It strikes me that BA have made these impositions because they HAVE to stop the flood of money leaving the company. Unless you think there is another reason? Maximising profit perhaps?
If BASSA can come up with alternative CC cost saving suggestions (that pass the independent audit test), then surely BA would be receptive to them rather than risk costly IA? Have BASSA tried to do so, since their wildly inaccurate 175 million package was proven to be bogus?
This was supposed to be the point of the negotiations, and BA were willing to grant BASSA access to the company accounts to prove it. If you remember, BASSA refused to do so. And you still have not told us why.
I would also like to know what harm it would have done to the BASSA cause to see these accounts, because the simple refusal to see them was simply sticking the collective BASSA head in the sand.
I don't see what choice BA have had in the matter, and I don't see that the onus is on them to come back to the table, especially when BASSA is telling its members not to discuss the issues with their "harrassing" managers.
Hi Desertia,
I do not remember Bassa refusing to view the company accounts - can you enlighten me with some facts...and once again, not belonging to Bassa, I therefore are unable to tell you why.
Talks are necessary to sort this mess out. It will take both sides to come to the table. The unions under the UNITE banner are ready and willing, I find it strange BA cannot find a way to sit down with them....or is there an ulterior motive by BA?
VOTE YES FOR YOUR FUTURE