EXCLUSIVE: the new British Airways cabin crew pay offer revealed – big cuts for legacy crew

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.

• Dave Winchester says:

  16 May16 May 10:44

  BA are being arseholes, but that’s business.

  There are lots of people who will want to do the job on those terms, not least as the service industry is going to be decimated for the foreseeable. It’s a job with some excellent perks that you don’t need a degree to do so they’ll be no shortage of recruits – it’s not a career for the vast majority doing it

  • Nik says:

    16 May16 May 13:20

    Exactly. They get circa 50K applications in every advertised Mixed Fleet recruitment round and only circa 2K get through. So any shortage will have absolutely no problems to be filled. Any aspiring UK based cabin crew applicant would also want to flock to BA, not least for the sheer size and vast destinations it offers (or offered rather pre-COVID)

• C says:

  16 May16 May 10:44

  This is crap but similar thing happened to me 5 years ago. Been at a company over 12 years, never off sick always worked hard but company wanted to sell to venture capitalists and needed to get rid of higher earners. Offered me a new role which was same job with lots of additionl responsibilities and for 10k less plus no more travel paid for.

  I took the redundancy pay and they ended up employing someone in their early 20s to replace me for half the money, and they did exactly the same job I did before, there was no ‘new role’. No employment solicitor was interested, ACAS pretty much said they can do it.

  • Lady London says:

    16 May16 May 12:29

    Did the new person that replaced uou do exactly the same job as you had done, or did they do the new job with more responsibilities that you’d been “offered” and with less pay? And was there and difference in the “value”/quality delivered by the new person?

    • C says:

      17 May17 May 02:51

      Exactly the same job, I trained him and he was given no training for the additional duties of the new role. I checked with colleagues after I left and they told me he was doing exactly the same role and was struggling to keep on top of that let alone anything else!

      • Lady London says:

        17 May17 May 10:04

        so it was just a way to get you out then. Constructive can pay more than redundancy/potential extra remedies, with hindsight I might have looked into that.

        • CC says:

          18 May18 May 12:05

          Yeh I had a feeling there was more I could’ve done but I did make an effort to explore options. I called a few solicitors, ACAS, and on a couple of forums asked the question, but all seemed to indicate that it was fair. Should have asked on here!

• mr_jetlag says:

  16 May16 May 10:50

  Air travel is a service industry and like most service industries will be very different after the crisis.

  I sympathize with long serving Worldwide crew, but the status quo was clearly not sustainable even before COVID19. Whether BA have gone “too far” remains to be seen, and any industrial action will obviously be ineffective during the lockdown. Not many options other than to walk away.

• Nick G says:

  16 May16 May 10:53

  I think the BA legacy crew on here are missing the point. I have no desire to live in France or wherever else, I’m not jealous because I wouldn’t want to do that job. I did say I don’t agree with everything BA is doing, changing the contracts like this is one of them. Many years I got made redundant one day and vowed never to work in the private sector again for that reason. Is robs article wrong then that a 50% ish reduction means you didn’t earn £48k ish?

  The points people make about jet lag and days off etc etc is just poor. Try working shifts. See what that does to your body, body clock, length of your life etc. And if you think you’ve been treated badly try having your pension that you signed up for changed half way through your career so you know have to work an extra 7 years to earn what you would have done. Oh and that’s not to mention being spat at with Covid 19, assaulted, run over, shot at, stabbed etc in your work place.

  So while I don’t agree it’s right I know how it feels do you not think it’s right. We’ve all been shat on from a great height at one time in life but your no different to other people. It’s awful and I do feel for those that will now be at a total disadvantage in life through no choice.

  • Rob says:

    16 May16 May 11:16

    For those who joined, say, 10-12 years ago the drop is more like £32k to £24k I believe. Contracts had already started to tighten up by then.

    • Nick G says:

      16 May16 May 11:23

      Cheers rob. What are the figures for say those that have worked 20 or 25 years? I assume it’s those that were on the circa £48k?

      • Rob says:

        16 May16 May 11:26

        Gets complex. There are still some around who came in from British Caledonian in 1988 for example and have legacy contracts from there.

  • Rebecca says:

    16 May16 May 11:17

    We do work shifts

  • Rebecca says:

    16 May16 May 11:28

    As for covid19, (we’re not often spat at, but puked on is a regular occurrence in turbulence), there are few worse places for contagion than a tin can packed with coughing people (who don’t wear masks onboard) for 10-12 hours at a time. Social distancing is impossible onboard.

• Davie says:

  16 May16 May 11:17

  I have done the maths and after over 25 years service, I will actually be taking a pay cut of 63% at best. The OTE that BA suggest is not the reality. Factor into the mix an extra £200 fuel costs per month and the figures simply would not make the job a living wage unless you are 21 and living at home rent free. We all accept that redundancies are inevitable but to force a loyal workforce out in this manner is very sad. Staff have given months, years and decades of loyal service to make BA the profitable company it is today. Sadly, it is the mmoral behaviour one can hardly be surprised to see from management consumed with utter greed. How can this company ever expect to be great again with this total disregard for those that ensure customers return again and again?
  Let’s hope the 42,000 employees vote with their feet, along with it’s customers.

  • Mikeact says:

    16 May16 May 11:48

    63%. ?
    I was never any good at maths. Could you please explain, thanks .

    • Simon says:

      16 May16 May 13:20

      £24k / (1.00-0.63) = c.£65k

      • Mikeact says:

        16 May16 May 14:50

        Thanks. You mean that @Davie was getting £65k per annum ? Sounds pretty good to me.

        • Genghis says:

          16 May16 May 14:55

          Assuming gross. Net basis would be much more.

• Rebecca says:

  16 May16 May 11:25

  Our pension has changed too. Final salary was stopped years ago. 55 year retirement age originally signed up to has long gone.
  Our T&Cs have been periodically attacked many times over the years.

  A lot of nonsense is being written here. 3-4 flights a month on full time longhaul is not true.
  As an example we can do 4 longhaul flights in 5 days on a ‘back to back’, this is just one trip.
  There are 4 – 5 ‘trips’ in a month, but these are a minimum of two sectors (flights) each trip, often a trip is multi sectored e.g. LHR-BAH-DOH one night and then the return the next night.

  • Briandt says:

    16 May16 May 11:51

    But ending final salary pensions and retirement at 55, surely ended years ago for most of us ?

  • Novice says:

    16 May16 May 11:57

    I keep asking the question that nobody is willing to answer. I ask again; why didn’t legacy crews’ fight for their MF colleagues in their own good times? Why not try to fight for them and try to use your power with unions to make it fair for all. It doesn’t mean if someone is young they should be paid pittance. Young people have a life to live too. No wonder nobody stays.

    As I repeat; a legacy was once a newbie.

    This is a bit like some firms only hiring based on experience and never younger talented people because they don’t have experience. In order to gain experience, you have to start somewhere. It’s common sense.

    • Nik says:

      16 May16 May 13:26

      Exactly! Glad there are a few that bring up this “immoral” stance. Legacy crew unions were perfectly happy to accept a completely new segregated fleet 10 years ago that were essentially doing the same job, even harder in fact, for much less money. They striked till the end of time in 2010 and ultimately agreed this new fleet would be “morally ok”. Hmmm, I guess that immorality doesn’t play convenient to the whole BA opportunism and immorality push. I mean if BA were a charity then of course it would be scandalous, but BA like most firms are there for their profits and shareholders.

      • J says:

        16 May16 May 16:25

        Because it would have been illegal for them to do anything!

    • Andy S says:

      16 May16 May 18:36

      @novice heres the answer you think nobody is giving you. Stop living in the protected world of Mum and Dad and grow up. Once you actually get yourself a job, if any exist that you can do. You will see this equal life for all “Nirvana” you keep banging on about doesn’t exist, I’d have thought you might have got that already, Was everyone at university totally equal? Must go to show how molly coddled you’ve been up till now.

      In most walks of life once you are in a job, it won’t matter to you what terms of employment newer people are on, they have the choice of accepting the job or not. Which is the crux of the BA argument. Mixed fleet are in general bitter they aren’t on the contracts that WW are.

      In the Fire service and the Police as an example, pension contribution and retirement ages have been changed, how worried do you really think the people who weren’t affected were by this?

      Maybe you should find a forum where you have a valid point to make from experience

      • Derek Scott says:

        17 May17 May 08:57

        Is there any weight to your argument by being rude?

        • Andy S says:

          17 May17 May 16:56

          Yes.

          He needed telling. He’s been posting ill informed rubbish all through this post.
          Why do kids think once they’ve been to university they suddenly know eveything and the whole world wants to know their views, althought they have no life / work experiences in which to form them.

          “Oh why isn’t everyone treated the same. Lets all love each other and everything will be fine, experience doesn’t matter I’m young but worth paying equally”

          In what real world situation does a new entrant with no experience or proven track record command the same pay and conditions as someone who has done the job for years. Only maybe in a scenario like Rob presented where if someone doesn’t perform they don’t get paid.

          Police, Fire, Nurses,Teachers shall I go on. All have pay scales commensurate with qualifications and experience.

          The last Willie Walsh experience comment sums it up.

          Hope this hasn’t been too rude for you.

    • Carlos says:

      16 May16 May 22:36

      You seem determined to ignore the answers given to your question, why didn’t legacy crew support MF crew. What do you think the 2010 strike was about?

      • J says:

        17 May17 May 00:27

        Because it would have been illegal for them to. Illegal. UK’s (anti) union laws are very clear. You can thank Margaret Thatcher if you disagree.

  • Aston100 says:

    16 May16 May 12:52

    Still can’t compare it to key workers.
    You lot have had it good for too long.
    There should never have been a time when cabin crew were paid more than police, and did less hours too.

    • Rob says:

      16 May16 May 12:55

      BA is a private company, it isn’t comparable.

    • Spaghetti Town says:

      16 May16 May 13:52

      You could argue the same about bankers and doctors

      • Rob says:

        16 May16 May 14:55

        Fundamentally if you want to make money you need to be in a job where you create value. You then get to negotiate with your employer how much of that ‘value’ you get for yourself. This is why a banker with a track record of bringing in £5m per year of advisory fees will easily find a bank willing to pay £1m for their services. If you’re not creating financial ‘value’ then your worth is simply a factor of the scarcity of the skills that the role requires, with an adjusting factor for job security / job location / perks etc.

        Bottom line is that if someone came to me and said that they could bring in £250,000 of advertising from new clients to HFP next year but wanted paying £125,000 if they achieved it (and only £25,000 if they didn’t) I’d hire them, as would any sensible business person. I couldn’t care less if that is 6x more than Mixed Fleet earn.

• Nic says:

  16 May16 May 11:27

  While I agree with Martin, the reality is airlines are fighting for their lives. Traffic is forecast to be down 42% this year and only return to 2019 levels in 2023. And if business travel is impacted by people shifting to conference calls (I doubt I will be attending the 2-3 conferences a year I used to) then airline profitability will be destroyed. It may be a case of accept lower pay or lose your job entirely. nziegelasch@yahoo.co.uk

  • Rhys says:

    16 May16 May 18:10

    No. BA said it wanted to start ‘meaningful’ flying in July and now that there is a 14day quarantine for arrivals they suggest it will take longer….

    • Toxteth O’Grady says:

      16 May16 May 21:09

      Oh, ok, I won’t be optimistic when things start picking-up then.

• Mikeact says:

  16 May16 May 11:29

  What a contentious subject…arguments on both sides of the coin, and from what I can read, good and bad points on either side…so, there will be no winners in all of this at the end of the day.
  It’s a shame that probably a lot of these arguments could have been settled years ago, but when you have militant unions lined up, then today’s climate is probably the end result of all the bickering of the past years.
  It seems to me that for BA to get back on track, they have no choice, and I guess that they have an opportunity to try and level the playing field going forward.
  Whether or not they are going about it the right way seems to be the big one, but ultimately what choice do they have ?

  • Rebecca says:

    16 May16 May 11:56

    Hi Mike,
    I hear what you’re saying but BA have made huge profits and have 10 billion pounds in liquidity. Nobody knows when bookings will pick up, but if the cruise business is anything to go by there have been mass forward bookings and pent up demand that has been very surprising.
    However long it takes, it’s temporary.
    So it’s temporary measures that are needed to fix the temporary problem.
    BA do have that choice. Many contracts have lay off clauses in them, so the answer is there. No battle needed. Temporary lay offs, then return to work when needed. We all accept that.
    But to just dismiss everyone and offer a much reduced alternative is uneccessary and immoral.
    It is indeed and opportunistic smash and grab.
    We will all be worse off for it, not just crew. Also passengers and indeed flight crew (pilots) who feel safer and more comfortable flying with experienced and level-headed crew. We hear this every day from passengers.

    • Nik says:

      16 May16 May 13:30

      So you’re perfectly happy by under cutting MF colleagues here again? All who have the same training but just aren’t “older” and “legacy”? Dubious to say the least. The reason they exist is because of the legacy unions settling for this new fleet as a suitable outcome when BA last tried to simplify/change T & Cs in 2010…I’m sorry but you can’t have a moral argument yourself if the undertone consists of partially throwing a section of your colleagues under the bus by saying customers and your own flight crew feel less comfortable with them. So much for “Unite”

      • Nik says:

        16 May16 May 13:50

        (For the record, I’m not “anti-union”)

    • Rich says:

      17 May17 May 13:05

      Sure Rebecca, but you can’t quote £10bn without also saying how much cash they are burning through each week and seriously, how long to get that back above zero? Years probably. Sure, they’re seizing what they see as an opportunity to do something they’ve wanted to do for years, but they categorically need to change and fast…and drastically. They ain’t alone either.

  • Aston100 says:

    16 May16 May 12:46

    It’s about time unions were disbanded.
    They serve no real purpose anymore.
    Most employees are protected by employment laws.
    Unions nowadays seem to exist solely to cause as much disruption and headache for employers as possible.

    • Craig says:

      16 May16 May 12:52

      I agree one zillion percent!! Unions are a nasty throwback to the industrial dark ages and are absolutely nothing more than an archaic self serving rabble, constantly seeking to stifle business efficiencies and progression.

      • J says:

        16 May16 May 14:43

        I wonder how you’ll feel when one day you’re screwed over by an employer and left with nothing. Without unions we’d have even less rights in the workplace.

        • Paul74 says:

          16 May16 May 17:19

          Agreed.

        • Ken says:

          16 May16 May 18:43

          Agree 100%

          Every labour law from the factory acts limiting child labour, adequate health and safety legislation, working hours, time off, sex and race equality has had to be fought off in the face of opposition from business and Tory MPs.

          We are a million miles away from the union abuses of the 1970’s. A million miles away.
          I’d just like people doing a roughly 38-40 hour week to be able to live live fairly normally and not have to claim grindingly depressing means tested benefits.

        • Josh says:

          16 May16 May 23:06

          Ken:

          Some people want the flexibility to work 40+ hours a week. You can’t dictate what people can and can’t do …unless you’re French

        • J says:

          17 May17 May 00:15

          Agree Ken. What a pathetic comment @Josh, pointless attack on our French neighbours and friends shows what kind of person you are.

        • J says:

          17 May17 May 00:19

          And @Josh some desperate soul might be willing to work 70 hours a week, doesn’t mean it’s a good idea… Think about it.

    • Derek Watts says:

      16 May16 May 14:13

      I have to say I don’t agree… With a mature management, unions can be a resource to draw upon and work through problems together. Sadly the airline management never engage with them and it’s a mutually abusive relationship. Unions also protect employees from the bullying, cronyism, nepotism and abuses of power that are rife in airlines. Maybe it’s the military throwback, not sure, but the scale of abuse from ambitious men with massive egos and an intellect deficit in airline management is quite shocking. The abuses I’ve seen and heard, with them trying to have any individual removed out the door that dares to question them or their decisions. In a safety critical industry, this causes crashes and accidents. Unions are one of the few barriers to this kind of abuse…

      • Paul74 says:

        16 May16 May 17:20

        Agreed.

  • Carlos says:

    16 May16 May 21:46

    They have gone about industrial relations like this for years hence all the ‘bickering’. Sensible negotiations have been absent for some time

This article is closed to new comments. Feel free to ask your question in the HfP forums.