Well its looking bleak isn't it and going one way? 🙁

Think this would come into play possibly there are other schemes too Financial Assessment Scheme but there serves a different purpose more focused on the scheme rather than the business have trouble but of course DYOR

The Pension Protection Fund (PPF)

Managed by an independent board, the Pension Protection Fund (PPF) was established in April 2005.

The purpose of the PPF is to pay compensation to members of eligible defined benefit – final salary – pension schemes, whose employers have gone belly-up and do not have sufficient assets to payout to its members.

When a firm knocks on the door of the PPF with problems, the group goes into an assessment period, where the PPF looks to establish if a scheme is eligible for PPF compensation.

The scheme will withdraw from the PPF assessment process if it is rescued – a new employer takes on responsibility for the scheme, or the scheme has enough assets to buy benefits with an insurance company which are at PPF levels of compensation or above.

But if it takes on responsibility for a scheme, it will pay compensation to scheme members

Genuine question – Are the people voting for strikes, really that naive that they think sticking to their guns won't drive BA further into the red and ultimately lose more jobs? Or are they just really short sighted?

This has been done to death. Have a look at the many previous threads to revisit the usual suspects rehashing entrenched positions.

Although they'll probably be happy to repeat themselves on this thread if you hang about long enough.

Unite are shameless Communists hell-bent on sending this country back down the road of the 1970s, Scargillite dinosaurs who won't be happy until the Winter of Discontent is relived, the dead aren't buried, rubbish is in the streets, cap in hand to the IMF, house prices fall, every cat is nationalised, you're not allowed to turn on the hot water, only immigrants can use electricity, newspapers aren't allowed to print pictures of posh girls in skirts, men are paid half the wages of women, conkers and sausages are banned by Jacques Delors, page 3 is replaced by feminist re-education tracts, Cilla Black is forced to wear a donkey jacket and social workers are allowed to decide how many pints of beer you're allowed to drink.

BA are Thatcherite fascists whose interest in cutting costs is matched only by their intransigence to provide hard-working cabin crew – some of whom work as much as 20 hours per week – with a living wage of 60 thousand pounds a year. Claims by Walsh of a global economic slowdown are an obvious fabrication, there is patently no connection between labour costs and profitability and the oversubscription of flights after the volcano dust disruption just shows that air travel is and always will be a necessity for business travellers who will not restructure their working practices at all. Further, the shareholders of British Airways can be ignored as irrelevancies to the negotiation process and BA customers will support cabin crew in a rolling five day strike from now until 2012.

Does that just about cover it? 😆

My brothers Mrs works for BA she gets paid loads more and has better benefits than when she worked for Virgin and AA, the staff are split and all believe diferent things. She'll be working as she's not with unite. Can't see any customers who will be happy to have a holiday ruined for this.

Does that just about cover it?

Only if you can keep repeating the same posts for about 4 pages while ingnoring everybody elses point of view. Then you'll come close.

Only if you can keep repeating the same posts for about 4 pages while ingnoring everybody elses point of view

*Tannoy* TJ to the thread please.

Only if you can keep repeating the same posts for about 4 pages while ingnoring everybody elses point of view.

Heh – unfortately, multiple usernames arguing with each other is someone else's posting style. 😉

konabunny = funny 😀

I'd put money on the government having to bail out the pension fund if/when they go under.

Idiots.

As Forge197 says, if BA goes bust the responsibility for paying the pensions will fall to the PPF.

But the cost of meeting any shortfall won't be met by the Government. It will be paid for by a levy on other companies.

Ewan – Member
I'd put money on the government having to bail out the pension fund if/when they go under.
Idiots.

No it'll be the PPF. Funded by employers not the Government.

So why is there a "pension hole" then?

I bet someone says it's Gordon Brown's fault.

Well I can safely say it will not be me as I work for BA 😆

I bet someone says it's Gordon Brown's fault.

All the Labour prospective Leadership candidates are saying 'lets move on from all talk of Iraq as we think the voters are punishing us for going to Iraq', thats why we lost he election.

Just shows crass out-of-touch thinking. No its not the 100,000+ innocent deaths, its EVERYTHING else ontop of this.

Ban fox hunting? Good call. However lets take up Socialist Worker hunting. We could let them lose into a field, give them 10mins headtime (they'll still be in the same spot as they are mindless ****) then chase them.

Have a look at the many previous threads to revisit the usual suspects rehashing entrenched positions.

Although they'll probably be happy to repeat themselves on this thread if you hang about long enough.

Waves blushes scuttles off

first Answer was correct but I suspect you have other Daily Mail esque motives Hora as above post shows

BA isn't like British Leyland etc- it actually has a product that can work. Sadly it has part of a workforce that wants paying for not much work.

Oh and I bet half of militant unionist's read the Daily Mail. Either that or the Daily Star or Sport.

If you are pseudo-communist/socialist- wake up THAT PATHETIC SYSTEM DOESNT WORK.

ok I will bite

Sadly it has part of a workforce that wants paying for not much work.

You mean what management offered them in there contracts of employment lefty **** militants eh ? It is more about reducing numbers not wages per se…never letting your ignorance prevent you from having an opinion do you?

Oh and I bet half of militant unionist's read the Daily Mail. Either that or the Daily Star or Sport.

That is neither witty, offensive or remotely logical 0/10 for that ranted line.

If you are pseudo-communist/socialist- wake up THAT PATHETIC SYSTEM DOESNT WORK.

It is true trolly dollies are just as you describe them they are the sleeper cells for socialists bringing in the revolution.
though cowards flynch and traitors fear well keep the red flag flying here !!!

8)

It is true trolly dollies are just as you describe them they are the sleeper cells for socialists bringing in the revolution.

No thats the Union-mechanism.

You've never experienced a real Communist state have you? None of this pseudo-socialism within the safety of free-market/people who die for us-protected island.

FWIW the only thing that they are now in dispute over is the issue of having their travel perks reinstated. It's kind of important becase about 12% of the cabin crew don't actually live in the UK; they live somewhere else like the south of France or Ibiza and then fly in for work using their ability of buying a ticket at 10% of the full price to make it economical.

because about 12% of the cabin crew don't actually live in the UK

Prove it

I can't see how BA can continue running a Premium Air Service when the competition are screwing BA to the wall on cost. I'm afraid the old days are long gone.

because about 12% of the cabin crew don't actually live in the UK

Prove it

It was widely quoted by the union and BA in the press yesterday and today. Also know it to be true annecodtally as the wife works for BA and it's well known within the company.

You mean what management offered them in there contracts of employment lefty **** militants eh ?

But its not, is it?

Because the discounted travel "perks" were non contractual weren't they? – and lets face it, they were already on dodgy ground because some might question the taxable status of "perks" like free travel!

It is more about reducing numbers not wages per se..

Hang on a minute, staffing on long haul had been reduced from 15 to 14….The EASA requirement is 'one per 50 passengers or fraction thereof'. Just how many 700 seat aircraft do BA operate? yep, none – it was a cushy number and staffed well above both industry standard and regulatory minimum. No pay cuts, no compulsory redundancies, In an environment where there is a global reduction in air travel due to the global recession – given what people in most other industries have experienced the BASSA members don't know they're **** born!

Zulu-Eleven, please, please. Stop talking common sense! The Union Leaders live in cloud Cuckoo land.

You've never experienced a real Communist state have you? None of this pseudo-socialism within the safety of free-market/people who die for us-protected island.

WTF are you talking about?

Because the discounted travel "perks" were non contractual weren't they? –

This is not why they went on strike though as you later comment on staffing levels noted.

C'mon Junky – you raised the perks:

You mean what management offered them in there contracts of employment lefty **** militants eh ?

Plus the other issue – Union members sacked after legitimate legal disciplinary process has been followed, for intimidation and bullying of other staff – and the union demanding that they were reinstated!

If their sackings were unfair then clearly there are legitimate, legal channels open to them in the form of tribunals – however the Union are trying to bully their way into reinstating them – how is that right?

cant be a@rsed off to get stroned
junky

This is not why they went on strike though

No, but it's why they're going on strike.

12% of the cabin crew don't actually live in the UK

I thought BA actually had crews that were permanently based in Hong Kong or wherever for the longhaul routes? But I did here that there were many commuters – much like elsewhere in business.

You've never experienced a real Communist state have you?

Who has?