have been made redundant 3 times from major corporates. I have been lucky enough to find better futures - but each one took hard work. Some times very hard work, with many disappointments on the way. I will not put in print what I think of many "recruitment" and "talent" so-called experts.

However, nowadays there is a lot more self-help stuff on the internet. From understanding the psychological impacts of redundancy, and the stages of recovery, through to cv preparation, Self awareness, Interview training, Networking, Self-presentation, and so on.

Good luck to each and every person.

BAeuro

Unfortunately I think it comes down to the greatest good for the greatest number. If BA didn’t act now and make some redundant, then there probably wouldn’t be a BA in 3/4 years. Arguably, it’s better to save the airline and the rest of the jobs by losing 12,000 (of which half could be voluntary redundancies). In this industry, being overly nice doesn’t get you anywhere, if airlines decide not to lay anyone off, trying to be caring, they will fail.

BA has taken action ahead of many others to ensure it’s safe for the future, Virgin and the others needs to do the same. They need to cut any costs they can and I’m sorry to say employees are always a good place to start.

Im not saying Willie and Alex aren’t acting for themselves too, of course they want BA to be as cost effective and profitable as possible, their jobs depend on it. But they aren’t cutting jobs out of malice, they just want BA to survive and be financially stable after this.

navylad

I agree, although so hope that the situation improved more promptly that feared allowing for job losses to be minimised.

The BALPA response comes across as a bit head in sand, although that may be positional rather than genuine shock at the position.

Bohinjska Bistrica

It is inevitable that job losses will occur in many industries, sadly. The furlough scheme does help to sustain them in the interim but it's becoming depressingly clearer that there is not going to be an immediate bounce back and the furlough scheme won't go on forever. In that respect it is in some way a method of managing job losses and spreading them out a bit rather than everyone being made redundant at once.

That said, if furlough is extended will BA push back the planned consultation period at all?

​​​​

sxc

I will be curious what the Union response to the abolition of “fleets” will be. They are likely to see it as a cynical opportunistic chance to finally break the unions.

ScruttonStreet

I'm sure it is but what, alas, are they going to do about it?

Confus

In the short term, yes totally.
In the longer term, having everyone on the same contracts will lead to the same issues down the line, once things have settled down, bedded in, and the new ‘single’ union starts getting stronger. MF round two, anyone?

cauchy

Their best hope is to lobby the government, who could threaten regulatory hostility if it felt BA had gone too far. Most notably it could tweak the "use it or lose it" slots rule to force BA to run unprofitable services. I'm not saying the government will go this far, actually I would be shocked if they did, but it won't stop the unions trying.