British Airways economic strategy

Status
Not open for further replies.
Joined
Oct 2, 2008
Messages
1,007
Location
Dallas, TX
GREAT example of just how out-of-touch presidents, CEOs, chairmen, etc. are with the typical working stiff.


LONDON (AP) -- British Airways on Tuesday urged its staff to work for nothing in an effort to save the company money.

British Airways PLC is struggling to come up with ways to save cash after reporting its biggest full-year loss since the former national airline was privatized in 1987.

BA chief Willie Walsh has said he would not draw a salary for the month of July, and urged other employees to work for blocks of time without being paid.

"I am looking for every single part of the company to take part in some way in this cash-effective way of helping the company's survival plan. It really counts," Walsh said in a company publication.

BA said the option meant employees would effectively volunteer to take a cut in base pay, with the lost income spread out over several months. The company had said last month it would ask employees to consider working without pay.

The UNITE union, which represents thousands of BA ground and cabin crew, gave the proposal a chilly reception. The union said that while Walsh might be able to afford working a month for free, its members could not.

BA said last month that it had lost 375 million pounds ($595 million) in the year ending March 31, compared with a profit of 712 million pounds in the previous year. That is its worst result in more than two decades of business, the previous low point being a 200 million pounds loss in 2001-2002
 
Bet you he still got a bonus!
smirk2.gif
 
How much is Walsh making, anyway?

Him not getting paid will cause hardship, too. Who is going to make the payments on his yacht and the mansion?
 
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Or they could just fire them...

Which is worse?


Working for free will always be the worst case scenario. At least if they get laid off, they have some chance of landing a paying job somewhere else.
 
I doubt "helping" one's employer by working for free, so the company can survive, will hold greater significance than putting food on the table and footing bills, etc.
 
Fire everyone, including Walsh, make whomever accepts the position(s) take the same pay cut in income and deferred income. Tie the CEO's compensation to everyone's ..from the bottom to the top based on the corporation's performance.

If he doesn't accept those conditions, don't expect anyone else to either. I'm sure his VP will take the job for a few $$ less.

He can go pump gas.
 
I would consider donating 10-20% of my time under the right circumstances.
  1. If I had been working there long enough to consider that I had a career with them.
  2. If they had treated me right and had a history of treating employees well.
  3. If they had a realistic, believable plan for digging the company out if the hole it was in.
  4. If upper and middle management was fully participating in the salary cut and sticking with the plan.
  5. If management couldn't gain any of their loss back in bonuses without equal bonuses in terms of % of base pay going to all employees that donated time.


In other words, not very likely.


Edit:

Woot! I made an ordered list with letters in UBB code.
 
Last edited:
Originally Posted By: Tempest
Or they could just fire them...

Which is worse?


Fire them, and there's no business to save
 
If I was with them, I'd show up regular hours for free for a month as long as I had faith in the middle management. 10 to 1 everybody who takes the leave and comes into work gets a raise when things turn around.
 
I'd say I wanted an equity state if they weren't able to pay me cash but they'd probably go bankrupt and give "more equal" equity to someone else...
 
Originally Posted By: greenaccord02
If I was with them, I'd show up regular hours for free for a month as long as I had faith in the middle management. 10 to 1 everybody who takes the leave and comes into work gets a raise when things turn around.



If everyone had the choices of losing a job and investing a month's worth of toil for share in the potential booty (or avoided losses) ..fine.

What you would find is that some people always consider themselves more equal than others and more deserving of the spoils of others toil and/or sacrifice.
 
what this BA CEO clown did sounds like an email that would do the rounds in my workplace. This guy's monthly loss of what, $100k, does not affect his day to day life. regular joe on the street, no income for a month, and he can't pay the bills... how can they suggest this plan with a straight face?

make him work for $1.00 a year and tie his salary to stock price.
 
A block of shareholders wanted to do that at EXXON (premerger with Mobil). They wanted a 50:50 compensation package. Half based on last years company performance, the other half on the last 5 years (maybe it was 10) of company performance. If the company perpetually grew, the compensation would go up. If the trend was down, so went the compensation. The board of directors recommended voting against it.

I mean ..it's not like the guy is doing anyone any favors in sucking up his check with a dwindling resource pool to draw from. His superior leadership skills haven't prevented the lack of revenues nor given him the clairvoyance to find them.

Now unless he can choke me by remote control for my lack of faith in his FORCE.....I just don't see putting much in the form of $$$ in his pocket for the privilege of his presence.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top