BA cabin crew industrial strike? [Archive]

sad or what

4th Dec 2006, 02:58

Copied from cabin crew forum

BA Industrial Action?
Was sent this email yesterday. I am no authority on this but it made interesting reading.

Please read and pass onto all crew.

All taken from the bassa website.

just in from spending time in the BASSA stable. What I´m about to
post is from the horses mouth......

1) As of Feb 1st the upperdeck Psr is gone. The ultimate goal is
have a 2 more gone by the end of 2007 leaving 1 CSD & 1 Psr on
longhaul aircraft. The CSD role is also being looked at. Do we need
one??

2) CC89 reps are totally behind the BASSA action they are being
held back by AMICUS who insist they must go to the enth degree to
find a solution.

3) SFG been told BA can no longer afford downtown hotels. Airport
hotels are being sort.

4) BALPA are not supporting us on our T&C´s issues. Pensions are
our common denominator.

5) Car stickers and other items will available shortly at BASSA´s
expense. (Thank you Chief Wigwam for the idea).

6) No big figures for severance. Statutory Minimum.

7) T5 report time 1hr 10 before dept. Arrival 30mins.
This will take SFO, LAX & NRT (new routing) out of LR and make them
night stops.

Quote from Mark Hassel: "Unions are history. Those were the old
days. Negotiation is good but if you don´t agree will walk right
through you. This will happen before our move to T5"

I don´t know about you but that quote has got my blood boiling, let
alone the issues we´re going to be balloted on.

As a union we need 80% (office figure not mine) return to stop the
BA train from steamrolling our T&C´S. It´s already started!!!
If there´s still anyone out there who thinks it won´t affect them.
Think on, Heathrow One Fleet is around the corner. VOTE YES for
industrial action and protect our futures.

This thread is for those people who have been asked to visit
the BASSA website by colleagues so as to find out about the
upcoming strike.

Whilst I am by no means an authority on whats happening, this is
what I understand about the current situation.

1. HOW HAS IT COME TO THIS??

BA and BASSA meet regularly, BA tell BASSA its proposals and plans.
Normally what happens is they both negotiate, BA say what they want
us to do and BASSA act on our behalf and agreements are made. One
of the most recent examples of this is the Standby block, the
starting hours, the hotel accomodation the night before an 0700
start blah blah blah. Previous examples of this include Box
Payments, MBT's, Back to Backs etc. These are things that BASSA
have negotiated on our behlaf.

The last time BA and BASSA met, BA outlined plans of what they
wanted to do next, preparing us for T5. After this meeting BASSA
had one of the quarterly meetings with its members and took a vote.
The vote was if BA try and impose such and such, are we prepared to
vote for industrial action?? There was a unanmous YES. So, BA and
BASSA met again and tried to iron out the problems. BA would not
budge and, acting in our interests BASSA did the same. Talks broke
down and now we are being sent the voting slip to support
industrial action.

2. WHAT BA WANT US TO DO

Reading this forum you can get some idea of what BA are asking for,
some of it is speculation we will find out EXACTLY what it is in
due course. Remember this, there will always be a bigger picture
behind what they are seeking to do now. There will be more and more
until they have got us eventually on

1. Hourly/Daily rate to replace allowances, boxes and overtime,

apaddyinuk

6th Dec 2006, 18:18

Lets not comment on things you know nothing about. Things are very sensitive at the moment and all will be released in time. No speculation please!

Riverboat

7th Dec 2006, 02:03

Sad or What? - says it all.

TopBunk

7th Dec 2006, 05:59

Lets not comment on things you know nothing about. Things are very sensitive at the moment and all will be released in time. No speculation please!

Paddy, with respect, this is a 'Rumour Network' and everyone has the right to their views and to speculate and gossip - it happens in virtually every post. Why should BA cabin crew be exempt from speculation, after all, just look at the multipage 'BA Pilots to Strike' thread elsewhere.

You and I know that BASSA ballot papers will be dropping onto doormats from 18th December, the ballot willl be counted on 12th January and a TGWU branch meeting will follow on the 15th January.

They are facts, not rumour or speculation. Yes things are sensitive, doesn't mean you need wrapping up in cotton wool....

sad or what

9th Dec 2006, 22:49

British Airways Cabin Crew are set to vote overwhelmingly for strike action. This could take place anytime from the end of January through to the end of March but a strike is most likely to happen sometime in February.

British Airways Cabin Crew would like it to be known that they absolutely do not want to go on strike. As Cabin Crew, all we want to do is our very best to look after the travelling public, conveying each and every one of you as comfortably and as safely as we possibly can from A to B. Obviously there are occasions when circumstances conspire against us, both for you the public and us as your crew, but it is often these very circumstances when our passengers appreciate most that they are with a British Airways Cabin Crew. This is borne out by us constantly exceeding every customer service target British Airways have ever set for us and also the clutch of industry awards we win every year - including this year where thanks to our hard work and the votes of you our customers, we walked away with the Best Cabin Crew award.

However, things are not all rosy with the current management of British Airways. Historically, we have always had a proper business relationship with our management. As with any commercial environment or business scenario, there has to be an appropriate level of give and take on both sides in order for anything to work. However, our new management team have a lot of ‘new brooms’ and wish to make a lot of changes. They have approached these changes by refusing to speak to our representatives, declaring their intention to introduce the changes without discussion and openly stating that “we will walk right through you.”

These changes are both to our working agreements and to our employment contracts, including but not limited to cuts in pay, no pay increases at all after a certain time, cuts in promotion opportunities, less rest between flights, removal of working position choice and BA ignoring the wording of their own sickness policy when applying it to Cabin Crew. This certainly has health and safety implications.

These changes go beyond simply working harder in a changing commercial and security conscious environment. They will affect our lives outside work, our take home pay and most importantly our family life outside of work. They will also have a knock on effect to you, our passengers.

We are still trying to get our management to talk to us but they are telling us “we have nothing to talk about”. Unfortunately at the moment we are not seen as people - and we are just like every one of you, doing the best job we can to earn a living and go home to our families, we are seen as expendable staff numbers. And whilst on board, we see you going about your business, travelling to see friends or going on holiday with your families, our current management see you simply as pound signs in seats.

At the moment, a strike is the only way we have of standing up for ourselves and forcing our management to open proper discussions regarding our contracts and our future employment. This can all be avoided with the application of a reasonable attitude and a dose of common sense from British Airways management, but anyone who followed the recent ‘cross wearing’ debacle will know that those qualities seem to be more lacking, the higher up the British Airways management tree you climb.

Should a strike happen and should you be caught up in the chaos it will cause, British Airways Cabin Crew humbly and sincerely apologise to you and ask for your patience and understanding whilst we try to get our managers to speak to us(!)

If you have non-changeable travel plans with British Airways from January to March next year, you can write to our chief executive Willie Walsh at

British Airways plc
Waterside
PO Box 365
Harmondsworth
UB7 0GB

Or e-mail customer relations using this link:

http://www.britishairways.com/travel/custrel/public/en_gb

Please urge him to treat his employees properly or simply provide him with your thoughts on British Airways current management style.

Thank you for your time

British Airways Cabin Crew

Just received this from a travel agent friend, interesting month for BA with pilots planning action at the same time?

AUTOGLIDE

13th Dec 2006, 07:11

A BA strike. That would be a new idea. As there is either a strike by the airline, (or it's caters) every year, would it not be better to simply have a post saying "BA not on strike this year". ********IF THIS EVER SHOULD HAPPEN************
"Non-Changeable travel plans"? All my plans are non-changeable, that's why I never fly BA any more.

Good luck with whatever. No doubt all the famillies with crying children stranded in the terminals yet again will be very supportive of you.

By the way comrades, it's 2006, not 1976.

And why exactly would I need the address of BA head office "to write to Wille Walsh"? Do you think passengers will write on your behalf? No, they just change plans and travel with someone else. The world doesn't revolve around you.

Wrightbrothers

13th Dec 2006, 16:59

Having read their reasons why, I am simply at dispare. Why do they think a strike will resolve this.
The pension problem won't go away because they go on strike, nor will it help solve it, the opposite is more likely because of lost revenue. After all, why should the cabin crew get special treatment on their pensions ?

Another reason was the removal of the CSD from short-haul: Well, I personaly think CSD's on S/H is a bit of a joke, as is the CSD role in general to be honest. They simply aren't needed, all they do is reset the IFE, and for the no-doubt high wage they get, they don't manage a lot of people.
The removal of the purser's from the 747 fleet is not exaclty a reson to strike, and it shows by the fact that they have to combine all of these wants becuase they simply won't stand up alone.

Just remind the cabin crew of the fact that they've had a pretty easy time, no job cuts and not too harsh a pay cuts (if any).
Wrightbrothers

zed3

13th Dec 2006, 18:31

Going to be pedantic here ..... removal of the 747 Purser's what exactly ?
Uuurm .

apaddyinuk

14th Dec 2006, 17:48

Well another bunch of informed comments about something most of you know nothing about.
Just please try to remember that not all of us are on blue chip salaries and need to protect what we have, tis simple human nature after all.

Let the flaming of reason commence!

manintheback

14th Dec 2006, 18:01

So right now we have 4 strikes lining up. Crew late Jan ownwards. Pilots some time after, Baggage handlers similar, and then the annual summer walk out. Me thinks advance booking with any other airline might just be a good idea next year.

Final 3 Greens

14th Dec 2006, 19:15

Dear Paddy

2003 - check in strike, disrupted my plans badly

2004 - threat of industrial action meant I had to rescedule flights to avoid uncertainty, wasted effort when I oculd have been billing clients

2005 - GG fiasco, paid club prices, got a brown bag just like discounted economy pax, what a rip off

2006 - suitcase broken enroute to Brussels, ground staff very unhelpful - mind you I only paid GBP444.50 for the ticket, what could I expect; failure to provide premium service = rip off, IMHO

2006 - just been charged £552 for a one way Y ticket LGW-TUN what a rip off

And BA has also reduced premium luggage to a 23kg limit.

To be perfectly honest, I couldn't care less whether your lot (BA) disappear up your **** in 2007

This is mutual death wish behaviour.

apaddyinuk

15th Dec 2006, 19:47

Well Finals...im sorry as I was fully responsible for all of those things. Heres a 20pence coin, call someone who cares. If BA have caused so much inconvenience to you as you claim then I think you are a muppet to continue flying with them. You also clearly dont give a rats arse about jo public like myself who just happens to wear a uniform so again, i lack sympathy for you, but you have none for me or any of my colleagues so no love lost eh?

BA are in business to make money...Im in the business of making money also, I will do my utmost to protect my livelyhoods terms and conditions and if that means "LEGALLY" disrupting a few thousand peoples travel plans for a few days because the bullys that wish to reduce my pay refuse to negotiate then so be it.

I too dont like BA (as in the management) at the moment and I have to work for the gits. I do however like my job (as a BA crew member as I feel its people, that is the non management people are the best in the industry and make me proud to fly for this airline which is not even my national one) and will do what I can to save it. Its unfortunate that the very nature of the industry will cause widespread disruption but Im sure all of you would do the exact same thing if you were in my position and the position of 15000 of my colleagues...and dont say you would not. This is not just about the pensions deficit. We have tried every other avenue possible, this is a long time coming!!!

My recommendation to all of you...we'll miss you on our flights, but dont book BA in the near future...Hit the managers where it hurts...THE COMPANIES PROFITS = THEIR LOST BONUS!!!!

SXB

15th Dec 2006, 21:12

Paddy
I think you're missing the point entirely. Those of us who fly for business are doing it for specific reasons, we go somewhere and we do the stuff we're supposed to do and then we come home. The airline that takes us there is one of many we can choose from, as a minimum we expect them to provide us with the promised travel on the time and date specified on the ticket. If they don't do this then we get upset, if we are aware, in advance, that they probably won't do this then we'll choose someone else.

From a human point of view most of us business travellers may agree with your position along with your reasoning, just as you may sympathise with our position when we are screwed by our management. At the end of the day it all comes down to business decisions, your industry is highly competitive and there are probably too many airlines competing for too little business. You are also competing with airlines who's staff T&Cs are probably much worse than yours (though I don't know, I'm guessing)

The laws of economics are extremely cruel and in todays world they are applied ruthlessly in the employment market, positions where there is an oversupply of good quality staff carry lower T&Cs. Those where it is more difficult to recruit attract higher T&Cs.

Personally I wish you luck with your struggle, even though BA may pay more than some airlines I don't think anyone becomes CC for the money. That said a strike will damage your business, BA will lose revenue. As a business traveller I would not entertain the idea of buying a ticket for a time period where there was a possibility of a strike.

Best of luck.

Final 3 Greens

15th Dec 2006, 22:41

but dont book BA in the near future

Don't worry, I won't be troubling you in the near future, as I get excellent service from Emirates and Lufthansa/Swiss on long haul and Air Malta and Lufthansa on short, but BA has the monopoly on the LGW-TUN route, so no choice there.

So this year reads 104 sectors (mainly C/J/F) so far, 7 with BA.

And how many times have I needed to reschedule on any other airline due to industrial action? Nada.

I rest my case.

PS. I wouldn't do what you are intending to do, whatever you think, because I wouldn't get into your position in the first place and I have the track record to demonstrate it, 16 years working for myself.

airbus777

16th Dec 2006, 11:22

Vote Yes!:d

BEagle

16th Dec 2006, 11:59

91 UK-EU business class sectors so far this year, with another 5 still to go.

Number with ba? ZERO. Main reasons being the lingering stigma of the 'Dirty Tricks' era - and to avoid like the plague having to travel from that slum known as LHR.

Went to Madrid a couple of times; BHX-MUC-MAD. My LH business class ticket was €200 cheaper than my colleague's - and he flew baConAir direct from MCR in Gitmo Bay class luxury on some EMB 145 to a terminal miles from anywhere....

ba was once at the top. But now it has no real unique selling point - it lost that when Skippy killed Concorde.

However, I can understand the CC's case. A friend, who was once a stew on BEA Tridents, said that her working day might typically be Manchester to Paris, a night on the town in a nice hotel, then Paris to Manchester the next morning.

Compare that with the slavery of today!

Mind you, tales from the DC-7C and Stratocruiser era would make any of today's CC green with envy. But many wouldn't even get through selection!

PAXboy

16th Dec 2006, 12:01

flybywire

16th Dec 2006, 12:21

Now...I am NOT in favour of this particular strike for many, many reasons, and I was not around when the other ones happened in 1997 etc however I do not understand why everybody else in the world can strike and when it touches any part of BA the general public goes completely nuts with anger etc. I blame the :mad: daily mail for this, which way too many people read as if it were the bible (or the quran, for par condicio).:yuk:

When talks between the workforce and the management break down, things become difficult. BA management are renown for not being very approachable and let's say how things are, BA in most cases (including with cabin crew of the new LGW fleet) give employees nothing more than the minimum legal requirement. (leave...maternity leave...etc etc) and take as much as they can (280duty hours on SH in the month of may despite 5 days of leave anyone else?!?) Those lucky ones that have had better T&Cs in the last few years are probably right to fight to keep their few priviledges.

Anybody else in the same situation would do exactly that. Workers-management relations have always been difficult in BA. Willie behaves like he's a dictator, well guess what he and his monkeys might have the power but the employees have the numbers on their side.

Having said that I feel for all those passengers who might have their travel plans disrupted:( if that means you'll take your business somewhere else then be it, maybe that will make some bells ring up in waterside.

manintheback

16th Dec 2006, 12:49

With respect Flybywire, the last 3 years have been no notice wildcat strikes that left a heck of alot of people stuck at airports around the world for days if not weeks on end. I had the unique privilege of sitting in the first class lounge at T1 when everyone disappeared 2 seasons ago - no notice, no information, nothing nut a sudden disappearance of staff. All that occured was BAA security appearing around 3 hours later throwing us all out. Any sympathy that may have been had disappeared for whats happened in the past, not whats about to happen in the future.

flybywire

16th Dec 2006, 13:10

manintheback....whatever, If you read my post you see that I have stated I am not in favour of it and I certainly won't strike. Full stop. However maybe people like yourself - booking on another airline - are what willie needs to realise he has to drop his attitude of a dictator and that it's time to stop giving huge bonuses to those managers who will be paid if they succeed in convincing the workforce to accept the new t&cs.

If the strike you're talking about is the gate gourmet one, it was an unforeseen, illegal strike and most of us "normal" BA people worked REALLY hard (I did extra work as a volunteer on the ground in the terminals on my days off for no money, despite I am a cabin crew and from another base, and with me thousands of other people) while management did very little from their offices in waterside.
I am not looking for empathy or sympathy, I am just stating the facts. If it were not BA and if the :mad: Daily Mail didn't exist (or if people realised that it's the worst form of pseudo-journalistic rubbish) things would be different.

6chimes

16th Dec 2006, 14:03

For those SLF out there; many of you do not have a clue how much destruction to Cabin crew terms and conditions has occured over the last 5 years throughout most of the airlines within the UK. What you do not understand is how much of an impact that has on crew as individuals. Working longer hours, flying much more has a real impact on your health, how many people get of planes feeling "great", its the same for us. Working in an environment with reduced oxygen levels, reduction of rest periods, earlier starts, later finishes etc. leads to a very short flying career. Many of the UK airlines now actively encourage a turn over of crew and work you as hard as they can in that time. There is a document called CAP 371 which is designed to stop fatigue amongst flying crew, what it is not included in that document is the needs of an individual to have a life, it was not meant to be used as a rule book for rostering crew, which is exactly what the low cost operations use it as. You do not find many crew working for those airlines for long. It is mainly young adults without many financial responsibilities, after college, gap year etc.

Now look at those crew who have worked for years and given a substantial part of their working lives to an industry, have families, mortgages, cars......people relying on them! We cannot continue in a career that is headstrong in getting rid of us. BA is one of the few airlines that still offer a career and in return you the passenger continues to get some mature people that; should be able to understand you the passenger better and will generally be better equipped to resolve any issues you have. (and no I dont fly for them! but support them every inch of the way!).

6

apaddyinuk

16th Dec 2006, 17:50

FBW...I think maninblack is referring to the T1 groundstaff walkout of 2003 where all the staff walked out over a new swipe in system. This may have been a wildcat action however it too was a direct result of management incompitence which although many SLF chose to ignore, is a harsh reality.
Of course the traveling public and anyone who feels they think its their business to comment will blame the striking faction for any strike that takes place without being privvy to the full facts. Thats a fact of life, its those that can see beyond the management dribble and picket lines that can educate others and sway opinion.

FBW, Id be curious as to your reasons why you do not support any strike action as you clearly do not support much of todays managements decisions.

flybywire

16th Dec 2006, 18:18

FBW, Id be curious as to your reasons why you do not support any strike action as you clearly do not support much of todays managements decisions.

Paddy.....if you ever read the cabin crew news, whenever there's an email that is uncomfortable for BA that's mine. I always stand up and say what I mean. I sent reports to chirp (they love me now) I have written to the whole world in BA, often getting silly non-answers, but at least making them aware that part of us do know that there's something wrong in many areas. Recently I approached CCnews with a serious maintenance issue and have received no answer. Got the union involved, let's see what happens there.

I am personally not in favour of this strike for two reasons:

1)My union hasn't asked me to ballot and even if I did strike being pregnant I wouldn't make any difference to the flying programme and now that I am grounded I would instead add considerable and avoidable disruption to my working week.
Besides, I believe that with proper talks many issues can be resolved, as long as the unions do not cave by accepting stupid payments in return (bribery.......sickness procedure anyone? Maybe the SLF should be introduced to this concept, and maybe it should be explained to them that it's all because of the "grab the money and run" philosophy of bloody bassa and amicus)

2)Nobody gave a :mad: when BA did the same thing with us at EF LGW and have to say I am very resentful. I love my job regardless and wouldn't transfer to LHR for all the money in this world, and I assure you I am working towards feeling a bit less upset that for years we've been the "poor" side of BA and nobody "up the road" gave a miserable :mad: about us!!!

However, I am not blaming all those crew who will actually strike. I understand the reasons why you want to do it and I wish you all the luck in obtaining what you want. I cannot help feeling that HE will do whatever he wants regardless though.:(

SXB

16th Dec 2006, 22:06

Paddy

This may have been a wildcat action however it too was a direct result of management incompitence which although many SLF chose to ignore, is a harsh reality

Again, you're missing the point. To us SLF it makes no difference, if an airline is subject to strike action we will avoid it like the plague, you can argue internally about who's fault it may have been but for us it makes no difference, if we don't get to our destination then next time we choose someone else.

If you go on strike you are cutting your own throats because we, the customer and most important part of your business, will simply book with someone else next time.

As FBW says there are other ways to address the problem.

6chimes

16th Dec 2006, 22:31

SXB; How exactly does someone who works in a totally customer faced environment deal with poor industrial relations with their management and the management are trying to break them, when the management and customers can use that disruption as a weapon.

6

PAXboy

17th Dec 2006, 03:33

fbw You write persuasively and it does sadden me that staff are being treated this way. I have seen T&Cs reduced right across commerce and local govt in the past 15 years.
people like yourself - booking on another airline - are what willie needs to realise he has to drop his attitude of a dictator and that it's time to stop giving huge bonuses to those managers who will be paid if they succeed in convincing the workforce to accept the new t&cs.
If only that would do the trick - but it won't. The mood in the country is now very tough. Everyone I know (people ranging from early 30s to late 50s) feels hard done by and that they are being backed steadily into a corner. The maddness of house prices that has been allowed to fashion our daily lives for the past 30 years has impoverished every regular person (not the bankers of course).

So, when people have a job and one that provides regular employment and benefits the public do not look at how it was for those people 10 years ago. They look at what you have now (through the imperfect television lens) and decide whether or not you have a valid gripe.

I agree also that the Daily Mail is a poisonous rag and that the Express tries to out-Mail the Mail making it worse for all. BUT they will make no change (either way) to what happens. The power is now back with mgmt and, one day, it may well be back with the staff and unions - but not any time soon.

If this strike goes ahead, the staff will lose. If the pilots strike, they will lose too. Across the last 20 years mgmt have developed new ways of dealing with staff and they have ensured that the mgmt always have a Win-Win.

All of these disputes have already been mapped out and the various possible outcomes have been costed and considered. Any action taken by staff will simply cause them to select a different option from the range at their disposal.

And the really nasty news is that, should you try and work in any other feild, the mgmt are from the same schools and have the same bag of tricks. Yes, there are exceptions but, in my 28 years of working in this country - not many.

Final 3 Greens

17th Dec 2006, 06:27

6 Chimes

It is not a question for SXB to answer, but for you to consider.

Maybe its time you changed career, since change is pervasive and no amount of resistance will stop it; all that happens is that some people become unhappy and disillusioned; the same thing happened with my industry about 20 years ago and I hated it, but did make a clean break and found an alternative that has worked out better. Not easy to kill off your favourite child, but sometimes it is the only way.

Remember that you are not victims of somedark conspiracy, but are on the receiving end of market forces. The 747 era brought the concept of air travel for the masses and combined with deregulation in the US, which acted as a catalyst for lower fares, a demand was created for air travel affordable to all.

In particular, short haul travel (including business class, which is a shadow of it's former self) is now more akin to a coach journey than an "experience", as it was when I started travelling, although long haul premium is still a highly differentiated service

As BEagle says in an earlier post, in those days CC standards were far stricter than today, perhaps the Concorde fleet was the last bastion to fall and many present day CC would not have made the grade, so the sword cuts two ways, more opportunity, degraded T&Cs.

I note with some amusement the argument that BA provide more mature CC; well some BA CC are excellent, but a lot (in my observation) are no more than average - I find that easyJet, strangely enough, have the most consistently approachable and helpful CC, who also act professionally.

IF the 2003 strike was a wildcat action, as SXB says, it matters not; business travellers choose reliable airlines - as I said in my earlier post BA management and cabin crew are engaging in behavious that risk mutually assured destruction.

Having worked on Heathrow for nearly a year and seen the old fashioned working practices in place there (for many different types of workers), I imagine that WW and the board have decided to break some of these and are prepared to bet the farm on winning, since the alternative is grim from their perspective.

But that is me rationalising about management matters and the bottom line is that I have had too many bad experiences with BA in recent years to use it unless there is no other alternative and peversely, in this regard, the airline has the same standing as Ryanair in my pecking order. I just booked 8 x J class sectors with EK yesterday - could have been with BA, but why fly with an airline that consistently disappoints?

BTW, PAXBoy, I agree with your analysis of the UK at present; I chose to emigrate and perhaps that tells its own story, I now enjoy a relaxed Mediterranean lifestyle and haven't felt better in years.

flybywire

17th Dec 2006, 10:38

I chose to emigrate and perhaps that tells its own story, I now enjoy a relaxed Mediterranean lifestyle and haven't felt better in years.

It maybe time for me to go back where I came from then :sad:

PAXboy I do agree with you entirely. I think the unions should work towards a)not killing each other for a start, having 2 unions is one of the main reasons why BA has done all what they fancied with us in the past as the unions were busier trying to kill the other one than to work towards defending us (I have many examples) b)finding a reasonable way, give something but not without getting something else back. In the past they have caved in sooooo many times (getting stupid payments in return for all cabin crew) accepting dramatic changes the moment they smelt a bit of money. They were too quick to sell themselves and BA think they can use this anytime they want.

I know I am not very popular with my colleagues at LHR for my ideas, however while I think that some changes can be delayed (and probably refined), I do see the need for other changes. BA have started a new model at LGW which is working and is saving the company millions of pounds, not compromising safety and/or customer service. That has set a precedent and has proved that it can be done in order to compete in this agressive industry. So even if I know that it might mean more work for my colleagues (like it meant for us) it also means that if we're lucky we can still be here in 20 years' time, working competitively and offering a better product.

I do not know how much money per year the LHR CC will end up losing at the end of the day, as nobody in BASSA has mentioned anything about the new proposed wages etc. and because of this and other reasons I have a veeeeery bad feeling about this proposed strike and the grounds on which it is based. There's much more space for talks I think, I hope that talking about a strike at this point is just a blackmail technique as it won't do much good to anyone!

As for the pension issue, well, that's another story and cannot say I do not agree with anybody who will be affected. But apparently, despite being the biggest issue in my opinion, it seems to have disappeared from the union's priorities all of a sudden. :rolleyes:

Final 3 Greens

17th Dec 2006, 11:33

t maybe time for me to go back where I came from then

Watch out for the volcanic ash at the moment :}

flybywire

17th Dec 2006, 12:32

Hahahahaha!!:E Well to be honest it's the scary windsheer I have to watch out for during this time of the year in my region ;)

PAXboy

17th Dec 2006, 13:41

fbw It is good that there are people who stand up to be counted and I am sorry to be such a Cassandra in PPRuNe. I think the reason that I so often predict that the worst fears of staff will come true is that the airline business is one of the last in the UK to be changed into the new style. Note that I do not like the new style!! Because I have worked in many different industries, I have seen the changes across the board. Whereas, people who work in airlines tend to be in them for their whole career and see the changes as being unique.

Consider the Data Processing (computer) departments where a single laptop now has more power than a mainframe had 40 years ago. An industry grew up from nowhere and people made fabulous money and enjoyed being respected for their knowledge - then found the rug pulled from under their feet by new microprocessors and software that meant much of their specialist knowledge for product purchase and operation could be bought off the shelf or, indeed, on the Internet.

Consider the UK newspaper industry, that was taken on in 1985 with the Murdoch move to Wapping and everything changed in that industry for ever.

Consider the airline industry, that began it's change with Southwest in 1971 and in the UK in 1977 when SkyTrain was able to start operations. There are many other examples to give from public knowledge and personal experience.

These changes are unstoppable because humans have universally opted for what we call capitalism (even if their own govt currently says that it is socialist or something else, the default human process is capitalist). Humans want to pay the least money for the most result - everywhere, all the time.

Why are the unions quiet? My cynical guess is that they know that they will lose this one and so are not getting in too deep, so that they will not be associated with failure.

F3G Yes, I agree! The BA board have decided to bet the farm and I expect that they will win.

I got out of telecommunications when it was merged into 'IT' and the whole industry changed. I'm sure some aspects changed for the better but my T&Cs declined as mgmt decided that they could save money and why did they need to pay people who had seen it all and watched the mistakes being made (made some of them :ouch: ) but then had to FIX the mistakes. Much better to pay less money to other people and worry about the mistakes later. Nowadays there are no gold stars in preventing mistakes - only in clearing up the mess. Our upbringing to keep things running smoothly is no longer considered econimocal.

If I could leave the UK, I would but the work I do now is highly specialised to the UK and would not export. It is also personal and not work that can be 'corporatised' and moved elswhere.

Enjoy the Med because I expect that this US/UK approach will continue it's insidious move to your corner of the planet. :sad:

flybywire

17th Dec 2006, 13:57

These changes are unstoppable because humans have universally opted for what we call capitalism (even if their own govt currently says that it is socialist or something else, the default human process is capitalist). Humans want to pay the least money for the most result - everywhere, all the time.

So true, so unbelievable but yet true. Sometimes it seems, in this time and place, that we are getting the worst of both worlds, socialism and capitalism. Not many people would accept that statement, I know, but the more I travel the more I see the UK especially as if it's on a collision track! Italy in the last 5 years has been following like a stupid dog in many fields and they're starting to count the damages now. I was too young for Murdoch in the 80's however I have been an unfortunate witness of his influence in Italy in more recent years :yuk:

Why are the unions quiet? My cynical guess is that they know that they will lose this one and so are not getting in too deep, so that they will not be associated with failure.

Which proves that it's so silly to work up the workforce against the company is this way. Talks and negotiations might have a better result in this case.
I have no faith in both unions and twice in the last 3 years I have been asked by Amicus to ballot for something and twice I voted against their recommendation. Maybe it's time for me to leave it ;)

I really hope they'll think about it twice before ballotting, however someone has mentioned that they're going ahead anyway and probably will start sending letters out tomorrow. We'll see what happens. BA official sources say that the possible disruptions will be at the end of january/beginning of february so good luck to anyone flying out of LHR during that time :(

Oh, last thing, we're both Cassandra's then, as all I predicted in the last 3 years became true for us at LGW...everything! I too started with better T&C's which were eroded little by little as foreseen and in the timeframe expected, and even the single fleet thing, I remember saying it during my initial course to all those people who were crying for long-haul. None of them believed me then and many left to go to charter airlines who offered LH straight away, and some since then tried to reapply for BA but didn't get in! :rolleyes:
It's not difficult to see what makes good business sense for a huge company like BA, you just need to have a look around at different aviation realities to get an idea of what we'll have to face in the years to come!

FBW :oh:

6chimes

17th Dec 2006, 14:59

F3G,

You do have a point, however I work for an airline that has consistantly eroded my T&C and have not received a profit share in years. BA workers got one so they can't be doing all that badly. It does need everyone to work together for sure and changes do need to be made. I do not think it benefits anyone having a Mcdonalds attitude style where a new face every day does not affect the end product. The only thing that I will say negatively towards SOME BA crew is that have got complacent, to have the T&C they have, should make them work a lot harder at pleasing the passenger, if you want people to pay more for seats to keep you in a good job you should really go out of your way to earn it. That is only SOME a minority at that, but for some they cloud the image unfortunately.

No i do not think I should find another career, I love the job I do and it is one of the few fairly well paid jobs left in the customer service industry. Unfortunately there is no exam, degree or test to show how much of a skill being good with the wide and varied public to show how much of a skill it is and how damn good most of us are at it. There really isn't that many talented people out there, borne from your comment regarding the lowering of standards as there are more people in the industry. I do believe that those of us that have worked in customer focussed industries for many years have developed skills that match those who train for a particular skill such as IT. Desire, application and aptittude are needed for both. Sadly the UK does not expect really good customer service generally but really appreciate it when they get it.....................off my soap box now:oh:

I suspect your opinions will prevail.:(

6

Get Smart

17th Dec 2006, 17:14

No-one wants AI, however, new contractors at BA (as the majority now are) simply cannot afford to continue to work for BA if the management get their way so hence the overwhellimg support for trade unions. Without them, it's open season for our dictorial managers who gain to reep the benefits of hefty bonuses should they succeed - at employees expense. Sorry, but it's simply called survival. You wouldn't be human if you didn't defend what you've worked hard for and your livihood was at stake - and for many that's exactly what it boils down to. All crew, hope this can be resolved without AI because at the end of the day, if there is a strike we're not paid, if we're not paid, life is difficult. Those making comments outside of the business need to put themselves in the same boat before making derogatory comments about others who are in a leaky boat! :=

Final 3 Greens

17th Dec 2006, 18:13

PAXBoy

I enjoy home, because I work globally and encounter this type of management attitude on a daily basis - fortunately I can pick and choose who to work with and have already booted a large telecom this year for messing me about; It took over 10 years running my own show to build that position, but thank goodness I stuck through the tough times.

BTW, there is an excellent essay by Jerry Harvey, published in his book The Abilene Paradox and Other Management Meditations, named "Eichmann in the Organization" which addresses some inhumane practices - well worth a look in the library.

6 Chimes

Having made the rational analysis, let me now express my empathy for your situation - I hope that you can find a way forward that works for you, in a career that you obviously love.

Get Smart

Those making comments outside of the business need to put themselves in the same boat before making derogatory comments about others who are in a leaky boat!

This is the SLF forum, by it's very nature aimed at those who work outside the industry.

When you are a moderator, you will be able to moderate, until then I suggest that you offer your own opinion and leave others to theirs.

PAXboy

17th Dec 2006, 18:14

GetSmart Of course - and I have consistently said that I agree with your grievance. I simply say that the course of action proposed will not succeed. I have also said this in the long running Pilots Strike thread.

The reason that it will not succeed is because mgmt in the past 20 years have tried out new methods and found that they work. The unions, for the most part, are still fighting the battles in the the 1970s and 80s style.

Lastly, as stated in other posts, the mood in the UK has changed dramatically and the mgmt will experience zero pressure to change their attack. Yes, they will get much aggro for a strike taking place but the blame will be focused at the company as a whole and not one group of indiviudals. The days when a group of hard done by workers could rely upon the moral (and other) support of the general public are gone. The only ones who could expect that are medical people.

Again, I'm sorry that you are now experiencing the same reduction in working conditions and money that some of the rest of of us have had to go through in the past 16 years since the recession of 1990.

brush

17th Dec 2006, 21:37

My personal sympathies to those who find their T&Cs being steadily reduced but that is what is happening across the whole of the UK in almost all areas of work. It has certainly happened in the IT world.

There will no sympahty or support from the public for any strike by any section of BA staff. The only sympathy that would be available, I reckon, is for doctors and nurses. No one else will be deemed to be having a hard time. That is because most regular people are having a hard time.

Yes, I know that the mgmt are lining their pockets with bonus' and will make even more if they reduce your T&Cs but that is the real world. A strike will affect all of you in the short term and all of you in the longer term.

If this is the "real world" does that make it ok?

If it's not ok who will change it?

Not the people who benefit by it, but the people who are working harder and longer, for less.

Furthermore to those who doubt the wisdom of any BA cabin crew strike ought to know that BA cabin crew annual manpower turnover rate is 1%. In other words the long term profitability of the company is something the cabin crew are concerned with, dare I say even more so than those within management who propose changes that most won't be around to see, even short term results of.

This is something that BA cabin crew feel deeply about as they do their company, going on strike is a last option faced with a management whose concern over cost cutting has distracted them from the basics of running a successful business.

PAXboy

17th Dec 2006, 23:05

brush Once again I have to say - Yes, I agree 100%. Yes, the UK has collectively gone bonkers and we are ruining our own lives and those that follow. The desire for short term gain by a few, via the mechanism of the Stock Exchanges of the world, will see many broken and disheartened.

The 1% staff turnover figure that you give is astounding and the cost of seeing that figure go up will be a very high one for mgmt. BUT that 'payback' will not emerge for some years and the present bunch will be long gone. That is the problem everywhere, that no one gets 'gold stars' for preventing disaster these days - only for cleaning up the mess.
If it's not ok who will change it?
A good question and I can only give you my guess for the future: Nothing will change until it is a VERY big mess. That means that the company is ruined and other companies experiencing the same. Until at least a million people can be seen to have suffered - nothing will change. That is just an off-the-cuff attempt to put a figure on the problem. I put a figure on it because people want figures.

Again, I predict disaster because that is what I have seen in the past 20 years. I wish it were otherwise. I wish that concerted action by decent people could change what is happening - but I doubt it.

What is the natural end point? Look at history and consider what has led to revolution. Look at how a few ruled the many, look at the decadence and ostentation. Then try to calculate how the next revolution will take place - factoring in the countless changes in the world since the last uprising of the people against their 'betters'.

Many readers will scoff that I take a thread about a possible strike by airline crew and extrapolate it upwards to a popular uprising - but a popular uprising starts with small things. It is an interesting debate and I do not have an answer or a time frame.

boredcounter

18th Dec 2006, 04:41

'less rest between flights'
I take it you work to CAP371 based FTLS, or by that do you mean your AFS?
:ugh:

manintheback

18th Dec 2006, 07:52

..
Furthermore to those who doubt the wisdom of any BA cabin crew strike ought to know that BA cabin crew annual manpower turnover rate is 1%...................................
This is something that BA cabin crew feel deeply about as they do their company, going on strike is a last option faced with a management whose concern over cost cutting has distracted them from the basics of running a successful business.

And heres the really bad news. Its much cheaper to offshore (not relevant here) or pay near legal min on-shore, with bad conditions (plenty of new EEC imigrants to choose from), overstaff by 20% and accept 20% + turnover per annum. Thats the reality of a global market economy. My company does it through offshoring, my wifes via the legal min route (a VERY large household name).

Does the service suffer?, absolutely,
Will passengers moan about it - absolutely
Irrespective of 1) and 2) above, will they then carry on going for the cheapest perceived option (aka Ryanair and the like) - absolutely.

If your competition starts doing it then your own company inevitably follows - and look at WWs background. As Paxboy states, a strike is the workers tool of yesteryear. The bosses will win, they always do.

Final 3 Greens

18th Dec 2006, 08:33

PAXBoy

The 1% staff turnover figure that you give is astounding and the cost of seeing that figure go up will be a very high one for mgmt.

Playing devil's advocate, I could argue that 1% is too low and suggests a stagnating worksforce, 3-4% may be healthier in terms of succession planning.

Equally, a BA manager may regard 1% as indicating that their T&Cs are way above industry norms, see MITB's last post.

SXB

18th Dec 2006, 13:54

F3G
Absolutely agree. A 1% turnover is too low, an element of new blood among the workforce is good, it stimulates the organisation.

One other point which is strangely absent from this thread is any details of what BA may be planning to do. There are some comments regarding general areas that might be affected but no details.

Does anyone have such details ?

apaddyinuk

19th Dec 2006, 02:18

Yes but one also needs to remember that there has been almost ongoing recruitment of crew since 2003 with thousands of new crew coming into the picture. Im sure that 1% figure is not totally accurate and does not include natural waistage.,..e.g...those retiring etc. Personally I too think 1% seems a little wrong.

Im sure many would agree that flying out of LGW or LHR EF there are far more "fresher" faces for want of a better word flying about. And were creeping into LHR WW too particularly on the 767 longhaul fleet.

Final 3 Greens

19th Dec 2006, 03:34

Paddy

I don't believe the figure, either.

Was just presenting a counterpoint.

apaddyinuk

19th Dec 2006, 17:04

I totally appreciate that Finals, I have actually heard that figure before in work. Id love to see that actual breakdown for myself to see how they came about with the 1% figure. We all know bean counters have a habit of manipulating figures to suit their own needs at times.

SXB

19th Dec 2006, 17:35

I suspect if you didn't include retirements and migrations to other parts of BA then 1% might be just about achievable.

THE FLYING COOK

19th Dec 2006, 21:13

This is quite interesting regarding the turnover of just 1%. I work with lots of longhaul crew at BA who at the moment are very angry. But the funny thing, is the fact that even if BA's management got through ALL the proposals they want, very very few would leave.
I have seen BASSA in action for so many years now and its the same boring old story. They instill fear into the crew, and then go onto this myriad of myths and lies. The MAIN problem is that they are run by a group of part time crew who have very little knowledge of what crew in BA REALLY want and NEED. A classic example was in 1994? when BA tried to bring in part time contacts for their cabin crew. BASSA said it was BA's way of IMPOSING partime on EVERY crew member. BA said no. A strike nearly ensued and yet 12 years later we have nearly 25% of our crew on a waiting list for part time,and at least 40%of our work force on some form of part time. A win/win all round I would say.
Some of our T/C's are so out of date it's a joke. One of our hardest trips this summer was a Mumbai nightstop. Horrible flight ex LHR leaving at 2200 and a 10hr+ day flight on the return. Yet there is a 5 day SIN trip where I earn 16 times the money in expenses/extras and the trip is a piece of :mad: . Will BASSA try and change it? No way as its a nice trip the reps can go on. They NEVER do any of the hard trips as they have office duty on those days.
No it seems to me that a lot of what is happening at the moment is so the reps can keep their own T/C's within their union. There is so much more I could say!! Its always been the same old story whether in old communist Russia where the boys at the top had their own private car lanes on the roads of Moscow or some of this countries union top brass looking after THEMSELVES a la Mr. Scargill.
However its important to say that if WW got his way we would be in big trouble. But BASSA need to get real and negotiate what is important eg the pension and not the fact that BA have withdrawn a bus service from the central area of Heathrow so that our commuters from europe have to find their own way to our reporting centre. Its their choice where they live!!
But as usual BASSA just lump the important stuff with the rubbish. What do you expect with a bunch of amateurs running the show, when we could afford professional lawyers and negotiators with the £2 million + that go into BASSA's coffers.

slim_slag

19th Dec 2006, 21:37

Then there is the famous policy advocated by jack Welch of GE which requires the dismissal of 10% of employees per year. Probably one of the more unacceptable faces of capitalism, but probably very good for the employer, and so very good for the shareholders. And as we (should) all know, it's the shareholders that really matter.

One suspects the only truly irreplacable employees in BA will be found in their IT department (and even that will only be true in the short term) and that is probably true of most of their competitors. One also suspects that the boys at the top know this.

haughtney1

19th Dec 2006, 22:24

Some of the comments on here are unbelievable..particularly the "management always win"..."its all been costed"...etc etc...

What those particular arguments conveniently forget are the shareholders..both institutional, and the private holders who will NEVER stand by whilst the company value is eroded by industrial action.
WW has a remit to follow...but make no mistake, that remit will only go so far, beyond that point he will find himself removed by the board.

Companies in the final analysis are about people, if the organization is to function then both sides need to come together....if this requires industrial action (still the most direct and effective form of getting managements attention) then so be it. Those of you on here who are angry about the inconvenience or hassle this may cause..get over it, perhaps your boss/employer has a few "efficiencies" waiting for you around the corner.

Yes the airline industry has changed, yes BASSA will have to change, but by the same token those at water world wont have much of a business to manage if they upset the troops to much at the coal-face.

PAXboy

19th Dec 2006, 22:27

One suspects the only truly irreplacable employees in BA will be found in their IT department (and even that will only be true in the short term) and that is probably true of most of their competitors. One also suspects that the boys at the top know this.An interesting observation slim. Whilst I am in no position to KNOW, I will make a guess!

Having worked in telecommunications, that was subsumed into IT, for 27 years my guess is that the IT folk will only be paid enough to keep them and they will be made to feel as 'at risk' as anyone else. I say that because the T&Cs of IT have not kept pace with life during the past ten years and because SOP for corporates is to make everyone feel at risk - but not too much!

However, it is true that the importance of IT to any company cannot be undserstated. Without IT - nothing in the airline moves a muscle (or a hydraulic muscle ;) ).

... both institutional, and the private holders who will NEVER stand by whilst the company value is eroded by industrial action.
Well haughtney1 I wish that institutional shareholdres actually took action and/or that small ones had the power to take action! I think that WW and the board will win because the City want them to. The risk of a strike may be high but have we seen a carrier broken by industrial action recently?

I return to my theory that, noawdays, companies are not so bothered about things getting broken - as to how they get fixed. In previous decades, mgmt were trained to make sure that nothing got broken. Now they are trained to cut corners and just pick up the bits very quickly when it does break.

Previously, strike action was seen as failure, now it is a means to an end because the workforce and the customer no longer form large blocks of people, they are split into many differnt sub-groups that overlap like a Venn diagram factory smoking canabis!

When you had a large block of staff who would take action together and a large block of customers who were interested in the company - then things changed. Nowadays, the staff are split and the customer does not care if the company lives or dies - at least not in enough numbers. They also know that, if BA were to fold completely, it would all get bought up by others and alternative carriers would move in to provide the service. There would be some short term horrors for customers but not long term.

Once again, I am sorry that you folks are now going through the same changes that folks have been through in other working environments.

slim_slag

19th Dec 2006, 22:39

Ah, but I never said all in IT were irreplaceable, just that IT is the department where you will find the employees who are. I bet the top 10% of the IT department are doing very well indeed and will be treated with kid gloves. The other 90% of IT are as replaceable as the 99.99% of employees in the other departments. Just a hunch.....

And i know a company depends on it's employees to survive, but management don't need the goodwill of all of them, just enough to get you to the stage where you have replaced half the ones who have left.

haughtney1

19th Dec 2006, 22:54

return to my theory that, noawdays, companies are not so bothered about things getting broken - as to how they get fixed. In previous decades, mgmt were trained to make sure that nothing got broken. Now they are trained to cut corners and just pick up the bits very quickly when it does break.

Pax....nice theory, but it misses the point, because in case nobody has noticed BA are trying to achieve a 10% operating margin for one reason and one reason alone...the stock price, and why is that? because its up for sale (at the right price).
If it does break down into little pieces...its worth a lot less to those who wish to purchase it, ohhhhh and don't forget the damage to the brand as well :8

The employees (if they stick together) have the power in this one:ok:

Final 3 Greens

20th Dec 2006, 07:27

Haughtney

It isn't theory and you are delusional .... or a amanagement rep stoking up the fire.

If your idea about a sell is valid, how much more attractive a sale if the industrial realtions and T&Cs have been updated.

manintheback

20th Dec 2006, 08:03

Haughtney1 - make no mistake, the institutional shareholders want to see the unions and perceived militancy at BA broken once and for all, the pension issues sorted, and they dont want a fudge. The cost to the major shareholders in the overall scheme of things is tiny, the cost to the employees is the end of their job in the industry. I would suspect few can afford not to work for more than a week or two unpaid.

Re-visit the comments here in 6 months and I guess we will see whats happened one way or the other.

Get Smart

20th Dec 2006, 09:43

It has lately become difficult to make an informed decision as to whether AI is right. Whislt we all need to defend what we've worked hard for, we need to know exactly what's on the table. So far, the only party communicating any regular information to crew is BA (taken with a very large degree scepitism) via ess. On the BASSA website there is no update. Why is that?

Whilst we know the 'bones' of the issues no one has communitcated in black and white, EXACTLY what BA propose to do and EXACTLY what BASSA prospose back. Both parties are accussing each other of the same crimes. Refusing to talk. I undertand talks are top secret, but how can we make up our minds without knowledge? The ballot forms are in the post and we're in the dark.

Not going in BASSA's favour is the latest text saying that if crew don't provide an overwhelling support for AI, then they'll have to pack up and pull out as our union as of course they will have lost power and there is nothing more they can do. That in itself doesn't make sense. Are they really going to pack in a lucrative business. Some 10000 odd crew (guessing) that pay them £15.39 per month? I think not! In any event, it makes BASSA appear desperate and makes it's members a bit nervous. Perhaps I've read it differently to other people that know more about it so if anyone out there has a different slant on it, your views are most welcome please.

In fact, if anyone out there even knows what's on the table that would be handy. At the end of the day none of us want AI. It is disruptive to everyone. :ugh:

haughtney1

20th Dec 2006, 10:54

It isn't theory and you are delusional .... or a management rep stoking up the fire.

If your idea about a sell is valid, how much more attractive a sale if the industrial relations and T&Cs have been updated.

I'm neither, and the idea is valid.......my own research and investment portfolio would suggest a small wager on this, which I'm confident will come out in my favour:ok: Further more....look at the bigger picture, this has been bubbling away for at least 12 months:hmm:

make no mistake, the institutional shareholders want to see the unions and perceived militancy at BA broken once and for all, the pension issues sorted, and they don't want a fudge

I couldn't agree more:ok:

The cost to the major shareholders in the overall scheme of things is tiny, the cost to the employees is the end of their job in the industry. I would suspect few can afford not to work for more than a week or two unpaid.

Part truth, part speculation with this comment IMHO, sure in the overall scheme of things a 50% loss of the gains in the last 18 months for a clever spread bet is one thing, but those who have increased their exposure on the back of stable fuel prices and higher yields number many at the moment. The real issue here so far as investors are concerned is how much will it cost me? and then will the longer-term returns justify the short-term pain? The answer to that one is down to the individual.
As far as the employees are concerned, they really need to be making provision for what they expect to happen (IMHO a strike is a 50/50 possibility at the moment..judging by the disinformation emanating from both sides) as a decision to vote for industrial action carries with it the responsibility to think for ones self:ok:

SXB

20th Dec 2006, 10:57

What those particular arguments conveniently forget are the shareholders..both institutional, and the private holders who will NEVER stand by whilst the company value is eroded by industrial action.
WW has a remit to follow...but make no mistake, that remit will only go so far, beyond that point he will find himself removed by the board.

Companies in the final analysis are about people, if the organization is to function then both sides need to come together....if this requires industrial action (still the most direct and effective form of getting managements attention) then so be it. Those of you on here who are angry about the inconvenience or hassle this may cause..get over it, perhaps your boss/employer has a few "efficiencies" waiting for you around the corner.

Haughtney
I think your post is incredibly naive. The shareholders of BA couldn't give a damn about the employees, all they care about is the stock price and their dividend.

As for your comments regarding our own employers and any "efficiencies" as you say I think you'll find that we all went through that in the early 1990's when our employment practices were modernised. BA is one of the few emplyers left in the market place who are still using certain "Spanish Practices"

Interesting comments about IT staff, it's still extremely difficult to recruit and retain quality IT people in certain fields. I'm regularly signing off invoices for Peoplesoft developers at between €1500 and €2000 a day, it's impossible to recruit these people through the normal employment channels. Not all of them are good though, some of them are correcting mistakes made by their predecessors, we even caught one guy inserting dodgy code that he hoped would give him further employment later in the project.