BA IR issues

[flybywire]

FBW, in regards to both the increments and law, have a look at ESS forum. It's explained there from our fleet manager. We're just waiting for confirmation about the increments involving LGW.

Glamgirl, I am aware of the pseudo-answer of our fleet manager on the ESS forum as I am quite active over there. The unions were supposed to meet "urgently" yesterday with the company and so far no emails from the unions to keep us in the picture.

I'm just wondering about your basic... I got the choice of starting on just over 14k or just over 15k when I got my promotion last year. Just wondering what happened with yours?

I knew of this situation and that's exactly the point!!! I didn't get a choice!! 13k that was it! Why is it that some people get a choice on what contract they want to be on and some don't? Are we or aren't we doing the same job for the same company? We got promoted at the same time too, so WHY?!?

This is what really annoys me....that some people are valued more than others. It is really unfair and something that, believe me, won't end here.
I just have something a little bit more urgent to deal with these days, but I will get all the legal advice that I can and present the unions (and not just the useless reps!) with the evidence. Or act on my own, I do not care if nobody else wants to support this fact although it would be in the whole CC community's interest!!!

[Glamgirl]

FBW, I'm confused... I got the impression you've been at LGW for quite a few years. If I'm wrong, I apologise. If you've been with us for a few years, were you EOG or CF? If on "new" contract (last 2-3 years), the basic for purser should be around 13k. However, ex EOG crew (me included) got the choice of 14 or 15k, depending on increments. Basically, if chose 14k, increments eventually go higher than the ones who chose 15k. I think exCF crew can only go on the 15k scale, but I'm not sure. Definately not fair, I agree. If you're on exEOG/CF contract, take it up with the union, your pm, ss, or whoever will listen. If you're on new contract, I don't know what to recommend. I guess it's to make sure that crew who've only been in the company a couple of years (6 months at the mo!!!!:eek:) don't jump the payscale too much, and make crew who've "done their time" peeved off. I don't know, sorry.

In regards to the other issues, are you able to arrange a meeting with SS? I know she talks a lot off oxmanure at times, but it may be helpful. Also, email or call your union tomorrow and ask if you haven't heard anything. At the forum the other day, they said the NSP meeting is happening next week although they want to move it forward...

Pips, I know 1k a month isn't much, I know SOME Easyjet crew earn more. In danger of sounding like a brain washed numptie, you'll have to take the benefits into consideration. I'll give you a few...

Staff travel. We can get cheap (ish) tickets world wide. Easy have the Easy network.
Tax. We get massive tax reductions, Easy don't.
Pay. We get basic+allowances+commission, Easy get basic+sectorpay+commission. They seem like they get more money, but do you really want to rely on your commission and working 6 sectors a day, 6 days a week? They also get on time departure bonus etc, which they lose if even 30 sec late.
Free stuff. Free uniform, free parking. Easy have to pay for both.
Night stops. We get them, Easy rarely do.
Pay rise. Our hourly allowance increases once a year, same with basic. At Easy you could wait for a raise for years, usually only when you get promotion.

I'd recommend for you to chat to some Easy crew (if you haven't already) and ask them how it REALLY is. Not just the money, but the conditions, hours, fatigue, and general happiness. Ask to see a rosta. Why do you think we've got so many exEasy working with us? I've seen some rostas and I wouldn't do that kind of rosta for all the money in the world.

If you still think Easyjet gets a better deal, go ahead and apply. They're looking for more crew. I don't mean to be harsh and horrible about it, but I'd rather you go work for Easy and earn money and be happy than stay with BA and be unhappy and poor if that's how you feel. I would recommend though that you stick around for a bit longer, as the last LH routes came over today, we're starting at least 4 new routes in the summer and bidding should normalise and there should be more work for everyone. Good luck with whatever you decide to do.

[misshostie]

Whatever happened to being the employer of choice?
Maybe thats gone out the window? :eek:

[Volant77]

Would you please stop saying this "with the new routes we'll earn more money" rubbish. I've been doing only long haaul for the last few months and I haven't earned more at all. If anything I have spent more downroute (only to eat) so I'm even poorer than before.

Astonishing to think that most at LGW don't think that the strike issues applied to us (err, hello?? What about the pension, the EG300??).

Oh and the usual "if you're not happy go and work elsewhere" is such a cheap argument. We are not happy. I am not happy with £1000 a month . So, yes, I will go and work elsewhere soon enough. And lots of us who joined in 2006 will (many have already left). What will happen next? Others will join, and lots of them will leave. Again and again until we get paid better at LGW.

[pips]

glamgirl
iam sorry but why should i leave i want market rate pay for my role which is not 1000pds amth charters ,easy jet ,zoom, all payed more,vs crew 7 free flts ayr,private medical insurance basic more. can i ask have you only work for ba,

.and this is why lgw is seen as a joke within ba ,it will get better is all lgw say it wont with an attitude like that. that why your t/c are so different from lhr, 9942 is not market rate ,lhr starting 10500 it is just as expensive to live in the south east as it is to live nr lhr.so stop with this attitude it will get better it wont untill we do some thing, stop ba for shafting lgw crew pls.

[Glamgirl]

Oh well, I tried... Sorry if me being the eternal optimist offends people, but it's a personality trait, and I can't change it. What you can change though is your job. Call it a cheap shot if you like. Seriously, if you think all other airlines are better to work for, why choose BA? I can't be bothered flying with people who whinge about how bad everything at LGW is. My allowances have definately gone up since long haul started, and I'm baffled that yours haven't. Did you come in via Lhr temp contract?

We at LGW are a community, not just a melting pot of crew. We do care about our t&c's, and don't try to tell me otherwise. If you'd been here as long as some of us have, you know more back ground. Did you know that we've been teetering on the edge of being closed down since way before 9/11? Did you know we don't make a profit? Did you know that our fleet manager actually cares? If you have grievances about your pay and t&c's, talk to your union. That's the only way things can change. Whingeing about it in the smoking area, caff, hotel room or standby room doesn't help and doesn't make change happen. Go to a forum, they're running very frequently at the moment (4th floor). Ask questions then. Arrange a meeting with your pm, fleet manager or whoever can answer your questions. Get some back ground information, put a business head on and then consider your options.

[pips]

its your very attitude thats allowed lgw to get shafted,i do know the back ground my partner has being at lgw for 6.5yrs so yes i know.the point you make that old chestnut ba never make money out of lgw rubbish if that was the case you would of being out the door so quick your feet wouldnt touch the floor ,you honest think ba would run a loss making op out of lgw think again.you think suzanne stass gives a stuff wrong every penny she save on crew cost all add to her big fat bonus. your comment about crew moaning then that must tell you pepole are just not happy and yes some of the long term crew also .

[keeperboy]

The way I look at it I was earning really good money and enjoying among the best t&c's in the industry BEFORE the strike was threatened (I am post '97 crew, LHR WW). Now they have just got better with an above inflation pay rise and extra increments to the basic salary to bring it closer to the old contract. The top of the tier basic for post '97 crew is now higher than the starting salary for Purser so it takes the pressure off needing promotion.

For you guys at LGW, I feel sorry for you. You guys, without a doubt, work the hardest in the company and for the smallest reward. That is wrong.

I couldn't believe it when I read on that BA 'discussion forum' that the extra increments for the post '97 salary scales did not apply to crew at LGW!! However, according to BASSA this was sorted out between the Tony Woodley and Willie Walsh and that LGW crew will now get the extra increments. And at least you guys will be in the NSP so have rights of transfer.

The thing that always amazes me with you guys at LGW (I guess it is thru a sense of pride more than anything) that when you get a bum deal - 3 crew on a 737, not enough crew on the 777 - you will still work your ar~es off to make it a success.

I flew to Geneva ex LGW and couldn't believe my eyes. 3 crew, trolleys were being sorted out seconds after the wheels had left the ground and the crew worked like maniacs to get the service done. But maybe you are shooting yourselves in the foot? Would it not be better for your cause, to set up the trolleys when it is safe to do so, just work efficiently yet calmly and if a third of the passengers don't get a drink and snack, TOUGH! Tell them to complain to BA and maybe then BA will change it if it isn't working. Ditto for your crew/Purser complements on the 777. Just an idea....

[Carnage Matey!]

Now they have just got better with an above inflation pay rise and extra increments to the basic salary

Except that the pay rise wasn't above inflation as it won't be backdated to October. It's effectively below RPI for the first period and RPI for the second period.

Would it not be better for your cause, to set up the trolleys when it is safe to do so, just work efficiently yet calmly and if a third of the passengers don't get a drink and snack, TOUGH!

The problem with your approach is that it is safe to do these things. LGW do them, other airlines do them. It's only LHR that don't want to do them, not because it is unsafe but because it's too much like hard work.

[flybywire]

But maybe you are shooting yourselves in the foot? Would it not be better for your cause, to set up the trolleys when it is safe to do so, just work efficiently yet calmly and if a third of the passengers don't get a drink and snack, TOUGH! Tell them to complain to BA and maybe then BA will change it if it isn't working. Ditto for your crew/Purser complements on the 777. Just an idea....

Thank you for the nice words keeperboy, it helps my mood to see that at least some of our colleagues appreciate our hard, but paid peanuts, work .
However the reason why we do not do what you have suggested (although it was a thought that was provoked a long time ago and that everyone more or less has had at least once since!) is that at the end of the day we always go the extra 1000 mile for our passengers. At the end of the day we fly for our passengers and for ourselves, and not for bloody BA believe it or not.

The best satisfaction of our job at LGW is to see people walking off feeling they have been looked after very well. Many people tell me they choose to fly from LGW for that specific reason and some of them are "regulars" who we all know!! Take that away and, since we do not have any satisfaction from the remuneration we get, I personally (and with me many others) would feel very down and would not think about it twice to change job.
I go to work to give my contribution to society and to feel useful, and doing things slowly only to show BA that we cannot possibly do it would simply make me feel useless.

The result is that we work very hard, rarely with any breaks :{ but we really do not feel like making our passengers lose out on anything just because our airline has become complete and utter c:mad: and treats us like ignorant and easily replaceable people.

[keeperboy]

Quote:
Would it not be better for your cause, to set up the trolleys when it is safe to do so, just work efficiently yet calmly and if a third of the passengers don't get a drink and snack, TOUGH!

The problem with your approach is that it is safe to do these things. LGW do them, other airlines do them. It's only LHR that don't want to do them, not because it is unsafe but because it's too much like hard work.

Carnage, I think you are wrong. Please name ANY full service airline with two cabins that you know of that has 3 crew on a 737 or similar sized aircraft? Even BMI have more on their two cabin services on the 319/320.

If you look at the comments posted on sites such as SKYTRAX passengers ARE noticing the difference in the crew complements. Although they very rarely have a go at the service received by the crew on board (who do an amazing job) many of them have made the point that there are just not enough crew on board.

It is not fair on the passengers, or the crew. If BA wants LGW short-haul to be a low cost operation, they must come out and say it, so the passengers and crew have clear expectations.

Your tone is constantly confrontational and you just seem to move from issue to issue regarding BA cabin crew (particularly those at LHR) and ALWAYS take a negative stance against us.

Why in your comment "The problem with your approach is that it is safe to do these things. LGW do them, other airlines do them. It's only LHR that don't want to do them, not because it is unsafe but because it's too much like hard work. do you feel the need to include your cutting little 'LHR' remark?

Do you realise you have made a complete sweeping generalisation of 10,500 people there?? I mean honestly, do you honestly believe that? It is a bit like me saying that ALL pilots are tight a#ses that will go out for a meal with the crew, order lobster and then want to split the bill! Not a fair comment......

I know nothing about you (what fleet you are on etc etc) but if you have operated on a MAN or NCL from LHR you will know that the crew always get the service done (5 crew on a 195 seat 757 - admittedly one cabin but still always with a full bar and snack or sandwich). I guess the crew at LHR EF feel they do not need to make a protest though (such as waiting til level to set up trolleys) as at least they are being decently compensated for their work.

I will give you another case in hand: you always seem to complain that BA crew do not know how good they have it, that they are too well paid etc etc etc.

I DO know how good I have it and wouldn't dream of complaining. I have worked for both BMI and Virgin before. When I walk around Heathrow I have my eyes wide open. Not just to collegues at other airlines, but also those within other BA departments that have suffered.

And yet, when I note on this site that I am happy with a deal, you highlight the NEGATIVE aspect of that deal.

Quote:
Now they have just got better with an above inflation pay rise and extra increments to the basic salary

Except that the pay rise wasn't above inflation as it won't be backdated to October. It's effectively below RPI for the first period and RPI for the second period.

I don't understand your point here? You would be a VERY welcome meber on the BASSA forum with such negative comments of the deal (where many are complaining). Am I meant to be upset with the deal and complain (which you would immediately attack as being selfish, paid too much already, not working enough etc etc)? The payrise will take place from Feb instead of Oct to help fund the new pay increments (from which I will benefit).

RPI or not, I know friends at Virgin and BMI were awarded their usual 1.3% and 2.1% annual payrises.

Now instead of taking your usual approach to replying by picking apart peoples threads and contradicting point by point, can I ask you a few questions?


Q. How much do you think BA crew should be paid? Do you think we are over-paid and underworked?

Q. Do you think it would be fair to reduce the take home salary of exisiting BA crew?

Q. What do you think of the deal that was struck between the T&G and BA?

Q. Were you hoping for the crew to go on strike so BA would be able to impose all the changes they had proposed?

[Carnage Matey!]

Why in your comment "The problem with your approach is that it is safe to do these things. LGW do them, other airlines do them. It's only LHR that don't want to do them, not because it is unsafe but because it's too much like hard work. do you feel the need to include your cutting little 'LHR' remark?

The day I see 6 LGW crew on an AMS or MAN I'll withdraw the LHR remark. Until then I will remain convinced that LGW short haul crew work harder than the LHR crew.

[/quote]Do you realise you have made a complete sweeping generalisation of 10,500 people there?? [/quote]

No I'd say I've made a fairly accurate generalisation of about 50% of them. For every shining star we have in the cabin there's at least one piece of space junk.

It is a bit like me saying that ALL pilots are tight a#ses that will go out for a meal with the crew, order lobster and then want to split the bill! Not a fair comment......

But nonetheless quite a common one on the BASSA forum I think you'd agree. Besides, it's usually me subsidising all those bottles of white wine on the bill when everybody else has been drinking 20p beers!

[/quote]I know nothing about you (what fleet you are on etc etc) but if you have operated on a MAN or NCL from LHR you will know that the crew always get the service done (5 crew on a 195 seat 757 - admittedly one cabin but still always with a full bar and snack or sandwich).[/quote]

Yes but it used to be 6 crew on an A319 for a MAN (one on a blocked out cabin seat!) and 5 for a 319 to NCL. Things are improving, but the base level for crew complement is often much above what the actual load on the day dictates. And we've all sat their wasting time and money and p'ing off the passengers because the CSD (remember those) wanted an extra crew member from standby because there was one club passenger more than the matrix permitted.

I will give you another case in hand: you always seem to complain that BA crew do not know how good they have it, that they are too well paid etc etc etc.

I DO know how good I have it and wouldn't dream of complaining. I have worked for both BMI and Virgin before. When I walk around Heathrow I have my eyes wide open.

Fantastic. I applaud your stance and wish there were more of you. But how many times do you hear "Our basic is even lower than Virgin" from colleagues, conveniently overlooking all the extras on top of that? Many of your colleagues really don't know they're born!

Not just to collegues at other airlines, but also those within other BA departments that have suffered.

when I note on this site that I am happy with a deal, you highlight the NEGATIVE aspect of that deal.I don't understand your point here? You would be a VERY welcome meber on the BASSA forum with such negative comments of the deal (where many are complaining). Am I meant to be upset with the deal and complain (which you would immediately attack as being selfish, paid too much already, not working enough etc etc)? The payrise will take place from Feb instead of Oct to help fund the new pay increments (from which I will benefit).

The negative aspect is that you did get 'done' by the company. My beef on this subject is with BASSA who have wound the crew up into a frenzy, distressed most of them, cost us a fortune then come away with pretty much nothing that couldn't have been achieved a month ago without a ballot. It would be nice of them to say "sorry chaps, we totally misjudged this" but instead they simply close down their forum, delete the criticism and publish a piece from DH about what good boys they all are!

Q. How much do you think BA crew should be paid? Do you think we are over-paid and underworked?

A. New contract is probably about right, although I think the new increments are probably a step too far. It's a job, not a career. I also think EF crew are utilised poorly with too many long turnarounds and not enough sectors. The ratio of flying hours to duty hours is appalling and must be one of the worst in the industry.

Q. Do you think it would be fair to reduce the take home salary of exisiting BA crew?

A. No,but I do think it is fair for the company to ask you to be more efficient to get that money. PS the hourly rate didn't have to redce your take home, thats just what BASSA like to say to scare you into objecting to it.

Q. What do you think of the deal that was struck between the T&G and BA?
A. Very reasonable. Somebody had to be because BASSA certainly weren't. I have no doubt that T&G declined to refer the matter to ACAS because they'd have p'ed themselves laughing at some of BASSAs demands. Also the pension deal is the one BALPA negotiated on behalf of all flying crew, and I think that is as good as anyone could get.


Q. Were you hoping for the crew to go on strike so BA would be able to impose all the changes they had proposed?

A I was hoping BASSA would be given a kick in the nuts so that they would realise the Mike Street days are over and its about time they started contributing to the efficiency drive. How that was achieved I didn't care.

[Sean Dell]

Are we happy with BASSA caving in?......

[amicus.cc]

I've written this up for www.amicus.cc (http://www.amicus.cc/) , let me know any inaccuarcies I don't want more solicitors letters...Or complaints from T&G 'members'.

[email protected]

[keeperboy]

Carnage, while I beg to differ on a few of the points you have raised, I think on the whole your thoughts represent what a good proportion of cabin crew think also (myself included).
Sean, I don't think BASSA caved in at all. I think out of the twelve 'issues' put forward by BASSA they were only really interested in a few of them. The rest were thrown in purely as a bargaining tool so it looked like we were giving up on some of our demands. For example, when i read 'downroute report times' as one of the issues i had no idea what that was about! (and I am LHR WW). Can honestly say I have never heard it discussed before it was raised by BASSA.
As they say, if you want a £2000 raise you have to ask for £5000 ;)

Edited as typing this downroute at 03.30uk time and after a few vinos :eek:

[Dick Deadeye]

I don't think BASSA caved in at all

Good for you!

Meanwhile, back on planet Earth, the rest of the airline are left shaking their heads at BASSA's crass ineptitude.

What did your strike ballot achieve?

What have you got that wasn't on the table beforehand?

As far as most of the rest of us can see, the only thing that :mad: BASSA :mad: has achieved is the undivided contempt of the other unions in BA.

Saved from disaster at the last minute, by the big boys from T&G central, some in BASSA still don't seem to understand what pratts they've made out of themselves. :ugh:

Willie had you for toast!

[keeperboy]

Deadeye I don't think you know what you are talking about.
Fact is, those on the new contract believe they DID achieve something while those on the old contract I guess many are unhappy yet there are also many that are relieved there was no strike. Of course there was a faction of 'all or nothing people' and a minority of those intent to strike just to give BA a bloody nose.
We got four more increments (and with the 4.60% increase) will take our basic to £20,088 at the top of the scale (up from £16,524 incl the 4.6%). Not pensionable, but lets face it. I am only 30 and I am counting on NO pension by the time i retire.
BA dropped their proposal to allocate us working positions.
BA finally agreed to have that all important paragraph re-inserted into our FCO's that indeed we ARE more likely to become ill than those working on the ground as well as making other important changes to EG300.

At the end of the day we still have the best wages (whether on old or new contract), terms and conditions in the UK, and among the best in the industry. And the majority of crew I work with are aware of this.
Willie had us for toast?? Is that why in their attempt to slash IFS costs by £37million they are now increasing IFS costs by £10million??

[Carnage Matey!]

Are they increasing costs? I seem to remember that the four new pay points are self funded by not backdating the pay deal and removing the fourth purser. That also saves BA additional money by removing pursers who have higher pensionable pay and hence require pension contributions from the company. BASSA really haven't won anything through the ballot other than a change to FCOs. Any hard changes to terms and conditions have been paid for elsewhere. They also failed to secure the minimum 250 CSD positions on EF (more savings in the pipeline) and fixed links are back on the agenda (after being pulled in protest at the removal of the CSD from 321s). I see BA making significant inroads to that £37M they want to save and no financial gain whatsoever for BASSA.

[keeperboy]

Hey Carnage, I believe the deal not to back-date the pay rise has partially paid for the extra increments on post '97 scales. When BASSA first put their demands to BA, BA claimed they would cost £42m p.a, including the extra increments, extra OT/box payments etc for earlier downroute report times etc etc. This has been reduced to £10M with the deal not to back date the payrise and the shelving of downroute report times until the next worldwide steering meeting. These are figures provided by BASSA though so read into them what you will (not that BA's figures are likely to be any more transparent).

Whom 'won' is a view that is a personal one I guess. Personally, I am happy with the deal. Being post '97 LHR WW crew I will get more increments. I was never expecting this, i knew the payscale when I joined, but hey, it's a bonus and one i'm certainly not going to refuse. My only other beef was EG300. It could be a fair system but is very VERY poorly implemented and managed. At least now it is being sorted out.

However. i'm sure there are collegues of mine closer to retirement age on the pre '97 contract that feel they have gained nothing at all.

So whether Willie or the union is the victor is down to personal opinion and I guess us business amateurs can view the deal how we like yet lets face it, we don't really know the numbers involved.

There is an interesting article in Feb 3 issue of 'The Business' magazine regarding the dispute.

Some paragraphs (by Jon Ashworth and Allister Heath):
'The latest dispute between BA and its cabin crews was settled after an 11th-hour agreement on Monday; but it left planes flying empty and cost the beleagured airline millions. Though company and union stepped back from the brink, BA's fractious labour relations illustrate one of the most alarming new trends to hit the British economy: a return of union militancy.'

'BA unions have their own brand of militancy; even though the company was privatised 20 years ago, it retains many of the archaic practices and attitudes of a state-owned company.'

'The British Airlines Stewards and Stewardesses Association (BASSA), a branch of the T&G, is the biggest single group of organised labour at BA, representing 10,500 cabin crew. In a ballot to walk out in the latest dispute over sick leave allowances and working practices....96% of BASSA members voted in favour of industrial action (and that was in an 80% turnout).'

'Like the newspaper industry before the watershed Wapping dispute of 1986, when publishers couldn't afford a strike by their print workers as it meant the immediate loss of all their business, Britain's erstwhile flag carrier, already damaged by the Gate Gourmet illegal strike of 2005, is being held hostage by militants that can ground its flights at a whim.'

'Willie Walsh, BA's chief executive, didn't help himself with his tactics during the latest dispute. But he has an almost impossible job and BA's unions could yet destroy a once-great airline.'

Sober reading!

[keeperboy]

The 'issues' and the deal done (from BASSA):

EG300

- All BASSA had ever wanted was an acknowledgement that cabin crew have to treat their health and fitness more harshly than those working on the ground and that this fact should be reflected in EG300.

- List of illnesses written into the document and FCO's preventing cabin crew from carrying out duties. These include:
• Colds and Flu resulting in blocked ears
• Diarrhoea & Vomiting
• One-off life events (for example, surgery, broken limb, one-off injury, severe emotional trauma)
• Down-route sickness (where reported to Global Lifeline). Information from the senior Cabin Crew member will also be taken into account.
• Pregnancy related sickness

CSD 'X' (CSD on short-haul)

- BASSA belives a good time to look at this issue due to the retirement of the 757/767 fleet in the future.

- Also believes there will be a need for a ground/air based management role come T5 (Cabin crew managers will not be in T5).

Fixed Links

- Agreed to conduct a trial that only involves day two of a three day trip. ie Day 2 NCL - LHR - MAD.

- This trial will pay a STR payment


Post '97 Payscales

- Already discussed at length on here. Four extra increments, top of scale for post '97 main-crew is now £19,456. The extra four increments are not pensionable.

- this is a two year pay deal and BASSA fully intend to push for complete merge of payscales.


Single Fleet LGW Breakfast payment

- Increase of the hourly payment to £2.43. (sorry i'm not sure what the old rate was??)


Introduction of hourly rate for LHR/GLA

- Confirmed in writing from Willie Walsh and BA that this item is off the table.


Allocation of onboard working positions (preferred seler)

- BA has withdrawn this proposal


Central area bus

- Re-instated.


900 Hour per annum flying limit

- Some changes made to give individual crew the option of which trips they want to drop when approaching 900 hours.


Pensions

- as per the BA-wide proposal.


purser/main crew swap

- One purser to be removed from 747 from september 2007.


Downroute report times

- trial/survey to be conducted at JFK/TLV & BKK

- referred back to worlwide steering group.

[flybywire]

Single Fleet LGW hourly payment was an increase of 11p per hour to buy out our SH breakfast and to solve the LH breakfast issue. However that still has to be agreed, as Amicus proposed 13p and LGW crew in general do NOT want an increase and want to keep the breakfast.

[miche2]

I keep reading the same comments, from the same sources. Carnage Matey spends a lot of energy rewriting cabin crew agreements and pay on this forum, but is frustrated by his lack of any power over the crew work practices and conditions. Having a vision of utopia, but never being able to reach it can only make for a scornful attitude.

[ABird747]

Flyer doing the rounds at Compass....
And the winner at British Airways is....
Willie Walsh
“Make no mistake; Willie Walsh is the big winner in the settlement of the British Airways cabin-crew strike.
Not only is the cost of the settlement to BA a minor one, but the BASSA arm of the T&G union representing the cabin crew has been publicly humiliated and is in internal disarray, and Willie himself did not put a foot wrong in the whole affair.
The game was up from the moment on BBC primetime radio news that T&G deputy general secretary Jack Dromey failed to respond to Walsh's declaration that average sickness absence among cabin crew was 22 days a year. Not news to anyone in the industry, but big news to the rest of the world. Dromey repeatedly refused to address the point. Shortly after, his boss Tony Woodley took over the negotiations and he and Walsh quietly thrashed out the new deal over a period of days. I guess labour deals aren't negotiated in the proverbial 'smoke-filled rooms' anymore, but it was that sort of old-fashioned session that cracked it.”*
The issue of the sickness policy was one that was held up as one of the key points of the T&G; the results that are being trumpeted by BASSA are nothing less than a cave-in. The T&G wanted a 12 month reference period when considering discounting, BA was holding out for 24 months; the result? Not the half-way point of 18 months which could have been attained had the union not given up; they stopped negotiating at 21 months.
The pay deal that has been ‘negotiated’ by the T&G is a slap in the face for their members; why are crew being made to pay for 4 years worth of increments in a 2-year pay deal? No one will benefit from last 2 increments yet the money will have been given up by the crew. Why is cross-subsidy (something that the T&G in the form of BASSA have always be vehemently opposed to) being used to ‘top-up’ the post ’97 pay-scales? Also by moving the pay anniversary from October to February everyone is suffering a 4-month pay freeze; does this sound like an agreement made by individuals worthy of our trust?
In the heat of the moment did anyone in the T&G realise that they had given away the Purser position on the upper deck of the 747? This was one of the items that the T&G in the form of BASSA said that they would not give up. Once again, after the behaviour of the reps caused them to be sidelined, this was another huge concession made to British Airways at the expense of the crew by their outside union officials.
Although the majority of the losses occurred on Worldwide fleet, BASSA have made sure that Eurofleet have taken their share of the pain. Even though BASSA have been opposed to fixed-links in the past (partly as there is no guarantee that meal breaks could be achieved and it would mean a large increase in crew utilisation), they have now agreed to trial the concept despite the last trials illustrating that meal breaks were not being attained with no new ideas to change things.
For those of you who joined British Airways as cabin crew and thought that would mean ‘flying’ think again… As part of the cave-in the T&G has agreed to ‘reexamine’ the CSD-X (i.e. Fleet Director) concept, the agreement has been couched in such language that it looks like a dead-cert.
The ‘catch-all’ approach of the ballot illustrated the desperation that BASSA felt in trying to secure our support for a personal vendetta by 2 of their reps (who subsequently resigned their posts as Convenor and Deputy Convenor when the strike failed to materialise). BASSA themselves admitted surprise at the high voter turnout and overwhelming ‘yes’ vote that they secured. This is all very well, it is the method by which the yes vote was come by that is the issue; a number of the issues that had either never been properly talked about (900 hours, preferred seller, LGW breakfast) or were still in the process of being discussed (notably NAPS) should never have been included; they were merely in there to assist the BASSA propaganda with whipping the crew up into a frenzy to vote in favour of industrial action.
“Nobody should be surprised. The characterisation of 'slasher' Walsh as the scourge of unions is simply stupid. It comes from his Aer Lingus days and ignores the context of what was happening at that company - which was nothing less than its complete reinvention from a stone-age, state-owned, flag-carrier into a reasonably modern business with a fighting chance of long-term survival. Employment reduction was just one piece of the jigsaw.”*
*Source: Kieran Daly - Flight International (30/01/07)

[HZ123]

I have to comment on one key statement. R elationships with management are at an all time low. After 34 years with the company I am at a loss to know at what point they were ever anything else but in that state. Such comments have no relevance anymore and irrespective of this and negative media there are still 3000 enquiries a week for the role of cabin crew and relatively high numbers of applicants as direct entry pilots. In other words the same objections to changes in T & C have been around for ever. At best the unions can only mount stop gap objections to the many changes that are and will dimish out existing situation with pay and allowances. The outcome is always the same we are still not earning enough revenue and the opposition continues to improve and offer better value and service. ThAt iS a fACT and the travelling public care little about our complaints it just leads to more pax on other carriers.