British Airways to make 12000 redundant

[nomadking]

Originally Posted by jfman

I’m not sure how your point contradicts mine. There’s no reason to expect any different if the economy just opened up with no restrictions tomorrow.

Anyway seeing as I’m banned from the Coronavirus thread for having an opposite opinion to Paul, despite being persistently baited my multiple right wing trolls, there’s no point continuing discussion here.

The 250,000 was if there was no lockdown or social distancing of everybody. That hasn't happened, therefore the first scenario no longer applies.

In the second scenario, more intensive interventions could interrupt transmission and reduce case numbers to low levels. However, once these interventions are relaxed, case numbers are predicted to rise. This gives rise to lower case numbers, but the risk of a later epidemic in the winter months unless the interventions can be sustained.

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

Exactly, which is why the lockdown has to be lifted soon.

Ending the lockdown won't make much of a difference with flights. Countries are going to try and limit travel into their countries with testing and self-isolation being a condition of entry into many, the airline industry is screwed for at least a year.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by Damien

Ending the lockdown won't make much of a difference with flights. Countries are going to try and limit travel into their countries with testing and self-isolation being a condition of entry into many, the airline industry is screwed for at least a year.

The Air industry as we know it is gone,so are those cheap holidays abroad, looks like the future is staycations, book early for Butlins etc.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by papa smurf

The Air industry as we know it is gone,so are those cheap holidays abroad, looks like the future is staycations, book early for Butlins etc.

Its certainly going to take a considerable time to recover a lot and we are talking several years rather months.

---------- Post added at 09:51 ---------- Previous post was at 09:50 ----------

Originally Posted by papa smurf

The Air industry as we know it is gone,so are those cheap holidays abroad, looks like the future is staycations, book early for Butlins etc.

You mean book early for next year.

[papa smurf]

Originally Posted by denphone

Its certainly going to take a considerable time to recover a lot and we are talking several years rather months.

---------- Post added at 09:51 ---------- Previous post was at 09:50 ----------



You mean book early for next year.

And remember, Cleethorpes smiles more fun

Originally Posted by papa smurf

And remember, Cleethorpes smiles more fun

more fun than dysentery (but not much...).

I went to Japan last November, thinking that turned out to be great timing. Not going to be on any flights for a while.

[denphone]

Ryanair to cut 3,000 pilots and cabin crew, and slash pay over Covid-19.

https://www.irishtimes.com/business/...d-19-1.4242639

Ryanair has said it plans to cut 3,000 mainly pilot and cabin crew jobs, implement pay cuts of up to 20 per cent, and close a number of aircraft bases across Europe as it continues to grapple with the effect of the Covid-19 pandemic on its business.

The airline said the grounding of all flights from mid-March until at least July, as well as the “distorted state aid landscape in Europe”, meant the recovery of passenger demand and pricing will take at least two years, until summer 2022 “at the earliest”.

(Mods feel free to put it in its own thread if you want to but perhaps a change in thread title might be better.)

[denphone]

As expected Virgin Atlantic are to axe more than 3,000 jobs.

https://news.sky.com/story/coronavir...vival-11983452

Sky News has learnt that the airline majority-owned by Sir Richard Branson's Virgin Group is to cut just over 3,000 jobs in a move that will spell the end of its long-running operations at London's Gatwick Airport.

[richard s]

Now the Chancellor may reduce the furlough to 60%.

[OLD BOY]

Originally Posted by jfman

Less than the 250,000 deaths you'd cause by lifting lockdown prematurely.

How many times....?

The government's policy is to slow the deaths down so the NHS will not be overwhelmed. The only way to deal with this is to let the vaccine travel its course more slowly or lockdown until a vaccine is mass produced, distributed and applied.

Clearly, it cannot be the latter or we will no longer have an economy.

---------- Post added at 20:19 ---------- Previous post was at 20:17 ----------

Originally Posted by richard s

Now the Chancellor may reduce the furlough to 60%.

Well, that will discourage too much talk about extending the lockdown!

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

How many times....?

The government's policy is to slow the deaths down so the NHS will not be overwhelmed. The only way to deal with this is to let the vaccine travel its course more slowly or lockdown until a vaccine is mass produced, distributed and applied.

Clearly, it cannot be the latter or we will no longer have an economy.

---------- Post added at 20:19 ---------- Previous post was at 20:17 ----------



Well, that will discourage too much talk about extending the lockdown!

You keep posting that, but never provide evidence to back up your assertion.

You also just posted in another thread

The number of deaths overall, however, will probably be about the same

I provided the previous Imperial Colleage paper which showed the numbers of deaths could be reduced by tens of thousands (not delayed, reduced), but you have not shown any scientific evidence to uphold your claim. Here is a later IC paper (30th March)

Table 2 shows total forecasted deaths since the beginning of the epidemic up to and including 31
March under our fitted model and under the counterfactual model, which predicts what would have
happened if no interventions were implemented (and Rt = R0 i.e. the initial reproduction number
estimated before interventions). Again, the assumption in these predictions is that intervention
impact is the same across countries and time. The model without interventions was unable to capture
recent trends in deaths in several countries, where the rate of increase had clearly slowed (Figure 3).
Trends were confirmed statistically by Bayesian leave-one-out cross-validation and the widely
applicable information criterion assessments – WAIC).

By comparing the deaths predicted under the model with no interventions to the deaths predicted in
our intervention model, we calculated the total deaths averted up to the end of March. We find that,
across 11 countries, since the beginning of the epidemic, 59,000 [21,000-120,000] deaths have been
averted due to interventions. In Italy and Spain, where the epidemic is advanced, 38,000 [13,000-
84,000] and 16,000 [5,400-35,000] deaths have been averted, respectively. Even in the UK, which is
much earlier in its epidemic, we predict 370 [73-1,000] deaths have been averted.

These numbers give only the deaths averted that would have occurred up to 31 March. If we were to
include the deaths of currently infected individuals in both models, which might happen after 31
March, then the deaths averted would be substantially higher

Averted, not delayed.

[jfman]

Originally Posted by OLD BOY

How many times....?

Enough times until you develop an understanding.

The government's policy is to slow the deaths down so the NHS will not be overwhelmed. The only way to deal with this is to let the vaccine travel its course more slowly or lockdown until a vaccine is mass produced, distributed and applied.

Pushing deaths the other side of the vaccine results in fewer deaths overall.

Clearly, it cannot be the latter or we will no longer have an economy.

Neither will we have an economy if we let thousands of people die and don't deal with the virus.

Once again, you are stressing over flights. Where will people fly to? What self-respecting country that is trying to eradicate the virus is going to let people in from the UK which has the second most deaths in the world? Who is going to want to come here?

If there's a second wave who is liable for the cancellations? Insurance companies simply won't touch it.

Paul is right here - the public perception is that many common activities are fundamentally dangerous and there's no real reason to expect that the public (consumers) will return to normal activity any time soon.

The problem isn't the lockdown - it's reduced demand. That's just straightforward capitalism.

[pip08456]

Meanwhile back n the thread both British Airways and Virgin Atlantic have announced job losses as have other airlines.

There appears to be a lot of outrage about it. Why? Less people flying = less people needed.

[denphone]

Originally Posted by pip08456

Meanwhile back n the thread both British Airways and Virgin Atlantic have announced job losses as have other airlines.

There appears to be a lot of outrage about it. Why? Less people flying = less people needed.

They had no choice to put it simply and l can see it staying that way for quite a while as one of the big problems is even when the traffic picks up is social distancing rules which means you can only fly so many passengers in a plane and as the Ryanair boss said that is simply not economical.