Is it abundantly clear when you read the offer, that it is an insult? Forget staff travel and the dismissals; I am talking about terms and conditions. Each new term will be listed, but is there a reference to the existing provision?
I was involved in a contract alignment project recently where two very different sets of terms were merged. We did not take the best of each and include them in the new document, (it would have been nice for the short time the business would have survived), but overall it was at least the same plus an incentive to sign. But through this process, information on the detail was constantly supplied. The best part was a "what it means to you" document, that outlined everything, with no bias.
The BASSA reps position is that there is good and bad in the proposal. Well explain in detail what the good and bad is. Quantify the position, don't sabre rattle. If it is just staff travel and the sack/suspended that will lead to a no vote, then that is a negotiating position still.
This
British Airways to restore travel perk to striking cabin crew - Cheapflights.co.uk is gaining momentum and if it is true, then staff travel is back on the table.
As to the dismissals, I would love to review the cases, as no doubt some or possibly all would still be sacked afterwards. That needs to be said by the BASSA side. Rules are rules and in the new Just Culture, you have to be an adult and realise the consequence of your actions. However the sanction still has to be proportionate to the misconduct.