One of the biggest problems that BA has faced over the years has been the fact that pay increases have been linked to length of service as opposed to performance. I'm not having a pop at cabin crew on this, it is endemic throughout the airline. You could pick up a copy of the pay scale. work out which spinal point you were on and calculate how long it would be before you were on top of scale. If you could do compound interest, you could almost work out what top of scale would be by the time you hit it. All you had to do was keep your nose clean and it was pretty much a racing certainty. There are very few organisations outside of central and local government that operate in this way. Most companies will provide a base uplift in line with inflation, but anything over that is awarded for performance. BA doesn't have a bonus system for non-management grades (I lie, there is one for APPG and IT staff) so it is very hard to accurately target and reward good performers.I'm convinced this is one of the reasons that folk like the BASSA executive simply don't understand why CEOs can get hefty bonuses. They just have no idea about performance related pay because they have never been exposed to it.
The other problem with linking pay increases to length of service is that it makes it very easy for people to be quite happy to chug along doing just enough to get by. There is no incentive to do a bit more, because at the end of the day it won't be reflected in your pay. Very easy to get into a rut. It's fine provided that the business stays the same, but businesses have a nasty habit of changing. If you get into a rut, you tend to be less inclined to enjoy change - it upsets your routine. So when you have a few hefty changes go through people, understandably, get upset. Trouble is that the changes are necessary.