As T5 security crisis looms, Virgin Atlantic allows rebooking (from T3) whilst BA (at T5) does not

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

• Numpty says:

  27 Mar27 March 08:32

  For clarity, the 1400 security guards – is this for the whole of Heathrow, or just T5? Or is it just the T5 ones going on strike (out of the 1400)?

  I ask cos last week in the comments we had a good back n forth on the economics of giving the staff the pay rise they wanted v parking charges v bonuses.

  • Rob says:

    27 Mar27 March 09:11

    Apparently T5 has 1400 security staff. Rhys and I were trying to do the maths on this and couldn’t work it out either, especially as the airport doesn’t run 24 hours.

    That said, when I was in Dubai last year I was told that the Madinat Jumeirah resort has 500 lifeguards for the pools. It’s easy to underestimate what you need when staffing things 16/7/365.

    • JDB says:

      27 Mar27 March 09:30

      @Rob – security is a lot more people than just the very visible hand luggage screening staff and there are more of those checkpoints behind the scenes for staff and crews as well. There are lots of people manning doors and other entry points as well as monitoring CCTV etc. Security does operate 24 hours a day as while there may only rarely be flights during the curfew, there is still a lot of activity all around the airport taking advantage of empty terminals and of course cargo activity.

    • BA Flyer IHG Stayer says:

      27 Mar27 March 09:55

      Something open 16 hours a day for 365 a year = 5,840 hours that need covering per function.

      Assume a 40 hour week so each worker can do 52 x 40 hours = 2,080 hours a year.

      So that means 5,840 / 2,080 = 2.8 people.

      That makes no allowances for breaks or time for training or sickness or annual leave.

      Multiply that because you need staff to work in teams and the required number of staff grows rather large in number very rapidly.

      There are usually (as far as I can tell) 5 people working each security belt at any one time (one sorting trays and people before the scanner, one scanning, two putting people through the people scanner /swabbing and searching and one post scanner helper) so they need 5 x 2.8 = 14 people per those 16 hours.

      The F wing has 2 scanners so that’s 28 people minimum per day.

      And because I’ve made no allowance for holiday etc it will actually be more people that that.

      Multiply that by the number of screening points and make a proper allowance for holidays and sickness etc and staff to supervise and organise the staff and you soon have a rather large number of staff. And that’s just if you employ full time staff. The number of staff grows if you have part timers even if the total hours to be worked remains constant.

    • Track says:

      27 Mar27 March 15:13

      They visibly overstaff Madinat Jumeirah.

      • Rob says:

        27 Mar27 March 15:19

        So would you if you paid your staff £300 per month!

        It is a bit weird having a private pool but which has a lifeguard sitting there all day, I admit.

• FlightDoctor says:

  27 Mar27 March 09:07

  Am I right that most of Heathrow will be caught by the new ULEZ charge later this yeat? I would much rather pay £12.50 to help out hard working Heathrow staff than go into the coffers of the Mayor!!

  • Jack says:

    27 Mar27 March 09:24

    Hopefully the ULEZ expansion will be scrapped before then

  • Rhys says:

    27 Mar27 March 09:28

    Yes

  • BA Flyer IHG Stayer says:

    27 Mar27 March 10:00

    Well the £12.50 goes to TFL not to the Mayor personally and less that 10% of vehicles will be paying it anyway.

  • baec_newbie says:

    27 Mar27 March 10:37

    You always have the option of taking public transport to the airport. Or parking somewhere outside the ULEZ area. Or, dare I say it, getting a less polluting car…

    • A says:

      27 Mar27 March 11:03

      Not much public transport at 3am in the morning when lots of airport workers start, park in slough and walk the last few miles, or yeah buy a new car when you get paid minimum wage. Apart from that it’s a great idea

      • Rhys says:

        27 Mar27 March 11:09

        Any 18-year-old petrol car will do…

    • JDB says:

      27 Mar27 March 11:16

      @baec_newbie you sound like President Macron – he told people to get electric or more fuel efficient cars and that sparked the ‘gilets jaunes’. One of the many problems with the ULEZ is that it disproportionately affects poorer people who simply can’t afford to replace their car/van and as mentioned by others on this page, if you start work at LHR for the 4am shift, public transport is not an option and often isn’t an option for any shift. I understand that HAL has recognised the problem for its staff and is looking at solutions.

      • Ant says:

        27 Mar27 March 11:29

        The ULEZ has been talked about for almost a decade and it was obvious that it would expand in size and expand to other cities too. I traded my diesel banger for a petrol banger in 2016. People who have waited this long to sort themselves out are just looking for an excuse to whinge about the Mayor.

        • Dom says:

          27 Mar27 March 12:23

          Those of us that live outside of London, that use Heathrow, can’t do anything but whinge about the mayor as we don’t have a vote to vote him out.

    • Travel Strong says:

      27 Mar27 March 11:32

      ‘Less polluting’ car?
      I have a 2000 1.8l petrol car that is £12.50/day
      I have a 2011 6.2l petrol car that is free.
      Both have beefy catalytic converters, and the 1.8l definitely has more tech to improve economy. The gas guzzler gets let off because it is made after 2005. It promotes buying new cars, not the environment.

    • Trevor says:

      27 Mar27 March 11:34

      As ULEZ does not ban “polluting cars” it is a money grabbing scheme. If the Mayor wants to improve air quality then ban polluting vehicles.

      When I bought my petrol car in 2013 I got it so cheap because the government was peddling diesel to the masses and petrol vehicles were the evil twin. Roll on 10 years. I still have my petrol car and can drive into ULEZ without paying a fee. Diesel is now the evil twin and a 2015 diesel vehicle is only good for scrap value.

      And lets not even get on to electric storage heaters of the 1970’s – and here we are again with government peddling electric as the best thing since North Sea gas.

      If you live anywhere south of Birmingham then Heathrow is your regional airport to the world.

      I always check the train prices when heading to Heathrow (even though inconveniently there is still no train link from Reading to Heathrow). Last week it was £200pp return peak times – there were 3 of us travelling – £600 by train and still have to get to the station or door to door by car £60 return including paying to park on someones drive. We took the car and always will on this pricing.

  • Dom says:

    27 Mar27 March 11:53

    It’s only just inside proposed ULEZ.
    Good business opportunity for someone to set up new airport parking and shuttle just outside the zone for those that need it.
    Some of the existing further afield hotel and parking options are outside proposed ULEZ.

  • Paul says:

    27 Mar27 March 12:09

    Only if their car falls into the appropriate category and only then is they done use public transport. Add in car share or those who can access via public transport but choose not to and it will be very small number of people who are affected. ULEZ is about improving air quality not about revenue generation though I appreciate that many don’t accept that

• Dom M says:

  27 Mar27 March 09:17

  Well I am flying to Nice on Saturday from T5. Don’t really have any scope to move the flight, due to work this week and due to the fact I am only going for 4 days.

  If they are going to cancel, i’d rather know soon, so I can book one of the easyjet flights going out on Saturday from another terminal.

• Jack says:

  27 Mar27 March 09:23

  Heathrow needs to run a airport properly with security staff who can actually do their jobs for once . 10% is way more than other organisations are getting it’s jumping on the strike bandwagon purely

  • SammyJ says:

    27 Mar27 March 09:51

    Annoyingly I’ve got the return flight of a BA holiday tomorrow, which will earn enough tier points for Gold when they process the double point bonus. Last 2 trips have taken 12 & 18 days for the bonus to appear though, so I guess we’ll still be silver and miss out on the First wing when (if) we fly from T5 on Saturday. First world problems indeed!

    • SammyJ says:

      27 Mar27 March 09:52

      Not sure why I posted that as a reply!

  • Rob says:

    27 Mar27 March 09:54

    But they took a 20% pay cut during covid – bet you didn’t – which has not been reversed.

    To put this in context, my cleaner gets £9k more than a Heathrow security guard and she doesn’t work antisocial hours.

    • Jack says:

      27 Mar27 March 15:48

      Lots of organisations did and have not had this reinstated 10% is much higher than other organisations are currently offering . Lots of people at other organisations also lost their jobs nobody has to work there if they do not like the pay being offered . I do not resent people striking but it’s clear that they are doing it to cause chaos

      • dougzz99 says:

        27 Mar27 March 19:55

        10% of 80% means they’re still 12% down on pre-Covid pay. You’d have to be retarded to strike in the least disruptive way.

  • S says:

    27 Mar27 March 10:14

    What an insightful comment 🙄

• Marsman800 says:

  27 Mar27 March 10:24

  Deep joy – meant to be going Dubai on Saturday night for a week (5 of us….)

• Ironside says:

  27 Mar27 March 10:34

  Could someone explain how fire & re-hire is / was ever legal?

  If someone isn’t doing their job, there’s a disciplinary process leading to termination of contract, perhaps for (gross) misconduct and that person doesn’t come back. If someone is doing their job just fine, there’s redundancy – but you can’t then re-hire someone (even or especially the same person) straight back into that role.

  Are many airport jobs based on time-limited contracts, in which case “fire” is a bit misleading? Or was it more that the alternative to accepting fire & rehire was going to be even worse for the employees (e.g.: permanent redundancy)?

  Question based on ignorance and naivety, so please educate me.

  • A says:

    27 Mar27 March 11:16

    You’re given 90 days notice and if you don’t accept the new contract (with less pay) you affectively resign with no redundancy. All perfectly legal. It’s called section 188

    • Paul says:

      27 Mar27 March 12:11

      It is an abhorrent means of managing people

  • blenz101 says:

    27 Mar27 March 11:16

    The staff were made redundant during the covid 19 pandemic, the operational requirements of the airport at the time being the reason for reducing headcount.

    As operations have ramped back up there has been an operational requirement to employ additional staff.

    Hire and fire is being used here because whilst the airport didn’t break the law its practice of physically reducing staff numbers rather than furloughing them and introducing a new lower paid contract when things ramped up is seen as opportunist at best.

• Dom says:

  27 Mar27 March 10:38

  Out of curiosity, interested in what the commercial impacts are of this between Heathrow & BA. If BA have booked slots that Heathrow can’t fulfil at short notice, is there a big liability there for Heathrow? If so, in their interests to get a deal, even at a high cost.

  • JDB says:

    27 Mar27 March 10:46

    It has very little financial impact in that way, and equally when BA has a strike or cancels flights owing to staff shortages it doesn’t pay the theoretical lost passenger service charges or loss of revenue from parking or shops. Industrial disputes are just a fact of life and all the parties bear their own costs.

• Chris says:

  27 Mar27 March 10:46

  My Edi-LHR on Friday was cancelled yesterday

  weirdly they haven’t booked me on an alternative despite it feeding to a club flight to Canada so currently I’ve got a connection with no initial flight.

  There’s now no connection, that I can make, without resulting in a 24 delay in arrival. As this was done with less than 7 days notice am I right in thinking compensation kicks in here?

  • JDB says:

    27 Mar27 March 10:50

    There is no compensation payable as the cancellation will be attributed to a third party strike. As many people will be in the same position as you, if you still wish to travel on the long haul, you have an interest in contacting BA (or via MMB) and finding an alternative solution or providing that solution yourself ASAP before others take the seats/rooms.

  • AJA says:

    27 Mar27 March 10:51

    Probably not since the strike is not in BA’s control. Ie from BA’s perspective it is extraordinary circumstances.

    Duty of care does still apply and you should be offered a reroute. Ba might pay for a train journey.

  • Paul says:

    27 Mar27 March 12:16

    No compensation as it is outwith their control and the reasons are airport restrictions. That did they must reroute you on any carrier who has seats in the same class as you were originally booked. This could mean EDI AMS Canada to EDI FRA Canada. It is best if you have options that you can give them when you call. As they cancelled the choice of what happens and when is yours and yours alone.

    If it was an Avios booking the requirement to rebook is the same. I did very well out of this last year when the cancelled my F trip to HKG

    • meta says:

      27 Mar27 March 14:39

      But there are no restrictions in Edinburgh and there are no ATC restrictions at Heathrow per se. Airport control is not on strike.

      Are we actually saying that Heathrow is requiring BA to cancel flights or is BA choosing on a commercial basis to cancel some of the flights into Heathrow?

      @Chris doesn’t actually have to clear security at Heathrow as his connection is T5-T5.

      • JDB says:

        27 Mar27 March 15:54

        Paragraph 42 of the 23 March 2021 judgment in Airhelp Ltd
        v Scandinavian Airlines System encompasses strikes by airport staff as well as ATC and while that isn’t binding in the UK, the principle is sufficiently obvious that BA will be able (as it has done previously) successfully to cite ‘extraordinary circumstances’ and further, they are entitled, pro-actively to cancel flights in light of the expected strike action.

        “Thus, in stating, in recital 14 of Regulation No 261/2004, that extraordinary circumstances may, in particular, occur in the case of strikes that affect the operation of an operating air carrier, the EU legislature intended to refer to strikes that are external to the activity of the air carrier concerned. It follows that strike action taken by air traffic controllers or airport staff may in particular constitute an ‘extraordinary circumstance’ within the meaning of Article 5(3) of that regulation (see, to that effect, judgment of 4 October 2012, Finnair, C‑22/11, EU:C:2012:604)”

        • meta says:

          27 Mar27 March 23:46

          @JDB This quote is taken out of context and it’s not entirely applicable anyway. You should really form a clear opinion whether EU rulings apply post-Brexit or not, not when it suits your argument. The SAS case is about pilots strikes (therefore within airline’s control) and the whole ruling actually goes into detail what constitutes internal and external events in this particular case. It’s just reiterated that extraordinary circumstance applies if it is outside airline’s control (the ruling says if ATC and airport staff are paid by public body such as government). In Finnair’s case it is about whether airline took all reasonable measures to avoid delay and compensation which it did.

          BA knew about the strikes for a few weeks and they haven’t taken all reasonable measures to re-route inbound passengers 14+ days. They should have really done that and they are also the ones to blame. After all, they are the main (only?) airline at T5 so should be able to take some initiative.

        • JDB says:

          28 Mar28 March 07:01

          @meta I explicitly stated the ruling did not apply post Brexit. You consistently criticise me and others without bothering to read posts. I cited the judgment simply because it references airport staff when you said there was only a decision re ATC. You claim the strikes have been known about for “weeks” which is incorrect; the results of the ballot were only announced on 17 March and the ballots for other terminals were against striking. The talks broke down the following Friday and the airport request a limitation of sales and cancellations over the weekend. The strikes are very clearly outwith the control of BA. To the extent that you are going to keep giving false hope to people that they can get compensation in these circumstances, perhaps at least provide some accurate information and detailed argument rather than this general broach brush.

      • Paul says:

        27 Mar27 March 23:01

        It is a restriction at the airport by reason of the strike. There is not requirement for it to be ATC EDI. the very fact BA gave cancelled is all that matters and it is for them to re route you at your convenience in the same cabin irrespective of what the booking class may be. That is the regulation.

        • meta says:

          27 Mar27 March 23:49

          There is a requirement. Knock on effects do not automatically constitute extraordinary circumstance. It’s tricky to prove, but it’s not clear cut for inbound. Knowing weeks in advance about the strikes at their own T5, they should have been more proactive, especially for inbound passengers.

        • JDB says:

          28 Mar28 March 07:03

          You state “it’s tricky to prove” – if you say that it can be proven, why not offer your expertise is saying how that might be the case rather than just saying, yet again, the OP is wrong.

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