anotherthing,
Also, having read the forum, I am of the understanding that BA propose to give an allowance regardless of what trips you do i.e. an average. If this is correct then surely what the lady said makes even less sense when she is happy to throw this idea out because such an allowance could, by negotiation, form part of the basic pay?
That is not my understanding of this proposed Travel Allowance, although the allowance is intended to replace the very unbalanced cabin crew allowances as they now exist.
Currently some routes pay very lucratively in allowances - a handful of days can produce several hundred pounds. e.g Far East (which is why some folk in positions of influence seem to be attracted to such destinations ....) . Other routes, e.g. to West Africa, produce comparatively little in allowances and the figure may not even reach £100. The proposed Travel Allowance (or whatever it is being called), will replace these allowances so that it matters not what route you fly - the allowances earned will essentially be based on time away from base i.e days away, and people who can't 'pick and choose' their trips won't be so disadvantaged.
The misunderstanding comes where some people seem to think they will pick up a Travel Allowance whether they are at work or not - wrong! If you do 7 days work, you will earn £Z in allowances. Someone doing 14 days work will get 2 x £Z. If you are not at work for the month, e.g sickness or leave, you will not get
any Travel Allowance. Think about it - why should someone
not at work be paid the same allowance for some one who
is at work? Someone not at work will only get basic salary, until such time as they show up and work a a trip. Maybe that is why it is being termed
Travel Allowance?