6 Responses

  1. Sean Roebuck
    Sean Roebuck at |

    Those aircraft aren’t doing much these days anyways right?

  2. WR
    WR at |

    “I’m not sure that bringing in aircraft crewed by staff that have roughly zero job security protection, either from the company or the local government, is going to win BA any points with its striking cabin crews.”

    This is not BA’s concern at all. BA’s strike isn’t winning the crew any points with mgmt either, though I’m sure tgey could care less. Unions strike because they think they have leverage to extort the company to bend to their will, and replacement workers weaken that leverage. Turnabout is fair play. Nice move, BA.

  3. Robbo
    Robbo at |

    Whatever helps the passengers I say.

    All the objections seem to come fom the very people it least affects. This is the problem with airlines these days, they forget about the passengers.

    Good on BA for being proactive and thinking about the passengers.

    As fo the unions and as for the laughable EU, what has it got to do with them what a private English company wants to do. Bugger off. Any wonder Britain has baled from the EU.

  4. George
    George at |

    I’m not a fan of unions personally, but what the LGW crews are getting paid is outrageous. They’re getting paid less than the U.K. minimum wage, which is why the service on BA has gone down hill quickly. It is MUCH lower than the rest of BA gets paid. They can’t hire competent people and they can’t keep any employees happy once hired.

    Keep business practices ethical and you won’t have issues. Oh and by the way, thinking of passnfers?! Ha! If they canceled the flights, they’d have to refund. They’re not thinking of passengers, they’re only thinking of revenue.

  5. Oliver2002
    Oliver2002 at |

    The CAA approved and now the 9 A320 are moving to LHR today.