Am I the only one feeling distinctly uncomfortable about the disproportionate penalties imposed on British Airways as compared to Virgin Atlantic?

Sure, collusion to fix the price of fuel surcharges is anti-competitive, and the Office of Fair Trading [OFT] imposed a hefty fine on BA. That’s all fine and dandy – but what about the other party to the price fixing, what happened to them?

Here are the bits in the OFT press release this month that left me squirming:

Virgin Atlantic is not expected to pay any penalty as it qualifies in principle for full immunity under the OFT’s leniency policy. 

… any company staff involved in the price fixing disclosed will qualify for immunity from criminal prosecution in relation to that conduct.

I do think it’s disproportionate that BA were the only one to be fined, and only it’s executives are threatened with extradition. Virgin Atlantic meanwhile are not fined, its executives are not named, and they are not threatened with extradition to the US. There were only two parties to this cartel according to the OFT:

British Airways has admitted that between August 2004 and January 2006, it colluded with Virgin Atlantic over the surcharges which were added to ticket prices in response to rising oil prices.

I do hope that Richard Branson feels ashamed that BA executives are under threat of extradition to the USA, while his equally liable executives get away scot-free.

The whole thing leaves a nasty taste in my mouth. Not a peep from the master self-publicist. Surely, even if you own up to wrong doing, you expect some penalty. To get none at all seems to me to be grossly unfair.