We would all lose out on an hourly rate on Eurofleet at the moment just like our Flight Crew colleagues have - who could have predicted a one for one exchange rate with the Euro? And that is the trouble with a rate independent of the local cost of living, cheaper to administrate no doubt but would be more workable if the UK became a Euro zone.
But don't forget that we have had the advantage of living 'well' off the Eurozone for the past couple of years. Fluctuations in currency will always affect crews who 'spend' their time abroad. One must take the approach that what is reaped in the good times is sown in the bad times. Take a long term view and you will come out equal. The advantage with the 'flat' system is that it will negate the 'fat cat trips' and the problems of allocators becoming embroiled in favouritism. Flat rate encourages working principles whilst allowing trip allocation independent of seniority.
Firstly we (FC) negotiated a while ago to have some of the allowances rolled in to our basic
Not an option ever offered to us.
Not quite true. The issue of CC being on a similar 'deal' to flight crew has always simmered in the background. During the recent AGM where Willie Walsh was to be disposed there was a heckle from the crowd of 'Give us the same deal as the Flight Crew!' to which Willie replied 'I wish you were on the same deal as the Flight Crew.' This has been bandied about since the FC took restructuring 5 years ago. During the negotiations leading up to the change BASSA refused to entertain the idea of change to such an extent and the idea, through weak management and an expanding market, was dropped.
There were rather a lot of pilots collecting receipts too!
There was indeed. The problem with the whole HMRC exercise was that it was a 'scatter gun' approach. BASSA produced a list of what must be spent at each destination to achieve compliance with the HMRC ruling. To be honest, under the Flight Crew allowance system the numbers were 'generous' but the CC system it was always going to be very difficult!
Secondly we (FC) actually took the tax exercise seriously.
Followed by:
SO DID I, in fact the weight of responsibility felt quite large for that period and I did the best job I could.
Many did and I thank those who did. Unfortunately the return from WW was too low and the HMRC will base results upon those returns. I find it sad that those who did take it seriously, and the drop in the value of Sterling has shown how important the tax benefit can be, have been let down by those who see that portion of pay as a PAYE 'top up'. Those people have failed to grasp the concept of the HMRC actions.
you can never , ever, EVER have a sensible discussion with CC about hourly rate because they have been brainwashed by the very people who are supposed to represent them.
That quote I find a little out of order as some CC and, indeed, some FC don't realise the impact that the HMRC action could possibly have. Once the realisation is there I think most people would agree that what the HMRC was asking was 'difficult' to achieve when taken as a snapshot outside of ones normal spending pattern. The failure, as usual, was from BASSA as they failed to impress how important the 'trial' was.
Always remember, debate requires different viewpoints, the trick to 'civilised' debate is to be able to convince the other side with balanced, factual and reasoned arguments. Rhetoric rarely wins the day.