PPRuNe Forums - View Single Post - BA and Project Columbus III
View Single Post
Old 15th June 2009 | 06:05
  #750 (permalink)  
MrBunker
 
Joined: Dec 1998
Posts: 369
Likes: 0
From: Oxford, UK
Joetom,

That's a lot of supposition from one very limited MoS article. Here's a thought, why not put the hysteria to one side and let's all see what today brings us when BALPA release the actual details of what's being proposed.

As for BASSA, well, words fail me, they don't represent the views of the membership, they try to impose their view on the membership. I love, in a perverse, depressing way, that many of our crew believe this is nothing more than an elaborate ruse to get them to change their terms and conditions. If WW is as blunt and aggressive as you claim him to be, why would he try and go through such a convoluted way of achieving this unless, and this is the non-BASSA bit, we maybe, just maybe, are neck deep in the poo and sinking fast.

Crew, as with all staff groups, need strong representation in a large company like BA, but the BASSA way is just not compatible with the modern world.

One final thought, as we know, the company can serve notice on all contracts of employment, and in such trading conditions the courts would, in all likelihood, come down on the side of the company. Of course, you could strike but were I a betting man, I'd imagine your 2000 headcount reduction would come from a large number of sackings. Of course, a tribunal might rule those illegal but as the law doesn't require the airline to re-hire those who were sacked in those circumstances, and the compensation is capped (I believe £30K) then it'd cost BA £60 million to achieve a permanent headcount reduction of 2000. And I'd guess that the composition of those 2000 might just be from the older contracts. Not saying it will happen but, it's a possibility.

I'm not sure why BASSA haven't had access to the books in the same way BALPA has but I'd guess that it's probably because the level of trust that exists between BA and BALPA simply isn't there with BASSA and the information involved is deeply commercially sensitive. As to why that trust isn't there, well, I'd argue that's a whole new thread in its' own right with errors on both sides.

Oh and one last thing, if we're going to have a debate, can we do just that and not simply come on gainsaying the alternative point of view without facts because it's not moving this on anywhere.

Flame away, warriors.
MrBunker is offline