Reasons why BASSA are stuffed in court re new ballot
All these are official comms on why the offer prior to these strikes should not be accepted in the online ballot
A proposal has been put forward by British Airways after discussions with Tony Woodley. As we have already stated, clarity is needed on the meaning of specific points contained within it so that we are all fully aware of any implications.
Whether your union is able to recommend rejection or acceptance of this offer depends not only on these points being clarified, but also alongside these, there remain the two main issues of contention - which are staff travel and the fifty plus disciplinary cases related to the industrial action which remain unresolved.
Regrettably, we are not and we simply cannot recommend accepting this deal - and here is exactly why. There are elements where progress has been made; there is no doubt about that. It could have possibly been the beginnings of a peace.
Mr. Walsh, by his simple desire to publicly “punish” people, has missed that opportunity.
It’s no longer about the issues; it’s about ego and reputation.
Alternatively if you accept this latest offer from British Airways, you accept ALL the elements contained with in it, including “new fleet” and the permanent sanctions against members that took part in strike action.”
Let me make it clear that I am recommending that you REJECT this offer. That recommendation is fully shared by my Joint General Secretary Derek Simpson and by all your own elected representatives in BASSA and Amicus. In summary, I believe that accepting this offer is incompatible with your dignity and self-respect as employees and trade unionists, and that it cannot alas form the foundation for the better industrial relations at BA that we all want to see.
We do not make that recommendation lightly. I am aware of the sacrifices so many of you have already made in terms of loss of earnings, loss of travel concessions and strain and harassment endured as a result of standing up for your rights. Rejecting this offer may mean having to take such a stand again. I therefore want to explain the three reasons why I believe you should reject the offer.
First, the vindictive and discriminatory proposal concerning the restoration of travel concessions. As you can see from reading the letter from Mr Walsh, these concessions would be restored straight away for the relatively small number of you who use such concessions to travel to work. However, for the great majority of you, these would only be restored when BA management, without any external mediation, consider that the union and yourselves have met a long list of commitments at an unspecified point in the future.
Even then - and this is the most important point - whenever restored it would be without accumulated seniority. This means that those of you who have supported the strike could lose thirty years or more seniority, and for the rest of your working lives at BA would go to the back of the queue in the exercise of these concessions behind those who tried to break our strike. Furthermore, this sanction even discriminates between those who supported the union - some of you may lose decades of seniority, and others only a few years, depending on how long you have worked for BA. This seniority would only be restored upon retirement.
This plan therefore aims to treat loyal employees and trade unionists as permanent second-class citizens, branded for having supported the union and humiliated for having taken democratically-endorsed and fully-legal strike action. There is no way on earth this union could ever accept such a sanction.
The fact that management has been so insistent on its position on this matter, even though it is an issue of almost no financial consequence, must inevitably give rise to concerns about BA’s entire attitude and outlook to the future of industrial relations, a point to which I shall return.
The second question relates to disciplinary procedures being operated by the company. As you know over fifty colleagues have been suspended by management on charges arising from the dispute. Four, at time of writing, have been dismissed. It would not be right to refer to individual cases here. However, the charges in the great majority of cases are entirely trivial and barely worthy of a slap on the wrist, let alone the sack.
There is also clear evidence that many of the disciplinary actions arise from a covert collusion between senior management and individual pilots, cutting across all BA’s fine words about its elaborate procedures and safeguards. This evidence of victimisation and draconian punishments - in some cases directed against your representatives - render worthless the words in the offer designed to rule out such behaviour. Only rejection of the offer can say to management that it will be judged by deeds as well as words, and can express proper support for colleagues in the disciplinary firing line.
The last ones from Tony Woodley himself. BASSA/Unite have made it quite clear they are currently striking over staff travel/disciplinaries. Another day in court approaches.