View Single Post
  #5   Report Post  
Old May 7th 20, 09:37 AM posted to uk.railway,uk.transport.london
Recliner[_4_] Recliner[_4_] is offline
external usenet poster
 
First recorded activity at LondonBanter: Jul 2019
Posts: 622
Default OT: Virgin withdraws from Gatwick

Roland Perry wrote:
In message , at 08:43:36 on Thu, 7 May 2020,
Recliner remarked:

Virgin is relatively insignificant at Gatwick,

"The airline plans to reduce its workforce by 3,150 people, which is
equivalent to more than a 30 per cent cut."


Most of them are not employed in, or live close to, the airport.


Even if that's true, their jobs depend on Virgin being at Gatwick.


Many of the Virgin jobs lost will be Heathrow-based. Ditto with BA. They're
both saying they'll move what's left of their Gatwick operations to
Heathrow, as they obviously want to retain their much more valuable LHR
slots. No doubt it's also cheaper and more flexible to only operate from
one of the airports.

BA also has a maintenance operation at Gatwick. I presume that is also
likely to go if the flights go.


Depends if you are one of the 3,000 perhaps.


Yes, of course, just as it hurt the larger numbers affected by the other
airlines cutting back. For example, BA is threatening up to 12,000
redundancies. And it's not as if all these laid-off staff can walk into
other airline jobs.

but losing it, TC, BA and Norwegian will hurt.

You think there's significant transfer passengers? And BA is threatening
to leave too, I gather.


As I said in the remark you were responding to.


Ah the difference between:

but losing it will cause TC, BA and Norwegian to be hurt.

but losing it, and TC, BA and Norwegian, will hurt the airport.


The latter is what I clearly said, in the context of Gatwick coming out of
this much more damaged than Heathrow. In your rush to argue, you failed to
read it.