The sad thing is that BASSA seem to be attempting to tell their entire membership that is it impossible that BA go bankrupt and the recession is not as bad as WW makes it out to be.
From 'Times Online' about Corus, formally British Steel:
Quote:
Corus cuts another 2,000 jobs amid union fears for UK steelmaking
Quote:
Corus has already shed about 2,500 jobs this year after mothballing a mill in South Wales and restructuring several parts of its business, to counter a 50 per cent fall in demand for steel from its peak because of the global recession. Kirby Adams, chief executive, said it was vital to act now, given that any recovery in Europe appeared to be “some time off”.
(My bold)
Even Unite is accepting of the problems:
Quote:
John Rowse, Unite’s national officer, said: “The situation for Corus and British manufacturing is too serious to stand idly by. Unless there is urgent support from the Government, British manufacturing will come out of recession hamstrung and unable to compete in the world economy.”
So, can the Government bail out every failing business? Nope. They have offered Corus £5 million in 'training support', how long would that last BA?
BASSA harp on about the destruction of contracts, the inability to live off of what BA are offering. For a start I very much doubt those statements. Sure the adjustment will be painful but sustainable. As has been pointed out many, many times before on this thread, this adjustment is little more than what other departments have done slowly and less painfully over the past 5 years. Those departments are already at the point BA want CC to be.
Consider however the possible consequences of ill informed and illogical IA. There are, as far as I can see three alternatives with varying degrees of probability.
1)At the bottom of the success probability scale is that the board see the IA as a direct attack on the girls and boys of the CC department and as PiB has alluded to, we can't have sexist bullying. So they sack the demon known as WW and the world returns to the land of milk and honey. First Class Pax and rich business men flock back through the doors of T5 in droves and off we go with a more BASSA malleable CEO at the helm.
Probability of success? 0.0000000001%
2) IA is called, WW activates his back pocket SOSR legal plan and the P45's start flooding into the post. The union call foul and demands an employment Tribunal. BA agrees but ties it up in legal red tape for 2-3 years. In the mean time, with forward bookings down over the winter, routes being trimmed and aircraft laid up, no slot flying restrictions and being cheaper not to fly than to fly, the company activates 2000+ temporary 11 month contract CC. Welcome to no job, long ET with a punitive payment at the end.
Probability of success? 85-90%
3) IA called, forward bookings drop to zero, the city loses all confidence in BA as an investment opportunity. Suppliers demand cash up front as IA has destroyed to forward going viability of the company. Cash reserves plummet on the costs. Share prices nosedive and a corporate hostile buyout ensues. ALL contracts of ALL 40,000 employees get reviews. Those that are militant get booted out. Pension disappears (investors payback) and the remaining 20-25,000 employees get allocated new contracts. All because BASSA would rather bring the company down than accept change like the pathetic, childish entity that it it. I wonder what the forward working environment would be like? Frosty one would assume.
Probability of success? 10%
So, to all on the CC forum that I am sure this will be cut and pasted, the idea of IA is, possibly ill advised. WW will have a legal plan in his back pocket. Irrespective of what he has done previously it is my firm belief that the board have him in the position he is in now as CEO for exactly this reason and he WILL NOT SQUANDER IT!
The pain will be borne by all in the company and the backlash could last many, many years.
Don't let a petulant union drag you to the brink of disaster. It looks nasty now and only a few days to sort it out. If BASSA could be bothered to turn up. The only hope is that Unite, who obviously have a grip on what is happening in the real world, give BASSA a good shake and tell them to grow up. Until then your union is putting your jobs on the line with the minimum of communication, for whatever reason, and no sight of any of the adjustments BA is demanding.
Remember, when bashing BALPA, BALPA kept all of its members informed through forums, newsletters, meetings, podcasts etc. We knew exactly the cost savings required at all points along the process. Members were polled on the subject of VR and then negotiations tailored to achieve the members wishes. Does this sound familiar? Nope. Instead BASSA announce a meeting after the deadline and a news blackout? Great.
I'm sure salient points will be cherry picked for the Bassa forum but here is the whole post. Enjoy.
As to those CC who are as aghast at the inept handling of this by BASSA as the other departments are. I really feel for you all and I hope against hope that this can get sorted in an adult manner to the benefit of both sides. BA is a great company to work for and I hope it can continue so without a few rotten apples from BASSA spoiling the load.
I await the BASSA forum foot soldiers 'constructive' criticism.
Last edited by wobble2plank : 26th June 2009 at 10:57.
I think BASSA may be in danger of falling into the same trap that caught BALPA out during the frankly disastrous Openskies issue.
The mistake is in thinking that Willy Walsh has somehow overstepped the mark, and that when the Board realise how many enemies he has made they will throw up their hands in horror and sack him.
Unfortunately, this is not the case. Mr Walsh was specifically recruited by the Board after Rod Eddington left. He has not gone too far, he is doing what the Board recruited him to do. A strong ballot in favour of industrial action will not result in Mr Walsh being sacked. He is here to stay, at least until he completes the job that he was brought in to do.
I am still stunned how many of my colleagues, and apparently BASSA, think that the whole global financial crisis is either made up, or that BA is somehow immune from it.
Despite nearly non-stop news coverage of it in all media, blitzing in BA News, and numerous ESS messages, my colleagues still think they are immune from it.
.........and if anyone who doesn't have access to the CF forum wondered what things get said over there. here are a few examples:
"Theres nothing wrong with BA!! He knows it and we know it!!"
"I'd rather see BA go bust, honestly what is the point!"
"This is purely and simply a ploy to once and for all shaft the cabin crew!!"
Is there any non-nuclear way of changing their mind-set? Sadly, I don't think there is. The only way they will realise things are serious is when all of us Cabin Crew end up on the dole.
Do you know something? Im sick and tired of all that. At the end of the day if ww gets his way and having us working like slaves, I'd rather see BA go bust. honestly. what is the point
Perhaps the point must be that all the other CC flying from non-BA airlines must be slaves, scratching in the dirt for the privilege of working.
The mindset and mentality of the BASSA hive mind is to hunt out, persecute and harangue the individual who dares to have an opinion against the 'brain'. For those that don't believe it just look back at the snow disruption in February and the BASSA hunt (name and shame it was called) for the CSD's that dared to reduce disruption rest for the good of the fare paying passengers.
Sadly, the mind set is implanted during initial training at 'Brain Crank' and is often set so deep that the average young, impressionable crew member will just jump when BASSA says jump without questioning why but just asking how high?
Hopefully, a peek over the ledge into the unemployment hell that exists in the middle of one of the worst recessions in living memory might jog people back into the real world before BASSA hits the meltdown button.
The rumours in the city are that this could well be a 'W' recession with us just hitting the middle at the moment. When growth doesn't return and the interest rates and taxes start to rise to cover the scandalous borrowing the Government have committed us all to, then we hit the second drop.
Surely it is better to be in employment (as slaves ) than on the dole queue? Add to that the fact that by calling IA you are handing WW the opportunity to target the people who are causing him the most problems and hit you with a P45. Legal or not is it worth the risk?
It does amaze me when some people say WW wants them to work as slaves. Do they know anything about history at all? How ignorant of them to even remotely compare these issues.
They also say, pay peanuts and get monkeys. So all crew at LGW and pretty much all crew in the UK (various airlines) are monkeys then? When challenged, they say "no, no, LGW crew aren't monkeys, that's not what we mean". So what do they mean then?
I know quite a few would think I'm jealous or whatever of their money and therefore want to see them get "shafted" at LHR. Not the case at all. I just want to be able to keep my job, do it well and considering I'm able to live fairly comfortably on my LGW salary, I don't need to go to LHR to make ends meet. Yes, it means I can't go to fancy restaurants, I can't buy designer clothes, handbags and shoes, and I can't go on holiday to far flung places several times a year. However, I'm happy! Seriously, I'm happy with my lot. I've got a car that gets me from A to B (and sometimes C), I've got a lovely place to live, even if it is the size of a shoe box, and I've got really good friends and a lovely family. What more could I wish for?
So many people out there have lost their jobs, house, car etc. Think about it, Bassa folks who think it's all sunshine in the real world. I don't want anyone to lose out on a lot of money, but as I've said before, something's gotta give.
For those who state that Bassa did not turn up at meetings. The question has been asked and the chairperson of Bassa has replied today as follows.
why on earth would BASSA not turn up when there are 14000 crew patiently waiting for news that could change their lives forever, that would be totally irresponsible. Please only post what you can verify. I would much rather people just emailed me and asked . Talks continue today to start at 1pm sharp at the companies request.Hence the reason I can post this morning.
Facts so far.
Talks are taking place and have been since february. Bassa are turning up to talks. No information is in the public domain because both sides are adherring to an information blackout.
Is that the same way they 'turned up' to the pensions meetings last year? Oh, no they didn't 'turn up' until the day after and even then managed to jump on the back of the already agreed BALPA deal whilst crowing that BALPA had sold them down the river?
I'm sure the chairperson of BASSA would admit that they hadn't turned up, wouldn't they???
Whilst talks may be 'ongoing since February' they seem to have stalled as BASSA advised that the company wants to discuss 'New contract, New Fleet' but BASSA are unwilling to move on from redundancies as they see that as the highest priority. Talks maybe, progress, possibly not, too late? certainly.
Quote:
Today BASSA are preparing a counter offer, which we hope to present to the company later in the week but the gap between us at present is large enough to fly a fleet of jumbos through it and whether that gap can be closed enough to satisfy all areas will be a gargantuan task. With that in mind and with threats of imposition on the horizon it is important that you now make a note in your diary. On Monday the 6th July we are holding a branch meeting, at Kempton Park again, and this really will be the big one. We will be presenting BA's proposals and our counter proposal.
This was posted by BASSA on the 24th after a meeting on the 23rd. The meeting with the company was scheduled for the input of counter proposals with BA on the 25th. BASSA did not attend on the 25th.
Last edited by wobble2plank : 26th June 2009 at 12:50.
I'll leave it to you to question the truthfulness of the chairperson of Bassa in writting. A question was asked, as had been suggested on this very site, and an answer given. You don't like the answer, and why should you, so you spin it out and question it. Did bassa attend the meeting? Yes.
Again, I wasn't there, I don't know what has been discussed in meetings, and neither I suspect were you.
I do know that now BA has informed the Goverment that 90 days notice has been provided for compulsary redundancies, BA now have a legal obligation to discuss with workers representatives the handling of the redundancies. They may prefer to discuss 'New Fleet' but surely you can see that the order of discussions needs now to be how job losses can be handled before any discussions on how new jobs will be created.
None of us have the facts re new fleet, but on the information we have there surely is a legal question of how a company can make 2000 cabin crew redundant one day, then re-employ 500 cabin crew the next day.
Did Bassa not attend a meeting on the 25th? I quote from the head of IfCE.
From: Bill Francis, Head of IFCE
Date: Thursday, June 25, 2009
RE: Talks update
It is just over three weeks since I wrote to you with details of the proposal and package to deliver the permanent savings for the airline’s survival plan.
Since then I have been in discussion with your unions and I know many of you are keen to know how these talks are going..........
.............Unite has today tabled its first written proposal.
As far as I understand, the company needs to get rid of 2000HCE. Therefore, VR and PT has been offered. The only time CR would come into the equation is if there isn't enough for VR/PT.
The 90 day notice comes into play if no agreement can be found in negotiations, and that's where CR would come into play.
New fleet will happen regardless, and there are plenty of people swimming in the hold pool, chomping at the bit.
Surely, it is possible to discuss/negotiate several issues in one session? Especially when the deadline is so close. Even if this isn't possible, I'm baffled it's taken this long for all this palaver. It's putting our jobs on the line, and I (and I suspect a lot more cc) do not want to lose my job because of a few die-hard non-negotiators.
Unite? or Bassa? who is negotiating here? Or are we seeing BASSA reigned in by Unite?
BASSA were to table the proposals but they didn't turn up, Unite did. So who is representing the Cabin Crew?
Who will make the decisions this time? Will BASSA be the usual headstrong child and have to be dragged screaming and kicking to the table by the parent union like the pensions discussions? Or will the parent union allow BASSA to discuss things themselves?
No mix up. You are correct GG, BA would prefer VR, but if there are not enough volunteers then CR will occur. To be legal the company has submitted notice to the goverment of 2000 job losses. If 1000 are by VR then 1000 will be CR. Having started a legal process BA now must engage employee representatives in discussions for upto 2000 HCE job losses. You will note that the VR relies on an agreement being reached by 30th June. Beyond that, at this time, VR will be withdrawn and the redundancies will be compulsary.
I suggest, if you didn't see it, yesterdays Channel 4 news has a good item to view.
and there are plenty of people swimming in the hold pool, chomping at the bit.
Not what I heard at Cranebank yesterday. In fact recruitment is going very badly indeed, with on some days up to 50% no shows, of the ones that turn up few are suitable, and even when they are, the candidates are leaving with no information with regard to pay and conditions.
BFs figure of about 500 may be the ballpark, BASSAs claim of 2000 is very wide of the mark.
If people leave the business through VR, the company are free to recruit, if however people are forced to leave through CR then it opens up a new set of legal questions, that I am not qualified to answer.
My take on the last few weeks is that BASSA must be seen to be doing the dance with BA.
Come to an agreement too early on in the negotiations and the members would not be impressed, drag it out, spew forth poison rhetoric, wind all and sundry up, then snatch an agreement at the last moment, which on the face of it does not seem to bad, given that all that was threatened by BA...................... oh and of course claim a victory, all the while the company is busy counting the £82 million saved
My opinion is that both VR and PT are used as a sweetner to make the TU:s and their members to accept the deal. If not agreed both VR and PT will be wiped out and replaced with CR.
Don't forget that 2000 HCE means anything between 2000 and 4000 actual people.
As for the hold-pool I have heard there are over 1000 people waiting. Recruitment earlier this year was fuzzy because they couldn't give any information whether it would be on temporary or permanent contracts or on which fleet they would be recruited to.
'channel 4 has been briefed by industry experts and Union representatives'
No one from the company then?
The reduction of the basic salary didn't take into account the proposed flying pay and TAFB allowances either.
2000 job losses puts BA into line with Delta, United, American Airways, AF/KLM and Cathay Pacific, all of whom have cut the CC workforce far more drastically than BA propose. Add to that the pilot job losses and the ground staff job losses plus the management cull of 400+.
One 'city analyst' verses the company position and Price Waterhouse Coopers independent analysis of the companies position coupled with the drastic share price roller coaster.
Touch one sided the article there.
As to lambasting personnel for taking voluntary unpaid leave or work, why? Surely when something is voluntary it is the remit of the individual to assess their personal circumstances and their personal appraisal of the companies position. We don't need some union 'muppet' telling us all it's out of order do we? I personally think it shows the depth of worry that many workers within BA have for the future stability of their jobs.
Continue your debate about meeting attendance elsewhere. I believe, from the chairperson of Bassa and the head of IfCE that Bassa were present. I wasn't there so I can only rely on this information. You are adamant that Bassa did not attend. Why? were you there? who is your source? Finally on this item, consider that cabin crew have two unions, who this time are in agreement and working together, Bassa and Amicus (nee CC89). They are sub-branches of Unite.
And to the holding pool. Many ex temps are in the pool. They are there until something else comes along. They are keeping their options open. Depending on the details of new fleet, many will not return if the fleet goes ahead as discussed in the company's 32 point consideration list. The issue isn't just about money, it is also about working to scheme. Alot of ex temps are working for other airlines at present. It may not be worth their while re-joining BA. Source. My wife and her friends and facebook friends who are all ex temps. There may be 500 ex temps in the pool, but I fear there could be a high attrition rate.
I think we shall agree to disagree on the attendance. Personally I believe the source I have and, as this is an anonymous, public forum, revealing that is not really cricket. I also choose not to believe the BASSA chair person. My choice. I too am very aware that being 'sub' unions is the only thing that has kept BASSA afloat over the last few rounds of negotiation by, occasionally, providing some negotiating professionalism.
On that I am quite happy to draw a line under the attendance issue.
4 more days and then we will see what miracles BASSA has wrought.
As to the temp issue, I wonder why, in the current cabin climate, the attrition rate could be high? Possibly due to animosity within the work place? If flight crew are getting lambasted on the BASSA forum for having a differing opinion what chance do temps have in the cabin?
Linear Mode
