What's this dispute about?
A simple question, originally it was about IMPOSITION - about the way in which BA reduced crew complements in the name of saving money. BASSA only ever offered "loans" to the company, vastly over-valued ones at that.
The newsletter at the weekend from BASSA (or it may have been Unite) confirmed that crew complements were no longer an issue. So if it isn't crew complements is it staff travel?
IMPOSITION was threatened by BA in February 2009 when the cost savings targets were set, WW said that if the 30th June deadline was not met he would have no choice but to impose changes. In October he did, your union got 4 months grace....
During your "negotiations" you had spats within BASSA with the two merged factions refusing to sit together let alone negotiate - then of course there was the car park incident.
Previously, BASSA has always thrown the toys out of the preverbial pram whenever change was asked of them, we've had 3 strike ballots since 1997 which have resulted in action being called off at the eleventh hour.
BASSA only knows how to stir up the troops, and in the past it's worked but now that you face a new adversary with a different attitude you are like fish out of water. What's really worrying is that this whole dispute has become very personal, DH is on a mission to land a fatal blow to BA for the way he's been dismissed - the crew are merely the foot soldiers in all of this.
UNITE appear to want to settle this dispute, BASSA don't.
WW threatened Imposition and he did it, he threatened removal of staff travel and he did it - I hope that next time he threatens something you take him a little more seriously, next time it could be P45s and a tribunal next year.