...and as a timely example of how logic gets lost in the way of emotion Miss M posts this on the CC thread:
HiFlyer14
Crew have been told that they could use ST to get to work. When regional bases were closed down, staff were told they could use it instead of relocating to London. When language speakers were recruited from all over Europe, they were told that they could use ST. We could debate this as much as you like. You will still be insisting that they have not. I will be insisting otherwise.
(My husband has a company car. He is told that he can use it to drive to work. That does not mean that, if its non-contractual, it cannot be removed.
I am not criticizing PCCC. As we are in a dispute with the company, surely it would be in your best interest to step forward now and not later. I don't think it will help once the dispute is over and everything has gone back to normal. As you are backing BA, you would probably get the support needed from them. And, no. I don't always feel proud of BASSA but they are also responsible for my terms and conditions, some of the best in the industry, which YOU are also enjoying at the moment. BASSA are not all bad. Why did you choose BA? You could have gone to BMI or Ryanair surely?
(I don't believe that the PCCC is looking for the "support" of BA. They are working towards forming an organization that can produce results for Cabin Crew. While it would be my preference that they step forward given BASSA leaderships' endorsement of "guerilla tactics" safety concerns are reasonable.)
Of course I blame everyone who went to work. Every crew who crossed the picket line. Every pilot who trained to become crew. Every VCC who trained to do our job. Every ex-temporary crew who have come back to cover the strike. If they hadn't, this strike would have been over in a couple of days.
(This is rather like a teenager saying to his parents "If you would just give me the car keys we wouldn't be arguing". They parents don't want the child to have the car....and the VAST majority of BA employees did not want BASSA to win the strike.)
Instead, we see that WW are desperately trying to break the strike by using any means possible. Getting VCC from the US because he's not getting enough support in the UK for instance. WW does not want to negotiate. It has never been part of his agenda. Our last proposals were £10 million apart, yet he refused it. He has spent hundreds of millions on a strike which could have been easily avoided if he had wanted to. Don't blame us for being responsible for not getting a share scheme, an extra ticket and bonus. Blame WW. He doesn't want a negotiated settlement. Can't you see it? He was recruited to BA with a purpose. What was this purpose?
(This statement makes no sense. There was an offer on the table that contained a share scheme, extra ticket, etc..BASSA refused it. If BA didn't want you to have it they wouldn't have offered it.)
WW is responisble for this mess. Don't blame us for trying to protect our jobs and what we have. He won't be here forever whilst the rest of us are intending to stay here and create a career until we retire. WW has created such a misery in this company and we would be better off without him. IB doesn't want him either and the cabin crew, with an 80% support, will go on strike if WW takes over. He's not welcome in BA. He's not welcome in IB. Surely that says something.
(BASSA has not protected "what you have"...the offers now are less, BASSA has taken you backwards. BASSA has lost this strike and the imposition remains. As for Mr. Walsh not being "welcome in BA" the numbers say something quite different. A small group of militants may not like him but a significant majority have supported his actions. Agreement with BA and Mr. Walsh's actions is why the strike was lost and why BA kept flying.)
Reasoning like that used above is now why BASSA is forced to ballot over issues that ARE THE DIRECT RESULT OF THEIR OWN ACTIONS.