Originally Posted by
flyeruk69
There are some very strong views and opinions through out this thread and it's a brave person who goes against the the general consensus without fear of being shouted down by the majority here in much the same way as people on here have been complaining the so called Bassa militants do.
Why do you need to be brave? It's an anonmyous forum available to anyone who has a relevant opinion. I seem to recall some posters who post pro-Bassa opinions being praised for doing so in a factual, logical manner. It's the slogan spouting rabble rousers who get short shrift here. In fact, your post was one of those I would welcome to see more of, as it forces me to review my opinion, and to have to develop good argument to counter your (in my view) erroneous points.
Originally Posted by
flyeruk69
"I think it’s the minimum that we need to do to address what’s clear to everybody is a cost challenge within the business"
That quote should make every BA employee sit up and worry, if it's the minimum we need to do what else is being planned ? Where's the point where you enough is enough ? Ryanair type conditions of employment ?
Doesn't everyone want him to cut the minimum needed to put the business on a secure footing for the future? Would you have preferred him to do the maximum he could possibly do to extract excess cost from the company?
To take that as a threat that it's just the start of cuts, and so conclude that Bassa shouldn't negotiate doesn't make sense. Start talking and establish baselines, and negotiate on issues that the membership can afford to change (eg disruption etc)
Originally Posted by
flyeruk69
As for being honest in negotiations and the information coming out of the BA propaganda machine, is it any wonder the cabin crew do not trust BA management when , just one example, the new fleet was tabled, then taken off the table and a few weeks ago it was reintroduced and in the last few days BA have suggested they are willing to "explore" alternatives to the new fleet. This isn't from bassa but from the leader of BA IFCE.
This isn't negotiation, it's playing with people's emotions and fears resulting in a very deep mistrust of the BA IFCE management and the leadership team.
As had already been mentioned, New Fleet was taken off the table as cc had told management they saw it as a huge threat. BA said they were doing that in response to cabin crew's views and in the hope it would bring Bassa back to the negotiating table. Bassa didn't return, so in the absence of a negotiated agreement, New Fleet returns. I'd do the same. If I was trying to achieve something through compromise with someone and they refused to budge, eventually I would do as I had originally wished. It's a no-brainer.
Originally Posted by
flyeruk69
the UK justice system works in it's own mysterious way and often the outcome is hardly predictable........ time will tell.
So your future is on the toss of a coin, or do you think the court will rule in Bassa's favour, saying that the new crew complements are unsafe, despite the CAA and the courts having set the law on this already?
The outcome isn't ever 100%predictable, but sometimes it's more predictable than others.
I can only repeat what I have said before, this whole thing is about power and control. Bassa are used to setting the agenda, they tell BA when they will meet and what they will discuss. They tell BA what service standards are acceptable and they tell BA whether flights can operate or not. What Bassa leaders fear is the loss of their control over the department, which is what BA are now proposing. The only power the Bassa leaders now have is a threat of IA, but, FlyerUK, what can it possibly achieve?
(I'm genuinely interested to hear an explanation of what Bassa hope will happen after the IA is announced and then taken.)