BA: Stress addict

I blame the Banks.

Everyone make sure they send a holiday greeting to the bankers and the governments that work for them. They certainly have earned those bonuses.

Mr Peston wrote:
'it has to find the funds to fill a huge hole in its two pension funds - which it earlier this week disclosed as £3.7bn - bigger than the market value of the business'

I'm just a self employed Joe, but if I were in that position, I'd consider myself on the verge of bankruptcy.

Temporary relief, but Unite has lost the opportunity to ruin many people's Xmas so the impact of any strike will not hurt the public as much unless they wait until Easter.

Len McCluskey, assistant general secretary of the Unite union, said: "It goes without saying that we have taken this decision to disrupt passengers and customers over the Christmas period with a heavy heart."

No one believes this rubbish, they could as easily have delayed the strike until January.

It is sad when any union has to go to a strike anyway but both sides seem just set on a collision course. The trouble as I see it is that trust has gone on both sides, which for a airline does appear to be the one thing you need to keep planes up in the air.
The worst case for both sides is that BA fails and they all lose jobs. And I don't really want to see that happen.

Who would they trust to chair talks? That would be a start.

Can BA now sue UNITE for a loss of earning and damage to their reputation in view of an illegally run strike ballot?

BA is in a deep hole.

1. It has staff that it pays far more than its competitors.

2. It is a tiny company with a huge number of pensioners.

The pay question is not just BA management's fault it is also due to the need to pay staff a living wage to live near enough to their hub airports. UK property prices are so out of line with BA's competitors hub locations that it is almost inevitable that BA will fail. This in turn is due to the abysmal economic and regulatory management of the Bank of England that has managed Sterling to be so out of line with other currencies that houses in the UK cost far more than those overseas. (Again Mervyn King's fault!)

If BA's staff could afford to live on lower wages (and incidentally be better off by so doing) and not have to pay absurd prices for their homes then BA could (have paid)/pay lower wages. The problem is that the whole economy is enthral to the banks and they have destroyed nearly all other businesses, including BA, in the UK.

BA needs to move its hubs to a low house price zone and employ staff locally - if bankers can do it, so can BA!

The pensions problem is insoluble (and will probably put an end to the Iberia tie up?) And it is far bigger than 3.7 Bn! BA's only logical solution, as I see it, is to go bankrupt and start again, abandoning its present pensioners in the old company. Can they get away with this? Can they afford not to???? Roll on British (Antilles) Airlines! The obit should read done to death by Mervyn King and his colleagues.

The magnitude of the pension deficit is only relevant to the merger with Iberian. It is the desire to merge and reduce competition, which has probably caused BA management to try to force such a bad deal down the throats of its workers.If BA were to continue trading as an independent company, it would only need to pay the deficit off over a period of decades. In the meantime the share market might recover and alter the situation completely.

The arrangement, widely used in the UK, whereby a pension fund is guaranteed by a single company, is not satisfactory. Especially when the company can effectively raid the fund by awarding itself a contribution holiday. Pension funds should have a wider basis, at least the whole of an industry, so that staff can have better pebsion security and change jobs without losing pension rights.

Thank you Robert - this is an important story.

"And at a time when it is incurring huge losses, it has to find the funds to fill a huge hole in its two pension funds - which it earlier this week disclosed as £3.7bn - bigger than the market value of the business."

Doesn't that technically make it bust? I'm no accountant but if the value of your business is less than one of your debts and your making huge losses - where can you go from there?

The ruling is a joke - although it does make it clear that the state will use "it's law" to suppress the rights of the workers - just as Marx said it would.

Now hopefully all those moaners who were foolish enough to book with BA (despite it being in the news since January for being 'at risk') can stop their moaning.

However if there is a later strike, I wonder how many fools will have booked in between - and then still get airtime on the BBC to moan about the strike and how unfair it is.

After hearing about people spitting at BA staff today I couldn't care less about who's holiday is being ruined. It's so self centred to care more about a holiday more than the rights of your fellow worker. Still when you moral guidance comes from MP's who were happy to fiddle the taxpayer and bankers who paid themselve huge bonuses as a reward for their ability to extract wealth from the working population - should I really be surprised?

You can't blame the banks when the general public behave as they do.

This is an old cliche but cliches are cliches because they're true. BA is the civil service with wings and can't shake itself free of the old national carrier mentality that meant that you kept on flying regardless of economics. This has bred an old fashioned management and staff who think that they're entitled to a job (which is also why onboard service levels are rubbish compared to many other airlines). The management has been too weak for years to deal with too many different unions (BALPA being the strongest) who don't talk to each other and often seem to deliberately disrupt each other. They have tried mergers and partnerships so often it's a joke - remember Delta, American and now Iberia. They all failed in the past because of the arrogance of BA management and old fashioned working practices that were too inflexible to give any financial benefits. Add in old planes and a huge pension defecit and you have a dead man walking. And the simple truth is that we don't need BA. I stopped flying BA after flying to San Francisco with only a tired old sandwich and a bottle of water because of the catering strike. I can still fly to wherever I want when I want but with airlines that actually seem to want my business and with cabin crew who are genuinely nice and cheerful.

Time Willie went ?

A 92.5% vote on an 80% turnout and a court says you cannot strike.

A really sad day for democracy. It really does not matter what the public think here if people cannot strike with such a mandate on some technicality the law is an ass.

I guess as we see with Copenhagen the world is about the wealthy doing what they like when they can and paying off who they need to.

What the union need are flying pickets but as they would be in the plane they may as well serve drinks.

Err. Pension fund re size of business, any similarity with the public sector pension problem and the size of UK Plc strike you, or is strike the wrong word.

The employees of BA who voted for this strike have a death wish.

Compared to the competition, they are overpaid and inefficient.

If the company goes bust, which is a distinct probability, they will deserve their statutory redundancy pay.

You have to consider (when you're brow-beating the union) why it ever got to this point.

As I understand it there is a serious management failure to address the problem of wages and conditions - until the recession started and then it's all too contentious.

I'm sure if the BA staff had been faced with these cuts in the boom they would have been confident of moving on to another airline and the market forces would dictate if BA were offering a good deal or not.

...but to wait until jobs are thin on the ground - and especially in the airline business demonstrates where the cuts should really come - the same people who should have been managing this problem - and in fact who get paid about £2m a year to do so.

It's all very good working a whole year for nothing when you have been vastly overpaid for the last 5 or so.

Pay me £2m this year and I will work the next 2 for free.

Once again we're back to how the top jobs are 'valued' - whether it's banking, airline or even the BBC.

What do these people do for such huge wages? it seems to me incompetence is rife at this level and it has been demonstrated quite consistently through the recession and I hope the public are starting to ask themselves the same question(s)

When British Airways was privatised nothing was done to address the old `Spanish Practices' which had grown up within the nationalised airline. Stories about the incompetence and waste at BA are legion and I know many people who will go the other way around the world so as not to have to fly BA.

The fact that employees of a service company chose to call a strike at the very time that the company would be at peak activity just shows how divorced many at BA are from the harsh realities of everyday life in modern New Labour Britain. They actually think that they can stuff the customers, damage the business irreparably and still keep their jobs!

On the other hand if BA closes its pension fund many of their older and more reliable staff will walk as the prospect of a decent pension is the only thing that is keeping them there.

In many ways BA exemplifies everything that is currently wrong with modern New Labour Britain: a management which is out of its depth many having been parachuted in, a workforce which is over-rewarded and under-employed, a massive level of investment based on a hoplessly optimistic and precarious income, poor productivity, a huge hole in the pension fund and an overhyped self-image as a great player.

Another entity for Gordon to save?

"And at a time when it is incurring huge losses, it has to find the funds to fill a huge hole in its two pension funds - which it earlier this week disclosed as £3.7bn - bigger than the market value of the business."

Which causes several problems. Not least that BA might be trading whilst insolvent so at the very least they need to cut down on staffing, which may be the only way to save costs. Which the staff have now walked into by their threatened strike action.

On top of this, it would finish off the Pensions Protection Fund after a mere four years.

TWSI complains that the law is an ass. No, the union is an ass. If you're going to call a 12 day srike over the peak holiday period and disrupt the holiday plans of thousands of hard working people who have saved up for a special holiday, the least you can do is get your procedures right. But don't worry the damage to the business is done. Talk to the travel industry about the number of people booking away from the airline now they now that this kind of disruption is on the cards. But when the cabin staff get made redundant it won't be the union putting their hands up and saying sorry. They'll all just play the blame game as per usual.

If I were a member of Unite, I would move to vote pass a vote of confidence in the union leaders who are obviously useless and replace them. The I'd vote for another strike ballot and screw BA until Willie's willy squeaks. How BA management could possibly think this legal farce would do anything but further aggravate the already flaky situation offers more than adequate explanation of their appalling industrial relations operation.

12. At 4:57pm on 17 Dec 2009, TWSI

This is how the system works - divide and conquer.

All the little minded people who have already been forced to accept pay cuts this year due to the financial crisis don't back those in a position to resist them - they have a "I had to - so why shouldn't they" attitude.

Some people simply assume the position - the rest of us ask why we should.

You're either a fighter - or a looser - The BA staff are clearly fighters.

For those saying 'doesn't the pension deficit mean BA is bankrupt - well no, not unless the pensions were all due at once. I don't know the profile of the BA pension scheme membership but it's likely that the pension liabilities will only have to be paid over many years - possibly many decades in the future the case of current (young) members.

So BA have many years to plus the hole in its pension schemes - it if can, of course. The problem comes if BA has to cease trading and can no longer stand behind the pension scheme. I suspect its deficit would cripple the pension protection fund, which is supposed to stand behind failed defined benefit pension schemes, but is itself funded by existing pension schemes - so double whammy. The more schemes that fail, the greater the call on the fund, but also fewer schemes paying in.

With such direction and leadership, thank goodness the BA senior management are not pilots.

14. At 5:06pm on 17 Dec 2009, mibren wrote:

Read John_from_Hendon's @7 post about wages and living costs before you come to your tabloid conclusion that BA staff are overpaid.

You try living near a London Airport on £20k a year, and even better on the proposed £14k a year basic wage.

I will bet you that £20k you will be begging on the streets of Hammersmith within 6 months.

https://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23753409-ba-staff-consider-strike-action-over-job-losses.do

...are you volunteering to take their place?

Most of the 'other operators' which BA staff salaries are compared to run out of much 'cheaper' regional airports - Gatwick, Stanstead, Luton etc.

It's amazing how BA managed to find millions to build terminal 5 and yet don't have enough to pay their staff wages now - now who's fault do you think that was?

15. At 5:10pm on 17 Dec 2009, writingsonthewall wrote:
'Pay me £2m this year and I will work the next 2 for free'

Well I'll do ten.

I have no comment on the strike situation, it is between the union and BA, but I would like to say that on a recent (October 13th BA0285) trip to San Francisco with our two grand-daughters, we had superb care from the cabin staff when one of them became ill on the flight. They were really attentive and took great trouble to help, moving her up into Business Class so she could lay down, and vacated another seat so that my wife could be with her.

A paramedic team met us at the airport and she was taken off before the rest of the passengers.

We were very grateful for their care and help, so please remember these sort of situations when you are knocking the BA Crew members on this Forum.

Haven't flown BA for a while, but when we did long haul every year to San Diego the planes were generally tired and the staff disinterested.

Bit like British Rail as was, but to be fair the current rail set up is appalling (I didn't think anybody could make it worse).

EasyJet to Bordeaux, pleasant and cheap apart from ludicrous UK security at Luton.

Someone in in the UK needs to grasp that a slogan like "the world's favourite airline" or "We're getting there" doesn't actually make up for a crap service.

TWSI 4:57

Maybe but how many ballots were returned by staff who had taken redundancy? I don't know but just asking.

Also I have heard several current staff, while interviewed, saying that they may not have voted for strike if they had known it was going to be 12 days and over Christmas - they didn't know this.

Not such a bad day for democracy possibly.

I think this sums it all up:

92.5% vote to strike on an 80% turnout to protect workers having to pay for a crisis not of their making = Illegal

Invading another country because you no longer like the guy you put in charge = Legal

24. At 5:38pm on 17 Dec 2009, Dempster wrote:

"Well I'll do ten."

Typical free market - always making you work for less.

Ok - I'll cut a deal - I'll do 5 and you do 5 for a million each.

I'm sure we can run the airline into the ground just as well as the current encumbant.

Something no-one has mentioned yet: the pension fund deficit is due at least in part to Gordon Brown's raid on the pension funds in, I believe, his first budget. How much extra tax has BA's pension fund paid in the last 12 years, plus the lost growth over that period?

So, a successful flagship UK business is seemingly financially crippled by its pension fund so much that it could go under - how does that help the pension fund exactly? And, to top it all, a union calls a strike at one of the busiest times of year to wound the business as badly as possible and ruin many peoples Christmas. Why do people run businesses - this would drive me mad? Pension holes need capping before everyone goes bust and unions should not be able to destroy an otherwise successful business. Merry Christmas everyone.

27. At 5:48pm on 17 Dec 2009, MrRanter

...so does that mean on your polling form next June you will have a list of options where you can pick and choose the manifesto pledges of the party to make up your vote?

....or is it a one tick covers all?

At least the Union intended to action the ballot pledge (unlike politics where manifesto pledges are forgotten once power is gained).

If that's your benchmark for Democracy then who knows what sort of day it's been - because none of us ever actually get a say in it.

The UNITE union are a bit late to the party. Democracy was crushed a long time ago. I don´t know why they thought that the Justice system would do anything other than support the system.

The only relevant question is the why the union stood around and watched the rise of the kleptocracy and did absolutely nothing to alert or protect its members. Why did its members fail to demand that the union actually represent their interests?

#18 uvedalerevel There are worse things than having your holiday disrupted. Like losing your job, your home, your entire means of self support and being subjected to the rapacious demands of an out of control criminal kleptocracy that passes for a government.

Have no fear for your turn will also come. Perhaps when it does you can ask yourself why you chose to sneer at people who, no matter how ill prepared, were at least prepared to try and defend themselves.

Is it not funny how the judicial system could swing into action so quickly to crush organised labour and yet is unable to take any action at all against financial institutions operating out of London who laundered in excess of $300 billion of drug money.

What is more harmful to people drug abuse or foregoing a holiday? The law does not care whether you live or die, so it certainly does not care about your holiday.

From an outsiders view the real problem seems be that "wee willie" keeps on trying to pick a fight. He did it with flight crews,and lost;he did it passengers re baggage,and lost;now it's the turn of cabin staff.Even with the injunction this will not go away. Some form of dialouge,not just macho posturing by the Company could resolve this,conversely they could change the management with people having a more discussional point of view.

A High Court Judge decides on the BA case with Employment Laws that should be binned along with all the other anti-employee legislation. BA and the High Court Judge deem the strike unlawful, but where is the law to make an employer negoiate a settlement?

Under technicalities of the law it determined the strike ballot was unlawful, BA clung onto this because they had a 92% strike vote against them, they are trying to impose changes to employees employment conditions and have no intention from where i am seating to negotiate at the moment.

On the bulletin boards used by Airline crew, I have seen almost no posts in favour of strike action in this way and most of the posts were from BA staff many from flight crew and cabin crew. .

The union at BA is a millitant hangover from when the airline was nationalised.

BA cabin Crew are better paid than any other airline in the UK. To advocate a strike of this nature at this time (12 days over christmas) makes me wonder what the union is trying to achieve. For a strike to be effective it really needs public support, and the support of the members. There is clearly neither

I suspect that the court ruling may well be somewhat of a relief for UNITE. They had backed themselves into a corner and this is clearly a way out.

Lets hope they listen to the majority of the rank and file of the cabin crew.

Walsh has a difficult task. BASSA has to be dealt with. I would go so far as to say that BA may not have a future unless the cabin crew of BA are prevented from holding the airline to ransom.

Now may be the rime, there are plenty of people who would jump at the chance of a cabin crew job at BA (was that an airline who went bust only today?)

BA be careful of your actions. Wake up - you are throwing the baby out with the bathwater - your frontline staff ARE your company.

You don't get good quality service on the cheap - I prefer BA to any other airline and will not use the airlines that want to charge for this that and anything else - the staff on the cheap airlines are rude, unhelpful and angry (and that is almost certainly down to their poor conditions and status).

If I was on a flight and there were problems, I know I would want the BA staff to do what they can and not someone on minimum/low wage who doesn't give a toss because their employer doesn't see them as valuable.
BA front-facing staff, you are wonderful!
If the management aren't trusted by the staff, then just how much are they worth as leaders?

The strike itself is a disgrace. I consider that ANY strike by public transport workers should be illegal. I get told that you could never make such a law work in practice, but they have worked the trick in Australia, so why not here?

But, looking at the history of the bullying tactics employed by BA in their relations with their staff, I am not surprised that this strike was called.

If it HAD gone ahead, I suspect that administrators would have been called in and the judge may well have been asked privately by both sides to find a way to stop the strike as Unite realised it had gone too far.

The only thing worse than being someone who works for BA is to be one of their passengers. I have never forgotten flying home from Boston in 1997 and being put in a seat that backed up against a toilet. This seat was impossible to recline and when the person in front reclined their seat, my misery was complete.

From things that have been said to me, I have no reason to believe that they treat their passengers any better than cattle now.

Unless BA improves its passenger experience, the airline WILL go bust. Then forget about making up that pension deficit. Virgin will then rule the skies and BA will at long last get their comeuppance for the disgraceful things they did in poaching Virgin passengers some while back.

I agree with Dempster @ 3, this company is B.U.S.T!

7, John for Hendon, Excellent point!

'The pay question is not just BA management's fault it is also due to the need to pay staff a living wage to live near enough to their hub airports. UK property prices are so out of line with BA's competitors hub locations that it is almost inevitable that BA will fail. '

Not just BA staff. We should all be striking. Every single one of us.

Last year our country and our future was stolen from us, and we had to pay the crooks that took it 850 billion plus for the pleasure. And their punishment? Well they might not get so much in bonuses for one year year although they're aggressivily looking for ways around that.

If that isn't a reason for people to get off their backsides and stand up and be counted then I don't know what is.

But I guess folk would rather bicker about the possibility of people missing a holiday than actually face what has been done to us.

An alternative view could be that BA is a badly performing Pensions Company who just happen to have an Airline - just like Government is a very badly perfoming pensions company who, as a sideline, supply or fail to do so Services for the Electorate.

What is there to like about BA?

I've flown with them in the past. They put lumps of metal under seats so you can't stretch your legs out - in economy class that makes the difference between a flight being tolerable and being unbearable.

I recently flew with them in their Economy Plus class. Not through choice - it was either that or miss a funeral of a dearly beloved aunt. Even paying the fat end of two grand per seat the quality was a disgrace. Once again lumps of metal so I couldn't stretch out. A height-adjustable headrest that didn't have any comfortable settings. A table folding out from the armrest that wouldn't fold over my legs. And I paid 1800 quid for the rather dubious privilege.

I've usually found their cabin staff to be good, their booking staff to be a disgrace and the overall experience suboptimal.

So let the union dinosaurs bankrupt the company. I won't be flying with them again - even when the choice was BA or missing the funeral I considered sending flowers instead. Perhaps then those who still fly BA will find another carrier and see what they were missing.

30. At 5:55pm on 17 Dec 2009, AnotherEngineer wrote:
'Something no-one has mentioned yet: the pension fund deficit is due at least in part to Gordon Brown's raid on the pension funds in, I believe, his first budget. How much extra tax has BA's pension fund paid in the last 12 years, plus the lost growth over that period?'

Good post; ten out of ten.

I personally feel a bit sorry for the BA staff, times are tough at the moment, and it looks like their pension is fund is pretty nigh on stuffed as well.

I still think we need a state bank, although it would worry me if it were run by government as opposed to the civil service. May be an off-shoot of the BOE could run it. That wily old goat Mervyn King, he'd find a way to sort it out I bet.

If there is to be any symmetry in this business story we will have the Italian privately owned Candy company buying BA.

It was Candy that stepped in to purchase Hoover when their promotion of free flights resulted in the flights costing more than the vacuums.

Perhaps Candy should similarly step in now that the pensions are costing more than BA flight revenues?

I guess a lot of people must have had some union experience from the 70's and 80's. I haven't, so please excuse me if I'm being naive.

For the union to have called for a strike at this point either:
a) they want power, and sense a weakness at this time in BA, sod the repercussions.
Or b) they are desperate and time is running out. Perhaps they hoped the timing would force BA to wake up and act quickly. They think the repercussions are no worse than they would face anyway.


My gut feeling, like the postal strike is that ordinary working people voted for this, so they must be desperate. Sure militant unions could have whipped it up, but why, oh why has it been allowed to get to this state?

The first thing you learn in business is what is important for the success of your business, and you focus on those issues. Without doubt, the staff at BA are (should be) the business, not the planes or infrastructure. The staff deal with the paying customer, and you have to have them on your side.

BA management have clearly failed to build a co-operative relationship with their staff, as have the Post Office. Compare this with Honda in Swindon, where to make the business work, the entire workforce was temporarily laid off. The trust between the managers and the shop floor meant this happened, and they are all stronger for it.

A bit like the banks, our top managers take great credit and reward for when things go well, but strangely have no responsibility when things go bad.

Someone should ask why BA is losing so much money and what happened to the last airline that Willie Walsh was in charge of? He turned Aer Lingus into an unsuccessful imitation of Ryanair and he is trying to do the same with BA. There are extra charges for everything including really high charges for sports bags (way higher than easyJet or Ryanair) that only become apparent once the ticket is booked or at the airport. In future passengers will be charged for reserving seats in advance. If customers are treated like budget airline passengers they will fly more cheaply on real budget airlines instead. If he treats employees like his customers no wonder they are fed up.

37. richard

what no one is saying which is really what they mean is no matter what the public will bitch and moan no matter, its the management they have the gripe with and what gives their cause the greatest persuasion is when it is most effective, namely Christmas. I dont blame them, all that has been proved from recent society is the "up yours im ok " society , lets see after Christmas the number of folk who are facing the chop after having their Chrimbo flights look for support when it happens to them

So the mp's and bankers et al can get what they want, but the little people better be thankfull for what crumbs we throw for them

It's about time the Unions realised they are the ones doing the disservice to the BA customers - wake up and smell the coffee and get out of your ivory tower - you are as bad as the politicians. In fact I hope BA take action against the Unions for damages due to all the people who have cancelled their flights and holidays or moved them to other airlines. The Unions could have called for a strike in January or another less disruptive time - the move has back fired and the leaders should resign as they don't act in the interest of their members - only themselves.

47. At 8:16pm on 17 Dec 2009, Crookwood
'They called a strike becuase the members were sick of the way they were being treated'


Forget business for the moment, think people. The average working Joe or Jane just want to go to work, make a living, pay their bills, raise a family and survive. Give them that and they’re usually happy. Take that away from them, and they’re usually not.

Unions rely on subscriptions, lose that and the union folds. Oddly enough a lot of unions seem to be reasonable.

Forget business for the moment, think people. The average working Joe or Jane just want to go to work, make a living, pay their bills, raise a family and survive. Give them that and they’re usually happy. Take that away from them, and they’re usually not.

There are many who remember the miner’s strike in the early 1980’s. Scargill was vilified, and unjustly so. Miners produced coal, it was transported to power stations, burnt and provided electricity. No need to rely on Russian Gas back then. Still he was broken by the political elite.

Is it better to have a miner sat in front of the TV on Monday morning wondering what to do, or have him doing what he does best, namely; producing power for the nation?

We didn’t have the internet then, but if this question had been posed to the average working Joe I reckon I know what the answer would have been.

I travel 2 or 4 times a week and am a confirmed BA supporter for the fab T5 and on time departures and arrivals. Their punctuality record and their value for money is second to none alongside most of their European competition which I wouldn't trust for a minute..... Air France - arrogant and unsafe, Lufthansa - the party boys and girls, KLM - not enough passengers and the flight goes technical....

42, Warwick totally agree.

Unfortunately, the general masses are too dependant on the state ;-)

52. At 9:09pm on 17 Dec 2009, Dempster

Well said.

You look after them and they look after you. When you as a boss don't keep your side of the bargain, then don't be surprised when the employees do likewise!

I think too many people are starting to question why, while they are on short-time, or signing on, there are others in this society having a bit of a party - people are not happy out here.

#53, BA value for money? Are you having a laugh?

I find a £350 seat on US Airways economy class more comfortable than an £1800 seat on BA economy plus. So I can make five trips with one airline for the price of one trip on another and find the whole experience more pleasurable.

The only advantage BA has is that they don't charge me for alcohol during the flight. But since I have to drive at the other end that doesn't make a whole lot of difference and even when I'm not driving I can buy a huge amount of beer for the difference in price.

"Most of us however would have had something of a nervous breakdown, confronted with quite the challenges its management is currently grappling."

Robert, the BA crisis is another example of what's most lacking in management and that's the proper training to run anything successfully, whether it's a bank or an airline or a democracy. What exactly does business management teach? Management in aviation appears to belong to a Neanderthal period, whereas the business of successfully flying a passenger aircraft depends on the most advanced understanding of technology, human psychology and teamwork.

When Captain Sullenberger landed his stricken aircraft on the Hudson River in January this year, he used his previous 42 years experience of flying to do so, especially the many nervous breakdown inducing moments that he'd had to face on the way.

For the last 60 years aeronautical engineers, pilots and crew have worked to increase safety margins. Air travel by now should have been a thriving business. Instead, as we wait for management to get beyond their human limitations, safety margins are being eroded, the passenger experience is more and more basic, and no-one in their right minds wants to work in aviation at all!

The 21st century should have been a time when the world could have benefited from the progress made in science and technology, but we see a mass destruction of all that promise and potential. Computer science has been invaded by mediocre IT systems, medical knowledge is lost in hospitals that are dirty and a danger to your health, transport systems can't work cheaply because they're fragmented, and we're still at a feudal stage as far as money is concerned. As for democracy, it's a distillation of all bad business practice with a blind struggle for power as its grandest aim. Yet science and technology got humans to the Moon and back! Forty years ago!!

When are managers like Willie Walsh going to do their bit to move on for the benefit of their industry and get beyond that annoying spurt, or lack of spurt, of some hormone that makes them confrontational, aggressive and slow to understand a situation fully or learn from past mistakes? The low cost model won't deliver, it will kill in more ways than one.

I was raaather looking forward to a traditional christmas ...snow,[whiteout ] strikes[blackout ] labour[Brownout] and Queenspeach [read out] whilsthisparty[layaaaabout]


Merry christmaaas to all....except the QE'rs they can go hang their gordy baubles in shaaame neath the flashing fairy lights before they plug them in!!!!

After reading these blogs for a while and then reading the comments for a while longer, one thing strikes me. Everyone brings in their own political view be it Tory, NLab, Communist, marxist et al and twists the story to meet their own views. WHY will very few people take the story and form an opinion based on the facts, rather than pre-conceived views and opinion?

The facts on this story as I see it. BA cabin crew may indeed not have been well treated (and the comments about cost of living around hub airports is very relevant) BUT BA is in major danger of going under. Playing the blame game helps no-one, it either changes or goes. Management, Union and employees must ALL accept this and move forward to all's benefit or they will all be unemployed and many unemployable in the eyes of many other employers.

Get rid of poor workers, poor management and poor government. This is supposed to be the task of the free market and democracy, but there are so many vested interests in this country.

You need a revolution like they did in the US to sort things out, but now they are going down the same route as us.

Unite's timing is unfortunate. I rather suspect that many were voting for a holiday rather than the issue of contract reform.

And! Average working Joe and Jane? No such thing. We all have different wants, needs and aspirations. There are employees unquestionably loyal to their employers and employers unquestionably loyal to their employees. Both sets are probably right more than wrong.

#57 At 10:14pm on 17 Dec 2009, starry-tigger wrote:

Starry-tigger I agree, but surely the same principles apply to the Union management?

55. At 9:40pm on 17 Dec 2009, copperDolomite

Thank you CD

59. At 10:20pm on 17 Dec 2009, muppetcentral1 wrote:
Playing the blame game helps no-one, it either changes or goes.

So if you don't find the source of the problem, the process of person that failed, then you do not know who or what to blame, and therefore will be left with absolutely no idea what if anything to change!

Cliches are alwasy a problem! This one really means, 'management will refuse to acknowledge all problems and leave all staff to swim in treacle.'
Every company I've ever known to try that 'no blame game' went bust trying to put out the same old fires over and over and over again (insanity definition?), with high staff turnover due to stress and frustration.

Thank you , at last a reasoned reflection on the sad situation. Nobody wants this strike , but the managers have got to work hard to close the gap- think it is their job....to manage. The issue was raised by them a long time ago and they let it ride until this difficult time. Reading between the lines it is worrying that the management have gone AWOL again. It is clear the board want to break the union, but remaining in your ideology at all costs reflects your disdain for the ordinary people - It appears to be a new division between the minority "haves" - "we have the right to do as we want - democracy" and the majority "have nots" - you have the right to no rights anywhere - autocracy. I hope it can be resolved as it is well known that the workforce wants to work out a resolution to save the company money. A sad reflection today that individual ideology rather than group involvement dominates. Individualism, ultimately, has never been the way the human race has moved forward - only the (unfashionable) collective spirit has led us to be the "success" we are today.
But as for telephone calls between the transport secretary and Brown and ? regarding this matter....we can only guess at the pressure applied to avoid a perceived public replay of "winter of discontent - 1m disgruntled great British Public stuck at home" before an election and ,therefore, the consequent question "hanging over" the impartiality of the injunction. Maybe, but not sure Labour's sub from the union will be up to snuff for the next election.
A little long, but I am saddened by the thought of a new extreme order in the "establishment approved" approach of those who are lucky enough to do very well towards those who just have enough to get by. Ultimately those who work for BA have done nothing wrong and we should remember that

62. At 10:31pm on 17 Dec 2009, muppetcentral1

The average Joes's and Jane's just keep on going, because that's what we do.
I reckon we do it for family, for friends, our country, this planet, and oddly even for you, even if we don’t know who you are.

It's just what we do.

Take the average Joe’s and Jane’s from this planet and you’re left with very little.

Robert, Very good point at the end - the risk of an 'anytime, anywhere, any place (destination)' strike surely will put people booking off BA flights.

You wouldn't want to book anything in Jan to Mar as things stand.

57. At 10:14pm on 17 Dec 2009, starry-tigger wrote:
science has been invaded by mediocre IT systems, medical knowledge is lost in hospitals that are dirty and a danger to your health, transport systems can't work cheaply because they're fragmented, and we're still at a feudal stage as far as money is concerned. As for democracy, it's a distillation of all bad business practice with a blind struggle for power as its grandest aim. Yet science and technology got humans to the Moon and back! Forty years ago!!

Yip. I've two friends who were enticed out of academia to work in business for a period of 2 years. Both said they never saw a project that would have earned any higher than an D grade. Both quickly escaped back to academia and relative sanity.

65. At 11:00pm on 17 Dec 2009, copperDolomite wrote:
59. At 10:20pm on 17 Dec 2009, muppetcentral1 wrote:
Playing the blame game helps no-one, it either changes or goes.
So if you don't find the source of the problem, the process of person that failed, then you do not know who or what to blame, and therefore will be left with absolutely no idea what if anything to change!

You presume that all blame is on the management. My point is that there is blame all around. You can blame who you want depending on your predefined politcal view. My whole point is back-off from your pre-formed views, judge a situation on the here and now, fix it for the present - if the company survives, the jobs survive and when (if?) things improve, challenge the long term issues.

Same again with BA. Crisis after crisis. We stopped flying with them after the last strike threat 2 years ago. Great airline but you just don't know if you're going to fly.

67. At 11:05pm on 17 Dec 2009, Dempster wrote:
62. At 10:31pm on 17 Dec 2009, muppetcentral1

The average Joes's and Jane's just keep on going, because that's what we do.
I reckon we do it for family, for friends, our country, this planet, and oddly even for you, even if we don’t know who you are.

It's just what we do.


Mr Dempster I suspect we agree on many things. The point I am trying to make (badly maybe) is that average J and J's can be employees, employers, unionists etc, etc. There are many people who consider themselves to be average J and Js, all are in different positions with differnet wants, needs and aspirations and all consider themselves average, normal etc

59. At 10:20pm on 17 Dec 2009, muppetcentral1 wrote:
Playing the blame game helps no-one, it either changes or goes.
So if you don't find the source of the problem, the process of person that failed, then you do not know who or what to blame, and therefore will be left with absolutely no idea what if anything to change!

You presume that all blame is on the management.


I do not.

I left that deliberately vague. I've worked with both bad managers and bad junior employees (and the job I have means both situtations can be physically dangerous for me!)

Bad junior employees tend to over-estimate their abilities and knowledge, while bad managers tend to be either domineering bullies who are right because they said so, have no interest in anything or lack support from further up the chain.

#73 CD its easy to follow the norm and presume. My apologies. Faults have to be found all round, but firstly fight the fire, put out the fire, rebuild........... and while you are doing all of that find out why the fire started and stop it from starting again.

Pension deficit is not actually a problem with lowly paid Cabin Crew the board who cost them hundreds of millions in fines and whatever the class action spits out (billions?) in the States between them got pensions of the cost of thousands and thousands of Cabin Crew. Indeed Pilots pensions are the biggest problem apparently (that's 3rd hand but makes sense).

It's also not a debt held now and they will address it with further pension reductions no doubt for ordinary workers so Walsh and co can walk away. Arguably the real problem is the pension fund has been used to pay off so many bad and incompetent senior staff over the years.

(I live nr Heathrow but don't work for BA or any airline)

It is a good day for democracy - our democracy, which is Parliament, laid down a law that said you cannot strike unless you meet certain criteria - in this case all those taking part in the ballot must be able to take part in the strike. The union failed in that aspect of the ballot, so the strike is illegal.

This was a disgraceful action by a old-style militant union happy and determined to spoil a lot of people's holidays - it is good that we can fall back on the courts to protect those people.

What about the 1,000,000 people affected by the strike? Don't they get a say? Where is the democracy there?

There is a simple reason why all airlines - and not just BA - hit the headlines about HR more often than about all other issues put together. Three components dominate an airline's cost structure: the capital cost of the aircraft, fuel costs, and staff costs. Management cannot do very much to control or otherwise influence either of the first two of these in the short-to-medium term. But - especially at times like the present - it cannot just sit on its hands but must be seen to be Doing Something About It (whatever 'it' is, and this is not always entirely clear). So, by default, its efforts are disproportionately concentrated on managing the remaining variable - staff costs.

This is purely the fault of the degenerate British establishment(of which Gordo The pension-stealer and the "Union" management are shining examples).

Britain is no longer a proper country after the treasonous signing of the Lisbon treaty,so why do we even need our own airline?

Given that Gordo has offered (pledged) a 42% cut in the UK's CO2 by 2020, is it a goverment plan for all UK owned airlines to go bust or get sold to other countries?

Airline emitions can be said to be "owned" by the country where the air line is registered and NOT by the users of the airline!

And if the goverment uses this new way of calculating emitions then hay presto and a gordo slight of hand we have met out target.

After all this was what they did with the keato target, back date the base line date to before our dash for gas, then hay presto we have met the target even before we signed the treaty.

Oil, Deisel, Petrol, Gas, and Coal usage in the UK have gone up year on year since 1997 yet Grodo will tell you we are the ONLY country to have meat and exceeded keato targets!

"75. At 00:03am on 18 Dec 2009, TWSI wrote:
Pension deficit is not actually a problem with lowly paid Cabin Crew"

Having looked at the tables in papers i would not call BA Cabin crew "Lowly paid" compaired to the other airlines.

Also they have major perks for example EasyJet expect staff to fly out and back on the same air craft for trips like egypt where as BA crews get an expenses paid overnight stay before their return leg.

Everyone at BA finally needs to accept that the airline is a different beast than the one managed so well in the 80s by Lord King & Colin Marshall.

Their success attracted the same class of idiots that are now entering law and politics. The arrogant, 10 out of 10 for style but minus serveral million for good thinking brigade who couldn't run a bath never mind a business. It goes right through the various management levels.

The Cabin Crew's decision to strike was a perfect example.

Having said that, the Judge's decision to declare the strike illegal is actually more worrying. You used to be able to rely on the courts staying clear of politics. It was a shocking decision.

Bear in mind the significance in all of this of oil at $147 per barrel - which in turn relates directly to the global financial meltdown (delayed for now by our politico-banking mafia). The real issue here is that the end of mankind's era of cheap energy - especially energy (oil) for transport - signals the end of flying as a form of mass transit.

Two things. First, as nations crawl out of recession, the oil price will rise again - stifling recovery. Each attempt to recover will be stifled by rising oil/energy costs. We'll be going two steps forward and three steps back from here on.

Second, watch as airlines go to the wall with monotonous regularity over the next few years as flying becomes an increasingly expensive luxury.

We're entering a new age and flying, as we came to love/hate it, will not be part of that new age. Google "The Olduvai Theory" for some more on this.

Just how easy would it be for BA to put itself into receivership?

From what I have read, it would appear to be the straighforward option that would address a lot of the issues in one go.

Chipping away at the labour costs by reducing the number of cabin crew on longhaul by one coupled with other small initiatives, is not really going to produce the significant benefit required to bring BA's labour costs anywhere near to its competitors.

Instead:
- put the company into receivership;
- staff are made redundant;
- leave the problem of the £3.7bn hole in the two pension funds behind;
- the new company buys the assets from the receiver;
- staff are invited to apply for new positions with the new company;
- on competitive terms and conditions - maybe similar to Ryanair, where staff pay for their own training and uniform etc.

Surely this would bring everything to a head in one go and allow a "new" British Airways a great start for a happy new year!

21. At 5:31pm on 17 Dec 2009, Helen Taylor

It's true what you say, the pension deficit doesn't mean it's insolvent because not everyone retires at once.

However if BA should fail then the pension hole will absorb the recoverable value and shareholders will get nothing. Either that or it will be the pensioners who loose out (I'm not sure what the order in a wind up is) - but the Governments protection scheme simply cannot afford such a failure.

That is the real risk of the deficit.

...after travelling on ryanair I don't know how anyone could suggest that it is the model for the future.

Sure the staff are half the price - which is why they ran out of stirrers mid-flight meaning no hot drinks could be served.

The staff turnover at a budget airline is much greater than at BA - anyone who has worked in a high turnover environment know that the inefficiency is rife - but conveniently suffered by customers and remaining staff and not affecting the company profits.

It's false Economy every time - like cheap Chinese factory made toys which only last until Boxing day compared to hand made British ones which lasted a lifetime.

...the thirst for profit encourages waste.

39. At 6:46pm on 17 Dec 2009, Henry Quimper wrote:

"The strike itself is a disgrace. I consider that ANY strike by public transport workers should be illegal."

...is that because you rely on transport (and BA isn't public BTW) and such strikes put you out?

So transport workers should accept worse and worse pay and conditions until there is no-one left who wants to work in the sector?

What will you do then - Conscription?

42. At 7:04pm on 17 Dec 2009, warwick

Comments like yours keep me going......just to know that at least some people out there realise what has happened and the consequences for all of us.

The rest won't find out until it's far too late.

50. At 8:34pm on 17 Dec 2009, Goldcardnolonger wrote:

"It's about time the Unions realised they are the ones doing the disservice to the BA customers - wake up and smell the coffee and get out of your ivory tower - you are as bad as the politicians. In fact I hope BA take action against the Unions for damages due to all the people who have cancelled their flights and holidays or moved them to other airlines. The Unions could have called for a strike in January or another less disruptive time - the move has back fired and the leaders should resign as they don't act in the interest of their members - only themselves."

.....and what about the 500 who lost their jobs at flyglobespan? - it seems that the union didn't do enough in that case (same union) - so they loose whichever way they play it.
To say they are not trying to protect their members interests is laughable - without their members there is no union!

Still, I suppose now you have given up your rights then why should anyone else have any?


Are you alright Jack?

76. At 07:10am on 18 Dec 2009, the_brazilian wrote:

"What about the 1,000,000 people affected by the strike? Don't they get a say? Where is the democracy there? "

....they can book with someone else - and unless you booked more than a year ago then those people are foolish as it was abundantly clear in October 2008 that BA was in real trouble and might not even be operational at this time.

It seems your version of Democracy is like the version you are fed from your political classes - it's Democratic when it suits you - but not when it doesn't.

76. At 07:10am on 18 Dec 2009, the_brazilian wrote:

"Don't they get a say? Where is the democracy there? "

What makes you think that as a member of the public you can have any say on how a company or a union operates other than where you spend your money? If that is the case, then all business owners, not just the bankers will be taking the ferry out of here...

To copperdolomite, writingsonthewall and co;

Unite have merged the unions until if a member wishes to exercise democracy by leaving Unite (like my BA cabin crew wife) to be represented by someone else, she can't, because Unite have done away with that option and have created a monopoly. She is having to leave Unite/BASSA, meaning her voice won't be heard in the ballot (so where's the democracy there?). Unite use this monopoly to bully the company and misrepresent the views of the community.

The 'information' that Unite/BASSA send cabin crew is disgraceful (I get angry reading it); written in divisive terms, stoking up conflict, full of half-truths. Unite 'news' takes the form of lines like "the managers sniggering at you from behind their desks", "don't listen to what BA tell you, they are lying" etc. Any union member who thinks they are being fairly informed is wrong.

My wife has had nothing but excellent support and treatment from BA managers etc over 15 years and is livid with what the Union write. Tell me.. do you think it's right for a Union to write things like that to members?

This, to me, seems to be the ever present and growing problem of big companies using the 'Harvard Business Model'.
Virtually all big companies have one flaw at the heart of each of them- trust. The management simply don't trust the employees to conduct themselves in a sensible and efficient manner. Sometimes there is cause for this, often there isn't. Almost always any cause for concern is in and of itself a failing of management and not the employees- lack of training and engagement.
I'll give an example- the water companies.
Many who used to work for the water companies prior to privatisation will tell you about the waste and why the managemnt couldn't trust the employees. All these tales will pretty much come down to the employees using the stores to keep their own personal toolkits up to date, and a lot of sitting around when they could be doing something.
So the companies get privatised to 'save money', and what did management do to address the matter?
Well, they started by giving the employees much more paperwork in order to be able to keep track of their activities. As a result the workforce spent a lot less time sitting around, but no more actual work got done. In fact many of the technicians, fitters and engineers who continued to work post privatisation will tell you that they actually did a lot less maintenance and repair work! And not just the paperwork to keep track of them, also the removal of their easy access to the stores.
Whereas before they might have gone and collected the tools and parts they needed for the days job, and maybe picked up a roll of solder for their own bathroom at the same time, now they go to the job and assess what they need. Then drive to the stores and hand in a form. Then do more paperwork. Then get less tools and equipment than they requested. Then go back to the job and have to do it incorrectly to show that their original assessment was correct. Then go back to the stores... and repeat until all savings made by privatisation are long lost in the new inefficiences that have been added. All because of a lack of trust.
This lack of trust is most evident in Royal Mail, as noted in the recent edition of Panorama. Here the expert opinion of people with 20+ years of experience (and an ex Royal Marine fitness instructor) is being over ruled by a computer program that says 4 miles an hour for x hours a day 5 days a week (other duties to be fitted in the remaining hours, noa ctual time given to return to the depot) is not unreasonable. And which do management value more highly? The computer program of course.
I have had similar arguments with a manager, who tried to say that my mileage expenses were incorrect cos his computer said the trip was 10 miles shorter than my odometer did. The fact that his computer also said I should take a route that involved me driving off the side of a motorway flyover where the junction didn't have a southbound exit appeared to be irrelevant to him!
And so the HBM continues to take precedence in managers minds, rather than basic common sense and actual knowledge of how the industry works.
BA management is complaining that its staff are paid too highly compared to other companies? Perhaps their first port of call should not be to cut their own staff's renumeration, but to start by noting that many airlines have had exposes done by various jounralists showing that their pilots are paid less than a starting manager at a well known fast food outlet!
There is only one lasting way out of this or any recession, and it is not to follow the Harvard model of cutting costs in a downward spiral of lowest common denominator standards!

Unions are a necessary counter to bosses exerting too much control, but they can become too powerful in their own turn.

Thatcher recognised this and contrary to popular belief never sought to destroy the unions but to limit their power.

Industrial disputes require compromise for resolution with all parties accepting pain as well as gain. For British Airways staff the pain is reduced income and the fact that they are better paid than their competitors is little comfort. But the gain is a chance to help transform the airline into a profitable and sustainable enterprise. Seems to me the management and union should be concentrating on softening the implementation of the cost-cutting measures rather than continuing with confrontation that will encourage their customers to use other airlines - there are plenty of competitors. I am an ex Gold Card holder and I dropped my allegiance to British Airways many years ago when I discovered the better value for money offered by many of BA's rivals.

94

Well said.

Without customers, BA and their staff are nothing. The same goes for any other business and its employees.

They don't exist to make profits for their shareholders or wages for their workers; they exist to provide products for their customers.

Not many people know that , it seems.

I think the BA management have demonstrated that they have sloping shoulders down to a tee. They have managed to pass all the blame off to the unions and workers.

But I think we should also remember in the case of BA, that this is the same great management team that precided over the terminal 5 debarcle and were in office during the price fixing and fuel surcharges offences.

How many millions of BA losses are due to fines which were gained by poor management.

I have worked in this country and paid my taxes for over twenty years and all too often I find poor management at the heart of too many British companies. In my opinion it is the management that wear down the staff and introduce the rot. After all management today seems to be get as much remuneration as you can whilst you are there with a heavty payout when you leave and never mind the consequences.

95

totally agree with you.

I think they mis use the term service as in customer service and have changed it to a customer being serviced by them.

I love British Airways and the crew have looked after me everytime I have flown with the company. I want to be cabin crew for British Airways and have done sicne I was 6. I am now 18 and I would happily work for British Airways, free of charge for three years! As long as Mr Walsh offers em a job at the end! Heck I'd even take the pay cut. Ok sure I don;t have huge exspenses and creditcards etc, but the truth is I want the job so bad and I want to provide good service for our national airline that is on the edge of going under. I know crew who ahve worked too hard to see their beloved (they didnt vote to strike!) BA go downt he pan. Some of these crew members have worked for BA since 1967 when they where the iconic BOAC. What happened to good old fashioend British pride and wanting to provide proper serivce. We where the envy of every otehr country in every business department, and we had a national airline to be proud of. Bring back the old days!

And Mr. Walsh, if you do read this, I will happily work for three years unpaid for the company as long as you offer me a job, or betetr still STAND DOWN!

The proposed strike was commercial suicide and I can only say that if the cabin crew does go ahead with these idiotic strikes then they deserve everything that they get ...which incidentally i hope is a P45 and a boot up the derrière whilst getting thrown out the door.
All businesses need to react and respond to the realities of the commercial markets and economic environment. The cabin crews are employed to do a job they are not employed as a social security exercise. BA just like any other commercial enterprise exists purely because it is able to sell product at a competitive price to its customers. If BA is no longer able to sell a competitively priced product and continue to attract customer who believe in the brand then it is nothing except a dead man walking. Employees who have lost sight this need to wake up and smell reality. Either they accept change to their T&C's and their pension allocations (just like the vast majority of us have already done, me included) or they indirectly accept that they will be out of a job because their company WILL fail.
Part of me actually wants to see BA collapse (and for the government to not step in) under the weight of its vast pension deficit and unrealistic historical T&C's. I for one am fed up with unions and their moronic demands on businesses that clearly don't have the capability to accept them.
As an FYI and to quantify - I am a loyal BA customer travelling with them so regularly that I am a BA Gold Frequent Flyer. I have travelled with BA for almost 20 years. BA needs to take note because its cabin crew and service whilst reasonable is NOT the best and there are plenty of other airlines who will happily take up the mantle of dominant player if given the opportunity.

An 18hr trip with BA to the US has just extended to over 4 days. All spent in terminals, half the time with no baggage. Weather on the 18th was the catalyst but staff ineptitude and poor practices were to blame. My family made the connection in time as the 2nd flight was delayed. They were told their connection was cancelled, but we texted our family as the BA home site and a web app showed the flight was deayed 2hrs. Why did we know more than BA ground staff? Because we cared more, that is why. My family got to their gate on our advice and watched others board the plane, which had their luggage on it, and were told they could not get on. It shut its doors and sat for another 3hrs before it took off. The doors would not re-open for them after 2 requests, because then a clock re-starts for "when the plane was boarded". A false metric stopped customer satisfaction. They were then offered an alternative flight 3 days later. This reduced to 2 days after a lot of gnashing... They never saw the luggage that made their first trip for the next 2 days. THey hung out in Heathrow waiting for it. While waiting pickpockets stole their phone. The plane they left on was delayed leaving Heathrow, and made the connection tight but possible. BA staff informed our family they would be rushed to the connection gate as they had an hour to get there. UA staff didn't want to do that. Chaos ensued and the plane was missed. The next flight offered was not till the 23rd of dec. Again after tears and gnashing a triple stop flight was arranged. We may see them in the next few days. Who knows, we've given up hope. This trip was a gift for a family going through some personal difficulties, it was meant as a treat. I paid more for BA as I thought they would be more dependable. The absolute opposite was the case. Phone support staff did help us well, but the plane schedules, metrics, management practices, lack of urgency from the ground staff all combined to make this the worst flying experience I've experienced in 25 years of flying.
taxation, Pensions, Poor Management, Aggressive Unions, Insane British cost of living, a broken capatalist/political/legal system supporting the extreme wealthy and penalising the middle/lower classes will mean an increase in pressure for wage rises, strike action, inflation, crime, unemployment. The next decade will look like the 1970's and be lost for the UK.
But I doubt BA will be around to see it, the haven't the clue how to get a customer from A to B.