Gate Gourmet management...
Discussion
...bunch of total idiots, from what I understand.
1) Sacking people with a megaphone.
2) It seems they tried to virtually blackmail BA into agreeing a new contract at improved terms.
3) Now talks have broken down with the TGWU.
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but it ALL comes down to management. For the following reasons:
a) If things were going well at the company, the management would be happy to take the credit - they can't have it both ways.
b) They're over-reluant on one customer. Which is kindergarten management.
c) Equally, BA are over-reliant on them. However, Gate Gourmet are trying to exploit that - "don't give in BA", I say.
Quite frankly, the people in charge at Gate Gourmet seem to come from a confrontational 1970's time warp in my view. Although I own several companies, if I worked for Gate Gourmet I reckon I'd be a shop steward!
1) Sacking people with a megaphone.
2) It seems they tried to virtually blackmail BA into agreeing a new contract at improved terms.
3) Now talks have broken down with the TGWU.
Now correct me if I'm wrong, but it ALL comes down to management. For the following reasons:
a) If things were going well at the company, the management would be happy to take the credit - they can't have it both ways.
b) They're over-reluant on one customer. Which is kindergarten management.
c) Equally, BA are over-reliant on them. However, Gate Gourmet are trying to exploit that - "don't give in BA", I say.
Quite frankly, the people in charge at Gate Gourmet seem to come from a confrontational 1970's time warp in my view. Although I own several companies, if I worked for Gate Gourmet I reckon I'd be a shop steward!
Well I looked at the company's letest results today. Well they're bad, but redeemable, in my view. To start acting the way they have is a massive over-reaction, in my opinion. Basically the management have over-reacted in my view. I don't know who the top bloke is, but I bet he's a "reactionary!" Such people, are good "project managers", but bad "people managers", in my experience.
They project managed the company coffers into their personel pockets. That was probably their 'intial' goal. They have shown they don't care about the employees from the wretched employment contracts and pay they gave. Noted the company is a possible financial option but the management can take the money and p
s off into the sunset
s off into the sunsetThe management doesn't sound perfect but the workforce are definitely stuck in the 70s - the company seems to be virtually unrunnable - eg. if one production line is busy you can't move staff from another quieter line as the staff won't have it. Does anyone other company work like that in this day and age??
Whichever way you look at it (and I don't see it quite like you do, Steve) the Company is broken.
Time to shut it down and create a new one - rising, Pheonix like, from the ashes.
However bad the management may be - they're not in control of their own business. That situation is intolerable. They only thing to be done is shoot it in the head now - kindest thing.
Oh. IIRC Gate Gourmet is merely the UK arm of an international business? In those circumstances its straightforward to shut down the UK legal entity, I'd have thought.
I doubt very much the GG Directors are too happy. Unless they can shut it down responsibly they'll be lucky to retain jobs with the international business and will be highly unlikely to get Director positions elsewhere.
Time to shut it down and create a new one - rising, Pheonix like, from the ashes.
However bad the management may be - they're not in control of their own business. That situation is intolerable. They only thing to be done is shoot it in the head now - kindest thing.
Oh. IIRC Gate Gourmet is merely the UK arm of an international business? In those circumstances its straightforward to shut down the UK legal entity, I'd have thought.
I doubt very much the GG Directors are too happy. Unless they can shut it down responsibly they'll be lucky to retain jobs with the international business and will be highly unlikely to get Director positions elsewhere.
First of all they are an ex BA subsidiary, of course they are reliant on them.
Secondly they are making big losses and need to make drastic changes in order to survive.
Thirdly like BA they are affected by overmanning and 70's working practices.
A few were detailed in the paper the other day, drivers, on 30K a year, only have to work a half day if they do all their deliveries and if they are expected to make any more deliveries they get generous overtime pay.
A machine which only needs 3 people to operate it, had to have 5 under union rules, etc.
The union agreed many changes in working practices (after all they are not complete idiots) but the work force rejected them.
Secondly they are making big losses and need to make drastic changes in order to survive.
Thirdly like BA they are affected by overmanning and 70's working practices.
A few were detailed in the paper the other day, drivers, on 30K a year, only have to work a half day if they do all their deliveries and if they are expected to make any more deliveries they get generous overtime pay.
A machine which only needs 3 people to operate it, had to have 5 under union rules, etc.
The union agreed many changes in working practices (after all they are not complete idiots) but the work force rejected them.
I blame Harold Wilson.
Having said that, I was wondering where the water canon was these days?
Sensible drenchings for a union free Britain.
One day this country will wake up and realise you can't liberate infinite quanitities of socialist wine from the overly squeezed grape of capital endeavour.
By then, of course, we will all be soylent green for the Chinese and Indian palette.
Welcome back, bruvvas and sisters...
Having said that, I was wondering where the water canon was these days?
Sensible drenchings for a union free Britain.
One day this country will wake up and realise you can't liberate infinite quanitities of socialist wine from the overly squeezed grape of capital endeavour.
By then, of course, we will all be soylent green for the Chinese and Indian palette.
Welcome back, bruvvas and sisters...
Pity BA didn't keep the catering in house under their own control. If you sub it out you may be losing the responsibility but you also lose control and you're also paying for another company's profit margin - so standards are only going to go one way - south.
Wonder of Jamie Oliver will step in?
Wonder of Jamie Oliver will step in?
simpo two said:
Pity BA didn't keep the catering in house under their own control. If you sub it out you may be losing the responsibility but you also lose control and you're also paying for another company's profit margin - so standards are only going to go one way - south.
Wonder of Jamie Oliver will step in?
There's a very good reason not to keep it in house in this case, so that another company can take the heat for the cost cutting that needs to be done.
Unfortunately for BA, despite the fact that it is a separate company, it’s own staff went out on a sympathy strike anyway
groomi said:
In reality, probably the best thing for the workforce is for the company to close. BA will then bring in another catering contractor who will bring in their own management and then re-employ 'most' of the old staff, give them new uniforms and hey presto!
And preferably under new contracts, which remove the 70s anachronisms, and provide a 'flexible' working practice.
anonymous said:
[redacted]
Absolutely.
When BA divested its catering division to GG it created a monopoly supplier to itself. Monopolies are generally bad...and sometimes illegal.
BA should probably divest itself of most of its non-core business functions and arrange a portfolio of suppliers to supply each need long term.
Competition makes the world go round.
Agree with the comments so far. Rumour has it that GG are hitting the wall fast. In fact GG were struggling some time ago and ended up being bought by a US company. They recently lost the Virgin contract and another one a few years ago (though I cant remember who). As a result they have one major customer, BA, and are reliant on them - and not forgetting that the contract wasnt actually very good for GG in the first place!
Outsourcing catering does have its advantages though. Someone like GG potentially has quite a few customers and hence can drive down costs using the scale of what they do - cost per meal should be lower or quality is higher. Its pretty much how outsourcing works.
But, as already said by strebbe64, its a management issue. Had they communicated with the staff I am sure it would have never got to this situation. Ok, so management have cocked up - take the can and walk. Of the people left then they should talk to the staff and explain the critical nature of the situation they are in. Cuts are to be expected and dialog with the staff to work through the issue - its the only way forward. Ok, so not everyone wins here. Some people be will loose their jobs, but given the situation of the company folding and thousands laid off, a few hundred is small in comparison. But this is dependent on the people who cocked up taking the responsibility and walking..... no one will be happy, but at least it wouldnt have got to the impass they are currently in....
Then again, I dont run a company so who am I to say how to run one with a few thousand who work for me! I also dont run an airline.... which is probably a good thing!
Outsourcing catering does have its advantages though. Someone like GG potentially has quite a few customers and hence can drive down costs using the scale of what they do - cost per meal should be lower or quality is higher. Its pretty much how outsourcing works.
But, as already said by strebbe64, its a management issue. Had they communicated with the staff I am sure it would have never got to this situation. Ok, so management have cocked up - take the can and walk. Of the people left then they should talk to the staff and explain the critical nature of the situation they are in. Cuts are to be expected and dialog with the staff to work through the issue - its the only way forward. Ok, so not everyone wins here. Some people be will loose their jobs, but given the situation of the company folding and thousands laid off, a few hundred is small in comparison. But this is dependent on the people who cocked up taking the responsibility and walking..... no one will be happy, but at least it wouldnt have got to the impass they are currently in....
Then again, I dont run a company so who am I to say how to run one with a few thousand who work for me! I also dont run an airline.... which is probably a good thing!
Erm, this is nothing to do with GG management. They've been set up as the fall guys.
Someone on PH mentioned last week that he had spoken to a BA board member and been told that this was all about the union trying to get BA to buy GG, and that the board member was more or less saying "over our dead bodies will we buy GG back".
If you notice on the news in the last two days - a number of newcasters have helpfully put in "their" suggestions "why doesn't BA buy GG back?". I get very suspicious when newcasters offer help like this - me thinks that they have been talking to the unions, and lets face it BA buying GG is a nice compromise in the eyes of the lefty brigade.
Someone on PH mentioned last week that he had spoken to a BA board member and been told that this was all about the union trying to get BA to buy GG, and that the board member was more or less saying "over our dead bodies will we buy GG back".
If you notice on the news in the last two days - a number of newcasters have helpfully put in "their" suggestions "why doesn't BA buy GG back?". I get very suspicious when newcasters offer help like this - me thinks that they have been talking to the unions, and lets face it BA buying GG is a nice compromise in the eyes of the lefty brigade.
Gassing Station | The Pie & Piston Archive | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff