BA Cabin Crew Strike Threat

[Da Dog]

Least of your worries litebulbs..................:ok:

[Litebulbs]

Dosen't worry me as it doesn't affect me. BASSA and BA,through negotiation have achieved a pay rise that much of industry will struggle to match, movement on other items that were an issue and avoided a strike.

[Stuntman Steve]

A slightly positive spin on it. The fact that the pay deal is not backdated means the rise is only valid for 6 months. Hardly industry shaking. Next years rise is capped at RPI. I reckon thats pretty easy to match. The negotiation seemed to consist of them telling BA what they wanted and BA telling them how it was going to be! Like we've said before, nothing new on the table except zero cost items.

[Litebulbs]

I agree the value of this years rise is about six months worth, but year on year, you are 0.9% better off than if you would have been, if the deal had been signed back in October. If you had made the statement one year ago, that in Feb 07, a 4.6% pay rise would be offered, people would just about stopped laughing by November. Whether by the skill of the BASSA negotiators, or just plain luck, 4.6% is still a substantial pay rise by modern standards.

[BASLF]

As with many 'slf' (most other industries would refer to their customers or clients) I've refrained from posting until now as I am not part of the industry.
I've read this topic with a growing sense of dread; I'm proud of BA as our flag carrier and I chose BA whenever possible. As the CEO of a reasonably large company I travel a fair amount and I am a silver card holder. I chose BA both for business (when my company pays) and for pleasure (when I pay). I chose BA primarily because I trust the pilots to be well trained and to put safety above everything else. I chose BA because I trust the engineers to maintain the planes properly and the company to make sure they have the resources to do so. And lastly I chose BA because, after long and often tiring trips, I feel at home as soon as I board the plane and that is often because of the cabin crew. When on form the cabin crew can make all the difference and often do. That said, in recent years I have had cabin crews who appear to regard passengers as a boring diversion, this happens all too frequently on long haul. BA's product is 'ok' but by no means the best, it really should be compulsory for BA CC to try out other airlines.

But back to my point, I despair! I despair because I don't and haven't seen anything in this forum or the press to indicate that BA CC have not been totally taken up the garden path by their union and I despair that they allowed themselves to be so. I will continue to support BA as a passenger because I am genuinely proud we have a profitable and efficient flag carrier but I know I am now letting emotion rather than sense influence my choice. If these problems continue BA will go bust or be taken over and that depresses me. You are killing your own employer! BA are no longer the best, the product (even with the new club upgrade) is no longer the best and the CC have lost touch with what is available elsewhere. I hope I am right in my belief that the pilots and engineers are the best because that is the only justification I now have to fly BA.

[M.Mouse]

And for anybody wondering why BA needed a robust sickness policy how about this little gem from the BASSA website earlier this evening.
NEWS UPDATE 29 January 2007
The strike has been called off. The agreement is complex and once we get an electronic copy we will post it here on BASSA NEWS. Naturally emotions are running high, especially as we were so close to the first strike days.

You may be interested to know that as of this afternoon we have been told that over 1000 crew had gone sick, so once again many crew have taken the easy route, that would have left the reps and the members who did go on strike exposed to the retribution of BA.

We will update you further as soon as we can.

[PAXboy]

It is difficult to know where to start with all of this mess but it is obvious that EVERYONE has lost. No one comes well out of this.

This was posted by Top Bunk as being from The Branch Secretary in post #987. The cold facts say however that BA were dragged to the negotiation table and important concessions were given.It has been said already in this thread but ... do they know it's not 1974? They really need to learn something about diplomacy and negotiation, the very things they accuse BA of not having. Is BASSA the last unreconstructed Union?

It is apparent that BA mgmt are very 'modern' in their approach to their task, so they have made it very easy for everyone else to be better. If BASSA had thought about it and reinvented themselves as a 21st century organisation, they could have been the good guys and distinguished themselves.

Looking from the passenger seat of 'GB plc' it looks as if they have done the opposite. But I repeat, everyone has lost.

One observation about CC and their working hours - taken from the outside and without full understanding of their job: I find it remarkable that their working hours are scheduled to be less than the flight crew. It is stated that, for the sake of one hour's work - they can prevent a flight from departing? When I think of the people in conventional employment who regularly work three or four hours overtime a week for no money and without hesitation, it makes you wonder...

[Stuntman Steve]

Latest hot poop from the funny farm:

28 JANUARY 2007



EG300
Please refer to Appendix 1; EG300 Cabin Crew Procedures Document Update v9.0
STATUS – AGREED


BUSES
The BA5 has been rescheduled to provide transport between the Compass Centre and the Central Area at the weekends. The service started on 27 January 2007 and provides service between 0600 and 2357 every 30 minutes. (Refer to BA intranet for full schedule)
STATUS – AGREED


GATWICK BREAKFAST ALLOWANCE
Increase hourly rate by 11p to £2.43 which includes the ‘buy out’ of current arrangements.
STATUS – AGREED


DOWNROUTE REPORT TIME
Referred back to Worldwide Steering Panel
STATUS - REMITTED


900 HOURS
Please refer to Appendix 2; 900 Hours v3.0
STATUS – AGREED
FOR PROCESS APPLICATION THIS WILL BE DISCUSSED IN WORLDWIDE STEERING PANEL


MANCHESTER BASE
STATUS – DISCUSSION CONCLUDED


PREFERRED SELLER
STATUS – OFF THE TABLE


FIXED LINKS
Form a working group and commence a trial. No imposition, details to be negotiated and agreed within Eurofleet Steering Panel.
STATUS - REMITTED

SINGLE SUPERVISORY GRADE (CSD Shorthaul)
Please refer to Appendix 3; CSD ‘X’ – EUROFLEET v3.0 which has been approved between us.
STATUS – AGREED

PURSER/JUNIOR SWAP
Introduction agreed for implementation from September 2007. Details regarding the implementation will take place at Worldwide Steering. We would introduce this change incrementally and we confirmed that we will offer voluntary severance to CSDs and Pursers which in itself should provide some room for promotion opportunities. Part time opportunities will be offered to Pursers.
STATUS - AGREED


POST 97 PAYSCALE
Please refer to Appendix 4; Cabin Crew two-year pay agreement 1st February – 31st January 2009 v7.0. This is the outcome of our pay discussions and will be ratified as the settlement for cabin crew pay at the ACC NSP.

STATUS – AGREED
RESOLVED PENDING RATIFICATION

PENSIONS
This matter has been concluded at the BA Forum.

The distribution of the £6m will be resolved at the ACC NSP, the intention is to increase pay for pension purposes by 18.75%.

If crew want to retire aged 55 they will pay extra contributions, currently 9%. As per the existing arrangements, staff with at least 10 years continuous service and in receipt of an immediate pension will qualify for staff travel concessions. Staff travel is a non-contractual benefit granted at the sole discretion of British Airways and can be withdrawn or varied at any time.
STATUS – RESOLVED PENDING RATIFICATION


ILL HEALTH
The company is prepared to make a proposal to the Employment Policy Committee which would address a pension concern raised on behalf of cabin crew during the talks. Please refer to Appendix 5; Proposal for Employment Policy Committee


RELATIONSHIP
British Airways and BASSA/T&G recognise that the relationship needs significant and intensive improvement. This process will receive commitment and dedication from both parties.

Our aim is to establish a constructive and professional relationship that recognises the objectives of both sides and respects each other’s positions. Both parties recognise that a fresh start is needed and both parties commit to begin the relationship-building work with the purpose of establishing general principles that cover:

• Purpose and objectives
• Code of conduct
• Engagement
• Mechanisms for resolving conflict
• Communication

The CEO of British Airways commits to meeting with the senior representatives of BASSA on a quarterly basis. This will provide the Senior Representatives with an opportunity to raise issues of significant concern such as the application of the ill health retirement process.

The initial and ongoing progress of this work will be jointly reviewed by the CEO of British Airways and the T&G General Secretary on a regular basis.


HOURLY RATE
STATUS – OFF THE TABLE

I love the way they sneaked the hourly rate in at the end, even though it was 'off the table' before the strike ballot was announced. What a triumph!

[Ancient Observer]

Companies get the Unions and Union rep.s that they deserve. Whilst I agree with BA that both 22 days sickness, and 12, are far too many, my observation of Employee Relations in the UK, (outside BA) is that companies get the TUs and TU reps that they deserve.
BA need to massively upgrade the capability of their managers, and then, over time, they will get the response from staff that the customers deserve.
Can BA do that before they lose their most profitable routes to new airlines such as Silverjet?
EZY and Ryan have not yet really impacted BA's core profit-earning routes - much of the LoCo success has impacted the chartered sector much more than the scheduled sector.
Can BA turn itself around in time.......? Watch this space.....


One of the SLF.

[Da Dog]

According to friends 1 of my posts has been paraphrased on the BASSA forum.................. :ok:

For those who don't like the truth on the BASSA forum, look at my post and its timings, now read the commentry in todays press and watch the interviews on the TV, they are giving the same message that I spelt out yesterday.

Now work out if BASSA have been manipulating its membership:ugh: :ugh:

Many CC of course will prefer to bury their heads in the sand.

[Low Flier]

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/graphics/2007/01/30/matt.gif

[Andy_S]

Alot of CC must be disappointed at the strike days being called off as they no doubt had some nice little plans for 'their days off'
Mind you, now that the planes are flying virtually empty, the 'feed them and foxtrot oscar' routine is going to be a piece of p*** :E

[old,not bold]

BASLF, you said "I hope I am right in my belief that the pilots and engineers are the best because that is the only justification I now have to fly BA.".

Not really; no better and no worse than most, if the truth be known, but that's around a pretty high benchmark standard of safety. Certainly not "the best".

Mind you -THREAD CREEP ALERT - not every airline thinks it's OK to take passengers on 3-engine long-distance ferry rides in B744s without the "no thanks, that's not what I paid for" option. BA company policy (perhaps others, to be fair) is to do it regardless, especially when it saves money. Think about that when you book long-haul BA.

For me and my company, as per previous posts, it's bye-bye time, now that we know that the threat of disruption is ever present. And I'm ex-BOAC/BA. If you want to go on supporting BA by buying their products, you're on your own

[Carnage Matey!]

Aaah so now you pay for the number of engines do you? And if you turned up and they'd subbed the 747 for a 777 you'd refuse to go, wouldn't you? Whilst you're avoiding airlines with a flight continuation policy you'd better steer clear of Virgin and Cathay too. In fact, you'd probably better steer clear of any 744 operator that isn't regulated by the FAA. Much better to fly 4 hours from land on a single donk on their unrestricted ETOPS machines!

[overstress]

old but bold: Perhaps we should set up electronic voting for those tricky occasions. We know the Monday morning quarterbacks will be out in force, so instead of the current methods, we'll display our options on the screen and invite the audience - sorry - I meant passengers - to vote on their preferred outcome. With satcomm, they could even phone a friend, or even give live commentary to the networks ("Yes - the F/O's just carrying out the memory items... hang on.. yes he's gone for the secure engine checklist...") :ugh: :ugh: :ugh:

[PAXboy]

I certainly agree that (it sounds as if) the BA mgmt should be upgraded by being demoted. Some serious training and inspection of their actions is required however ...

Thinking about this today, I realised the enormous similarities between BA and another ex-Nationalised industry giant - BT. I worked in telecommunications for over 25 years and always worked for the customer, not the suppliers. I watched 'GPO Telephones' become BT plc and they went through the same period of arrogance as BA.

For many years after privatisation, there was still the attitude, "But we are BT, of course we are the best" and the distinct view that you should buy BT just because they were BT. Now they have had that shaken out of them but it took nearly 20 years.

The advantage that BT had was that, thousands of their staff met their customers (domestic and corporate) every day in their homes and offices. So, as the new companies like Mercury and AT&T started to have an impact - they knew about it right away. They could see and hear directly from us why they were losing business.

BA staff, for the greatest majority, do not get to see the other side of the story. When they go on holiday, they will probably use BA. If they do go on a LoCo or Charter, they will ascribe any shortfalls to them not being a main line carrier and, once again, not learn anything. If they see higher standards will they respond?

Of course, BA has people who are paid to travel on their competitors and evaluate the compettition but that information is all in confidential reports and by the time anything filters down to the staff in a training programme - it has lost any punch and immediacy.

BT had many, many competitors but the only strong competition to BA in the past 30 years has been VS. All the others that threatened were bought up and no lesson was learned. With VS, they tried to crush them BUT many have pointed out the great improvements that came about in BA as a result of VS (all cabins).

I was very lucky that, when I started in telecomms, I was doing a job that took me to over 100 companies in a five year period - so I learnt a great deal about how they worked and what their staff wanted from their telephone systems and infrastructure, before I became a supervisor, then a manager and then a consultant.

BA should consider paying for all it's CC to travel several sectors each year. Check-in staff could take some flights too and see how it feels to stand in those long queues and then be told a critical item of information that the booking agent did not tell you and the web site did not make clear in large letters. There are many other examples of course, but I pick a couple at random. So, rather than offer staff travel - offer to pay their fares on the competition. (Yes, I know they never will.)

Until BA staff know what the other carriers are doing and the standards they deliver - they cannot change. Trying to tell them through training programmes (assuming that it has been done) has failed.

[Semper Amictus]

*Aaah so now you pay for the number of engines do you? And if you turned up and they'd subbed the 747 for a 777 you'd refuse to go, wouldn't you?*
C'mon Carnage, you know a little bit of engine balance never goes astray !
But I gladly admit that I've enjoyed every one of your posts.
Sheesh, all those lonely hours hunched over a laptop in your hotel room ?
But back to the topic; call me cynical, but if BA hadn't unavoidably set themselves up to be flying several cubic miles of fresh air around the network for a couple of days, do you reckon they'd have still gone back to work ?

[Jet II]

Never mind the strike, BA directors to get unlimited first-class travel
Steve Hawkes
# Deal will include wives and children
# Unions furious at 'nest feathering'
British Airways is planning to offer senior directors a lavish travel policy that guarantees them unlimited free first-class flights, The Times has learnt.
The final touches were being added to the scheme even as the company was locked in strike talks with unions over plans to alter their pay and conditions. Senior managers were asked to rubber-stamp a new policy allowing non-executives to “queue-jump” paying passengers and reserve free, first-class tickets to any destination in the world.
An internal e-mail seen by The Times reveals that the discussions were taking place last Wednesday — just as the airline was preparing to cancel 1,300 flights because of a potentially crippling strike by thousands of cabin crew — which was only averted by a last-minute deal with the Transport & General Workers’ Union two days ago.
Non-executive directors are currently given “high priority” for the most expensive seats, but can be bumped down if space fills up in the first-class cabin. The e-mail to Alan Buchanan, the company secretary, from the department dealing with internal “manager rewards”, reveals that the new guidelines would put them on the same first-come, first-served footing as any other “commercial” booking.
It suggests that the change has already been approved by BA’s £300,000-a-year chairman, Martin Broughton.
An airline spokeswoman denied last night that talks over the new policy followed confusion over a booking made by the BA chairman’s wife, Jocelyn Broughton, before a flight home from South America two weeks ago. “These proposals have been under discussion for months,” she said.
The e-mail — entitled “Non-Executive Director Travel” — spells out: “With immediate effect all BA Business and Personal travel will be on a commercial basis in premium cabins. Travel will be First (longhaul), with option to go into Club if F not available. If anyone volunteers to go in Club that’s fine.
“New arrangements will apply to the individual, spouse/partner and children under 18 years. Unlimited number of tickets per annum. Costs will be charged to the Chairman’s budget.”
The timing of the discussion is a major embarrassment to BA, given its stand-off with the union and initial reluctance to improve basic terms and conditions for cabin crew. The row was settled after 120 hours of negotations and the promise of a 4.6 per cent pay rise. Before the deal, the basic starting salary for cabin crew was £10,499 a year — the cost of three first-class returns between London and New York. Union leaders described the executive travel plan as “ unbelievable”. Ed Blissett, national officer at the GMB, said: “If this is right, it shows the management at BA are more interested in feathering their nests than offering low-paid workers a fair wage.”
The GMB is currently balloting 4,500 check-in staff and baggage handlers over a controversial pension shake-up at BA and has warned the airline that a strike is possible. The T&G declined to comment.
BA told The Times last night that the new policy has yet to be agreed by the executive committee of its main board, led by Willie Walsh, the chief executive. A spokeswoman added: “We have a business to run and there were many, many other issues to be discussed last week as well as industrial relations.”
The guidelines could still cause more problems for Mr Broughton, who joined the airline in 2004. Last November he was publicly embarrassed by Tony Blair after asking for the Prime Minister’s support over BA’s decision to refuse staff permission to wear a cross.
In front of stunned delegates at the CBI’s annual conference, Mr Blair told Mr Broughton: “Look, Martin, do you really want my frank advice on this? One of the things I learnt in politics is that there are some battles really, really worth fighting, and there are battles really, really not worth fighting.”
Mr Broughton and his fellow non-executives pocketed £3.1 million in pay and benefits last year. BA is likely to update the City on the likely cost of its talks with the T&G on Friday. Yesterday, the first day of the planned strike, BA reinstated all its Heathrow and Gatwick flights, but admitted that they were only a third full.
And people wonder why BA's staff are a bit antsy with the management:rolleyes:
The Times (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,2-2575620_1,00.html)

[Albert Driver]

I doubt many BA directors would want to place themselves in the hands of BA cabin crew for the time being.

[exvicar]

I really don't see why the BA directors staff travel scheme warrants being on page 3 of The Times. That is their contract. If we all want 1st Class travel then best we get ourselves into management & become a director. We are not on equal benefit packages, I am sure that is the case in most companies. In fact, I am sure the directors of The Times are on different benefit packages to their reporters, sales staff, marketing and the list goes on. This is not news. I am on a different benefits package to my directors, big deal!

[TopBunk]

Ex vicar

RIghtly different contracts and agreements apply to different groups of people. However, in this case, where we are talking about potentially turning down passenger revenue in favour of giving a 13 year old child of a Non Executive Director a free first class seat to go on a whim wherever they want. I find that outrageous, and I suspect so does the CEO Willie Walsh, and previous CEO's, Colin Marshall included. The latter certainly knew where the bread was buttered and who the most important people were - the fare paying passengers. Remember, we are not talking about subject to space availablility, over which we would have less issue, but over potentially denying a full fare pax. This decision, if it goes through, absolutely enshrines the pigs in the trough mentality that seems all pervasive in the 21st century. The same mentality that pays Non-execs upwards of £300K pa for 2 days work a month, the same mentailty that sets aside £75m in share options for 'senior management', the same mentality that rewards director with upwards of 50% bonuses on the back of monies saved, just like the politicians and their voting through inflation busting schemes. IT STINKS.

[egbt]

BBC report proposal rejected (by the board?)

[M.Mouse]

I know that it is unusual for a Murdoch owned newspaper to get its facts wrong but this was the BA Corporate Statement issued in response to the piece:
Non-executive board members' travel arrangements.

The airline has issued a statement in response to media reports today about changes to non-executive board members' travel arrangements.

The statement reads:

A proposal to modify the travel concessions of British Airways’ nine non-executive board directors has been under consideration for some time.

The proposal has never been discussed by the board and has been rejected by the airline’s executive management.

All airlines offer free travel to board members and directors.

The existing arrangements at British Airways are in line with arrangements at almost all full-service carriers and have been common practice in the aviation industry since airlines were founded.

[hapzim]

Even the Directors should have to pay to cover the taxes and various other charges that the rest of the staff pay. Why should the shareholders foot the bill.:ugh:

[driftdown]

If I was lucky enough (!) to be a Non Executive Director on an enormous salary for part-time work, I would not have the audacity to turn up for a flight and expect fare paying passengers to be down graded or left behind so that my entourage could have nice first class seats.

Surely this cannot be right ?:ugh:

[Carnage Matey!]

That, my son, is why you'll never make it as a NED. You still have the capacity to feel shame.

[Jet II]

It takes 30 full seconds to work out that BASSA have come out of this situation with an enormous amout of egg on their faces.


I keep hearing this sentiment - but I must admit from my (lowly) position I think BASSA have got a bit of a result - a 19% increase in pensionable pay, 3 extra increments and a 4.6% payrise - I would go on strike for that sort of deal.

[TopBunk]

I keep hearing this sentiment - but I must admit from my (lowly) position I think BASSA have got a bit of a result - a 19% increase in pensionable pay, 3 extra increments and a 4.6% payrise - I would go on strike for that sort of deal.

Hmmm, let's see.

1. Pensionable pay increase was available to BASSA from early Jan as a result of BALPA's analysis and negotiation resulting in cabin crew having an extra £6m to distribute. BASSA chose to do the same as BALPA had already done.

2. 4.6% payrise is RPI+0.2%. BUT only payable from Feb 2007, not Oct 2006 when the previous agreement lapsed. Like for like this should have been a 5.8% rise.

3. Extra increments, look at 2 above and you'll find out where the money came from.

Overall, BASSA got no new money over RPI through their ill-thought out actions. How they dress it up to their members is up to them, whichever way they chose the reality is that they have been well and truly sh*fted.

[Jet II]

Overall, BASSA got no new money over RPI through their ill-thought out actions.

I hear what you say - but the fact remains that BASSA have achieved a better deal for their members than is on offer to the rest of the company employees (flight crew excepted of course)

So whilst you may think their actions ill-thought' there's a quite a few of us thinking 'well maybe if we did the same' ;)

[M.Mouse]

.....but the fact remains that BASSA have achieved a better deal for their members than is on offer to the rest of the company employees .....

Errrr.....what exactly?

The pension money was already there, your RPI + a tad was not backdated so the extra increments (which only go to those already at the previous CAPPED pay point) do nothing for the supposedly low earners joing since 1997.

Although it is interesting to see that this post was made and then hastily withdrawn from elsewhere on this website:

our t & c's are head and shoulders above any other UK airline, and dare i say alot of other national carriers around the world.
the new payscales have been improved SIGNIFICANTLY.

the 8th (and until tomorrow) final annual increment in basic pay for post 1997 main crew was £15,748.

BASSA have now managed to get 4 more years worth of increments:
* 9th increment = £16,200
* 10th increment = £17,000
* 11th increment = £17,800
* 12th increment = £18,600

HOWEVER, when you factor in the first year of our two year pay deal uplift the numbers increase further:

* 9th increment = £16,945
* 10th increment = £17,782
* 11th increment = £18,618
* 12th increment = £19,455

obviously these numbers will increase still further next year when the second pay award uplift kicks in.

some have pointed out that these new increments are non-pensionable.

however they only non-pensionable for crew who are in NAPS - for crew who are in BARP, they are pensionable.

So then add in the large dollop of allowances and it makes a mockery of the claim I read somewhere about poorly paid CC.

[Joetom]

Looks to me like the company left nothink to chance with BALPA and its members causing problems like Strikes and offered them a good deal, well done BALPA.
.
Looks to me like the company were trying their luck with BASSA and their members and took it to the wire, but in the end offered them a good deal, well done to BASSA.
.
The main difference in the above is BALPA and its members are happy with the way they were treated, but BASSA and its members are not happy with the way they were treated and continue to be treated, if the company fail to repair the damage they have caused, the future will have pre-loaded issues waiting to bite them all the time.
.
However, now the Flying Staff pay and pensions have been sorted out(18.75% pensionable pay rise and bigger pensions for all) the company can now sort out its ground staff pay and pensions, interesting times to see if the company treat all staff the same, I would guess if the ground staff were to be offered 18.75% pensionable pay rise the pension issues would be fixed, but I think ground staff will have to pick up the tab for the Pilots and Cabin Crew pension deals, time to see if the ground unions can raise their game to BALPA or BASSA standards, enjoy the show.......:sad:

[overstress]

However, now the Flying Staff pay and pensions have been sorted out(18.75% pensionable pay rise and bigger pensions for all) the company can now sort out its ground staff pay and pensions, interesting times to see if the company treat all staff the same, I would guess if the ground staff were to be offered 18.75% pensionable pay rise the pension issues would be fixed, but I think ground staff will have to pick up the tab for the Pilots and Cabin Crew pension deals, time to see if the ground unions can raise their game to BALPA or BASSA standards, enjoy the show.......

Joetom, you have just displayed your complete lack of understanding of the issues, and your own prejudices, for the consideration of all those on here who actually understand the current situation. :sad: All our pensions have been reduced, geddit? :ugh:

Jet II - you say you hear what M.Mouse & TopBunk say - but you obviously don't understand it, also as displayed by your latest post. BASSA has 'achieved' the reduction of a purser, and sold it as a victory to its members.

Better to keep your mouth shut & be thought a fool, than to open it to confirm the fact.

[Jet II]

Jet II - you say you hear what M.Mouse & TopBunk say - but you obviously don't understand it, also as displayed by your latest post. BASSA has 'achieved' the reduction of a purser, and sold it as a victory to its members.


But I do understand it - very well and I dont have to insult other posters at the same time - if you cannot be civil then I suggest you post somewhere else.

Yes BASSA did fail on the Purser deal - but that is what negotiation is all about, you win some and lose some. The fact remains that BASSA have won a deal for their members that many ground staff are now looking to their rep's to achieve for them.

[Flying Fred]

Jet II

the fact remains that BASSA have achieved a better deal for their members than is on offer to the rest of the company employees


Wrong. BASSA have achieved nothing of the kind. All company employees have the same deal, 8.5% if you want to retire at age 60 and 5.25% if you want to go at age 65. For flying crew only, because we were originally contracted/promised a normal retirement age (NRA) of 55, BA offered a five year transitional arrangement. This was in the original offer made 1 year ago. All that has happened is the money that was destined for that scheme is now being used to fund the pensionable pay increase and the transitional arrangement has been dropped. There was no new money, just using the offer already tabled a year ago in a different way. The pensions deal was done before the BASSA ballot had even closed.

So what makes you think BASSA have done so well? Could it be that they just forgot to mention this/lied to you in their previous comms in order to whip up the strike? Take a look at my post no.529 on 23rd Jan:-

BASSA conveniently forget to mention the £6m per annum that has been ringfenced to help negate the effects of the increased retirement age. If used in the same way as the pilots have done, pensionably pay scales could be raised by approx 20%. If this is done and the age 60 option is taken (8.25% contribution), they would get back close to the position they want for only 8.25%, not 17.5% as claimed.

Funny old thing that, BASSA have now got an 18.75% increase to pensionable pay (all the work on this was done by BALPA by the way)

Joetom

However, now the Flying Staff pay and pensions have been sorted out(18.75% pensionable pay rise and bigger pensions for all) the company can now sort out its ground staff pay and pensions, interesting times to see if the company treat all staff the same, I would guess if the ground staff were to be offered 18.75% pensionable pay rise the pension issues would be fixed, but I think ground staff will have to pick up the tab for the Pilots and Cabin Crew pension deals, time to see if the ground unions can raise their game to BALPA or BASSA standards, enjoy the show.......

You are beginning to sound a bit like a broken record. There are several (inconvenient) bits of the argument you keep ignoring:-

1) As said above, this money has been there from day 1 of the company's original offer of a transition arrangement for flying staff which was made a year ago. Did you object to it then? Now the money is being used in a different way, all of a sudden people are crying foul.

2) Flying staff are having their retirement age raised from 55 to 65 (10 years) whereas for ground staff it was only 60 to 65 (5 years). Hence the transition arrangements in (1) above. BA acknowledged the unfairness of this by making the transition offer in the first place.

3) By raising the pensionable pay scales by 18.75%, the employees contribution into the scheme also raises by 18.75%, thereby causing a reduction in take home pay. So the flying staff are paying more in to get more out.

4) The trustees have agreed to this - they have a legal obligation to see fair play and that one group is not advantaged at the expense of another

Overstress

Jet II - you say you hear what M.Mouse & TopBunk say - but you obviously don't understand it, also as displayed by your latest post. BASSA has 'achieved' the reduction of a purser, and sold it as a victory to its members.
Better to keep your mouth shut & be thought a fool, than to open it to confirm the fact.

Absolutely no need to be so harsh on Jet II. BASSA have been so economical with the truth/lied so often in their comms that a lot of CC don't know the reality of the situation. BASSA have kept saying "believe us & noboby else". At least on this forum we have had the opportunity of putting other points of view. You shouting Jet II down like that does nothing to foster free speech.

[Jet II]

Jet II
Wrong. BASSA have achieved nothing of the kind. All company employees have the same deal

absolutely untrue - the rest of the company have not been offered the opportunity to have pensionable pay increased, an increase in increments or a 4.5% pay rise.

[M.Mouse]

Anybody in doubt about the complete climbdown which BASSA was forced into (if it was such a result why have two BASSA reps resigned in protest at what has been agreed by the TGWU on their behalf?) why not compare the 12original points in BASSA's list of demands and see what the result has been for each item?

Joetom,

Your post is so full of inaccuracies it appears your mind is made up but for what it's worth:

Looks to me like the company left nothink[sic] to chance with BALPA and its members causing problems like Strikes and offered them a good deal, well done BALPA.

The pension negotiations were conducted between BA, BALPA, TGWU, BASSA and the GMB. With some effort the unions presented a coherent plan and a united front (until BASSA deliberately avoided attending the meeting of January 4th). BA had no more desire for industrial unrest over pensions than the unions (well BALPA anyway). Presented with a meaningful, fully analysed and affordable alternative to the original proposals BA struck a deal, also acceptable to the trustees incidentally. It was not a gain for anybody. We will all either have to work longer for the same pension or retire as originally planned but with less. So it was not BALPA 'being offered a good deal'.

Looks to me like the company were trying their luck with BASSA and their members and took it to the wire, but in the end offered them a good deal, well done to BASSA.

BASSA's ballot took everybody (including BALPA) by suprise. Given the level of co-operation over pensions one would have thought that simple courtesy would have meant that BALPA would have been advised of their impending ballot. BASSA were trying to hurt WW with little thought for the consequences to BA, their members or, most importantly our passengers.

The pension money of £6m for CC was part of the proposed pension deal all along. BASSA have not just 'won' this as part of the strike settlement. Some weeks ago one of the BALPA reps. predicted they (BASSA) would use the money to increse CC pensionable pay but that they would keep quiet until proclaiming victory in their dispute. The four extra pay increments apply to post 1997 joiners and have been funded by NOT backdating the RPI + 0.2% payrise to October (historically backfdating has always occurred).

So please explain to me what BASSA have actually achieved from their origional demands, apart from screwing our passengers that is.

The main difference in the above is BALPA and its members are happy with the way they were treated, but BASSA and its members are not happy with the way they were treated and continue to be treated, if the company fail to repair the damage they have caused, the future will have pre-loaded issues waiting to bite them all the time.

Perhaps if BASSA members behaved as adults they would be treated as adults. Respect is earned not awarded.

However, now the Flying Staff pay and pensions have been sorted out(18.75% pensionable pay rise and bigger pensions for all)...

I fail to see how working longer or retiring on less is a rise in pensions. You are demonstrating a lack of understanding of the whole issue. The rise in pensionable pay is funded to offset having to work 10 years longer. It also increase everybody's contribution rates (percentage of a larger pensionable figure).

the company can now sort out its ground staff pay and pensions, interesting times to see if the company treat all staff the same, I would guess if the ground staff were to be offered 18.75% pensionable pay rise the pension issues would be fixed, but I think ground staff will have to pick up the tab for the Pilots and Cabin Crew pension deals, time to see if the ground unions can raise their game to BALPA or BASSA standards, enjoy the show.......

The pensions deals was finalised on January 4th, Nothing any union does now will change that. Ground staff are NOT funding the 'tab' for flying staff. Do you truly believe that, with their legal obligations and the penalties for getting it wrong, that the trustees of the pension fund would have agreed a totally inequitable deal?

Refresh my memory and tell me how much longer you will have to work for your originally promised pension.

The GMB are posturing. ALL the unions involved in the pensions negotiations KNOW that the deal is the best that was available for all and whatever any unions threaten it will not change. It is done.

[M.Mouse]

This is getting tedious.

absolutely untrue - the rest of the company have not been offered the opportunity to have pensionable pay increased, an increase in increments or a 4.5% pay rise.

Neither have the rest of the company had to suffer a 10 year increase in working life.

The 4.2% payrise (not backdated) is RPI = 0.2%. The pay negotiations for the rest of the staff, including pilots, have just started. For those outside BA the last 3 year pay deal ran out last October!

So if you think that a fraction over RPI is a good deal and worth a strike well......

The increments do not affect anybody other than post 1997 joiners.

[Flying Fred]

Jet II

absolutely untrue - the rest of the company have not been offered the opportunity to have pensionable pay increased, an increase in increments or a 4.5% pay rise.

My apologies, I thought your original comment was referring only to the pensions settlement, not the whole thing. This was reinforced by you adding (flight crew excepted of course) at the end because, of course, flight crew have only negotiated so far on pensions, not pay.

I can't however agree with your other sentiments. The 4th purser on 747's is going and the pay rise was not backdated, as it should have been, to 1st Oct 2006 (when the last pay deal ran out). Both of these provide the money to fund the 4 extra increments. All that has happened is that money the CC community already had has been slightly redistributed. Was a strike needed for that?

[Jet II]

This is getting tedious.
Neither have the rest of the company had to suffer a 10 year increase in working life. true - I have only to 'suffer' a 5 year increase but without any of the sweeteners offered to BALPA or BASSA.

I would also point out that you are not being asked to work an extra 10 years for nothing - from the day I joined this company I have listened to FC complaining about being forced out at 55 and I've lost count of the times I've gone on the flight deck of other airlines and found 'retired' BA FC.



The increments do not affect anybody other than post 1997 joiners. who will be with the company for decades to come - boosting their take-home pay by a significant amount.

I can see why you think the results didnt make a strike worthwhile but you forget that the majority of ground staff are not on the very generous salary package that you are and an increase in pensionable pay and extra increments would make a big difference to their standard of living

[M.Mouse]

true - I have only to 'suffer' a 5 year increase but without any of the sweeteners offered to BALPA or BASSA.

The 'sweetener', as you like to call it, was as compensation for the 5 years over and above the 5 years that ALL will have to work.

I would also point out that you are not being asked to work an extra 10 years for nothing - from the day I joined this company I have listened to FC complaining about being forced out at 55 and I've lost count of the times I've gone on the flight deck of other airlines and found 'retired' BA FC.

And your point is? I can see no relevance to what you are saying. We are talking about loss of retirement benefits or working longer to achieve those same benefits.

The increments do not affect anybody other than post 1997 joiners.
who will be with the company for decades to come - boosting their take-home pay by a significant amount.[quote]

Self funded.

[quote]I can see why you think the results didnt make a strike worthwhile but you forget that the majority of ground staff are not on the very generous salary package that you are

Again irrelevant and open to anybody with an ATPL.

and an increase in pensionable pay and extra increments would make a big difference to their standard of living

No it won't it helps offset 5 years of the extra 10 needed to earn the same pension benefits.

It is plain that you are looking at the world through green glasses and I will leave further explanations to somebody else. I fear your mind is made up and judging by the paucity of your arguments I am wasting my time.

[Flying Fred]

I can see why you think the results didnt make a strike worthwhile but you forget that the majority of ground staff are not on the very generous salary package that you are and an increase in pensionable pay and extra increments would make a big difference to their standard of living

I can see your point here about the extra increments lasting forever and this is possibly a minor 'win'. However, as stated above, all that has happened in reality is that the 747 purser and lack of backdating has paid for this (for the time being, anyway). Could this not have been achieved by negotiation instead of pressing the nuclear button. Clearly the 'big' TGWU knew this and took over from the BASSA reps to settle this. The strike ballot over these issues was a huge own goal and will weaken BASSA for a long time.

As far as the pensions deal goes, we appear to be going round in circles.

All I can add is that flying crew were promised their pensions at 55 and you were promised yours at 60. Now we are both at 65. Both of these were part of our existing remuneration packages in the same way as pay & conditions are. Flying crew are having their package changed by more than ground staff, hence the 'sweetner' as you call it or 'transitional arrangement' as BA called it. As has been stated many times before, the trustees are happy with it and they have legal obligations to ensure fairness.

ATB

[overstress]

Jet II - I thought it was civil - just robust debate brought out by frustration at the inaccuracies being perpetrated by some - if you're offended, perhaps you should go elsewhere... :}
Fred - no fear of me 'shouting' anyone down - they can all stand up for themselves :} But I take your point that a lot of crew have been kept in the dark by BASSA.
As M.Mouse says This is getting tedious.
Watching the BASSA spin unfold over this issue is like watching New Labour choosing a good day to bury bad news...

[MancRed]

I think the cc unions have done a great job for everyone in cc,
but what about all those mainline ground staff around the regions who are about to lose their job due to the sale of BA connect, they are all dedicated staff some with 25 years or more service soon to be shown the door while BA ships a third party agent in to take our jobs over!


Maybe some of you lucky one can show some support for us ???

[M.Mouse]

If the CC unions continue doing such a great job we will all be looking for employment elsewhere.

[Joetom]

The company offered £15M P/A Transition Arrangement to offset the changes to flying staff for a period of 5 five years I think. (£9M-pilots,£6M-Cabin Crew)
.
My understanding is that this £15M will be forever and will increase each year as per normal pay rises.
.
My understanding of being Fair would be to give all ground staff a pensionable pay rise of 18.75% at a point 5 years into any new NAPs deal, to do anythink else is unFair.
.
A previous comment mentions pension changes have been set in stone as of the 4th Jan 2007, I also understand this is not the case.
.
Interesting times ahead:(

[M.Mouse]

My understanding is that this £15M will be forever and will increase each year as per normal pay rises.

No it won't.

My understanding of being Fair would be to give all ground staff a pensionable pay rise of 18.75% at a point 5 years into any new NAPs deal, to do anythink else is unFair.

The 15m is to offset the fact that every pilot now has to either pay more or work 10 YEARS extra for the same benefits. The youngest pilot so affected probably has another 35 years to go. Try again then.

A previous comment mentions pension changes have been set in stone as of the 4th Jan 2007, I also understand this is not the case.

As good as. The deal will not change, I would stake money on it.

You seeem intent on continuing to post your unfounded assertions because you either do not understand what you are talking about or you are trolling.

Either way, you win, I give up.

[Human Factor]

The pension deal is as good as set in stone. No amount of striking will change it, like it or not.

Now give it a rest. :mad:

[TURIN]

Is n't that what BA management were saying about a year ago?:hmm:

And another thing.

If the pay deal had been done in October then it would have been based on September's RPI (3.6%) not December's (4.4%).

Can't be bothered to do the numbers but have BASSA really got a good deal?? I don't think so.

[wiggy]

Bleedin Heck Guys, will this never stop? Imagine if 40+ years down the road people were still debating wether a World Cup Final goal was legitimate...l..oh hang on, they still are.

"....they think it's all over"...I wish it was

[atyourcervix73]

Finally, there has been agreement on all sides:ok:

Hopefully now the septic comments and thoughts will stop, the industrial relationship can improve, and we can get on with the massive task of making BA the worlds favourite airline:D

[You Gimboid]

It was a good agreement all round.

Both sides should be happy with the outcome, although ultimately it just looks like a pay-off.

If disputes can be settled by just throwing money at it, then it hardly strengthens BASSA's position for the future, does it?

[M.Mouse]

From my understanding BASSA threw CC's own money at the 'problems'.

From the conversations with my crew yesterday realisation is starting to dawn that they have blindly followed an ultimately self-destructive course.

[Da Dog]

Although at least a couple of long term pursers (30 plus years)at the bar a few nights ago are happy:ok: talk of 50K payoffs to go early............. apparently:confused:

[PAXboy]

This in The Independent of Monday 5th Feb.
BA cabin crew accuse T&G union boss of 'selling out' over strike

By Michael Harrison, Business Editor
Published: 05 February 2007



The head of the Transport and General Workers' Union, Tony Woodley, is to face the wrath of British Airways cabin crew furious at the way they believe the union leadership "sold out" in last week's deal to avert a strike.


Mr Woodley, the union's general secretary, had been due to appear today before a mass meeting of cabin crew at a hotel near Heathrow to defend the settlement, but it has been delayed for a week in an attempt to allow tempers to cool.


http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/article2237734.ece This link might time expire.


If this is correct, then the whole issue could 'mushroom' somewhere else. That is not to say in a strike but in a further decline of attitude and dedication. After all that has been said in this thread and the media, I am surprised that they do not appear to have understood the old phrase, "You are standing into danger".

[Carnage Matey!]

What you need to understand is that the BASSA reps are desperately searching for a scapegoat to disguise the fact that they were never going to have their demands met and have failed to deliver. They are very keen to blame Tony Woodley, I believe going so far as to publish that article in thir forum. They are also fabricating a whole new scenario where the clever old BASSA reps had thought of a better solution to the pensions problem (pretty impressive given that they hadn't thought of it by the 5th of Jan) but it was vetoed by BALPA! I'd like to say you couldn't make it up, but they just did.

They also seem to regularly overlook the fact that 6 of their 9 union reps voted for this outcome. If they were being stitched up by TGWU then why didn't they all vote no?

[AndyPandy]

For those of stamina who have been following this whole sorry saga the thread would not be complete without seeing how BASSA saved the day for everybody and are truly to be admired.

If anybody is puzzled where the CC anti - FC sentiments originate read the paragraphs on pensions if nothing else. The viciousness and gross lack of truth really says it all.

POST STRIKE UPDATE 05 February 2007
OVERVIEW

Since the amazing result announced at the Branch meeting on 15th January 2007, most of what you know by now is history, but we thought it prudent to share with you the actions taken.

In the following week after the meeting, BA's arrogance and contempt continued in various meetings that took place between ourselves, which still surprised us.

It was not until BA were served with the legal 7 days noticed that attitudes began to change, albeit incredibly slowly.

About halfway through the following week it was suggested that ****** and ***** meet with Willie Walsh and ******, in order to meet the face of BASSA and to have a no holds barred meeting, where firm views could be exchanged. This they did and on the first occasion met for just over 5 hours finishing just before midnight and again the following afternoon for a further 4 hours. In fact on the second meeting the 4 of them finalised the EG300 document that you see now.

Both sides agreed that the meetings had been useful, if frank.

The following day Tony Woodley, General Secretary of the TGWU, met Willie Walsh to thrash out the post '97 pay scales. The following day he called for a meeting with the 9 members of the BASSA Branch Committee to report back on his meeting. It was agreed that night to meet BA, for them to officially put their proposals forward to BASSA and then to continue in secret talks over the weekend, to see if an agreement could be reached to advert the strike. This as you know happened and at approx 1300 GMT on Monday 29th January 2007, the committee took a vote and the majority decided that the strikes should not go ahead.

In the decision making, everything that had happened in the past 14 days was taken in to consideration, including every meeting, every view, every comment and every possibility and the majority decided that if the strike went ahead that a better deal could not be reached and the deal that we had negotiated would possibly be off the table also.

The senior reps involved gave 101% of their time, energy, effort, commitment and concentration to study and argue for the best possible deal, taking EVERYTHING and EVERYONE in to consideration, regardless of grade, contract type or fleet.

All of them at the end of it were exhausted and believed they had aged 10 years!

Although we expected that some crew would be disappointed with the deal and that they didn't have their 2 days on the picket line, we would hope that they accept that the reps when making an incredibly difficult decision like they had, did so NOT lightly and did it taking in to account the WHOLE of the membership.

What transpired on the crew forum within hours of the announcement of the strike being called off, was although not surprising due to the tension of the situation, was unjustified in that a handful of crew were personally attacking and criticising individual reps. In our opinion with NO idea of the previous 14 days and its content, this criticism was untimely and unjustified. What was heartening though was the hundreds and hundreds of emails and private messages we received thanking us for our hard work and for the deal that had been negotiated, along with their amazement and disgust on some of the anonymous comments made.

As part of the negotiation and in the spirit of moving forward, Willie Walsh wants to personally meet ***** and ******, the two Convenors, starting this Tuesday 6th Feb and then every 3 months to avoid a repeat of the breakdown in relations and to raise any serious concerns or items that need addressing.

No other Chief Executive has ever offered this and we hope that this will be a positive step in the right direction for all parties concerned.

Some crew have asked 'was this the best deal that we could have done?' Pensions was a closed item, ***** and ***** confirmed this every time they tried to raise it, Willie would not budge. He had his deal with the mother TUs on 5th January and he was not letting go. (See the pension article)

Given the nature of the circumstances, the breakdown in industrial relations and trust, coupled with the above, some had hoped for more BUT considering what we were facing, we believe we have not only delivered a deal, but have also regained trust and respect for both you and BASSA. Yes two quality reps offered their resignation from the Branch Committee (but not as reps), we hope that when emotions die down, they will return to the Branch Committee and we can all move forward together, because that is what makes us stronger. No individuals are bigger than the membership, we are all here at your behest, and we should never forget that fact

EG300

Since BA's request in October 2005, for BASSA to 'take a leap of faith', the history behind EG300 has been well documented. After its introduction in October 2005, BASSA spent months trying to ensure that the policy took our unique working environment and lifestyle into consideration when crew entered into EG300. After many meetings, it was clear that the only place the 'leap of faith' had taken us, was towards the recent breakdown in industrial relations and our subsequent ballot.

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.

Once our ballot result was announced, BA approached BASSA to begin negotiations on EG300, amongst other things. During the talks BA finally acknowledged that certain illnesses do stop crew from flying, this admission was a key part of any deal. Progress continued to be made during the negotiations, including the reinstatement of Flying Crew Orders and a list of various conditions that would exclude crew from being able to carry out their cabin crew duties.

In the new spirit of moving forward, these changes should hopefully work in ensuring that crew are treated in a fair and consistent way. The list includes the following:

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

There is also recognition that an injury sustained whilst on BA premises will be dealt with under the industrial injury framework, which will be added to the cabin crew procedures document.

Arrangements for IVF will be handled within the Family Friendly Working Group.

Unlike before, once you report fit, the normal practice will be for an occasion of absence relating to one of these conditions to be discounted, however, the line manager will endeavour to look at all the circumstances when making this decision. Where applicable, discounting should take place prior to an ARI.

Also, where an individual has no occasions of absence in a 21 month period, the normal practice will be for the next occasion to be discounted, however, the line manager will endeavour to look at all the circumstances when making this decision.

The following texts will also be reinstated in Flying Crew Orders (FCO):

The grounds for declaring oneself unfit for duty are sickness, injury or fatigue:

Cabin Crew are expected to judge these matters more rigorously than ground staff because they have a prime responsibility for safety procedures as well as handling food and work at close quarters with passengers.

Many crew members will be away for a number of days after they report for work, so this means that a cold or other minor ailment should be taken seriously.

One of the other bug bears regarding EG300 was the procedure for reporting fit and the timescales involved in the decision making process and the timing of the ARI outcome. As part of the talks it was agreed that the process will be simplified, the outcome of your ARI should be sent within 48hrs of your meeting and the letters sent out to you regarding stages 1 and 2 will be rewritten in a more friendly, crew specific manner.

The procedures for reporting fit, the process and timings etc are as follows:

Go fit via the Operational Support Team (OST) on *******. During this call the OST will ask if you wish your period of absence to be considered for discounting.

The OST will then send an Email to the Attendance Unit (AU) including any relevant information that you gave and whether you wish the occasion to be discounted. If the AU has all the required information, they will aim to contact you within 2 days of reporting fit.

Where applicable, the AU will discount prior to an ARI.

If an ARI is necessary the following changes / options apply:

For WW crew it has been agreed that you can volunteer to have your ARI after your next trip or on an unusable day. This agreement only applies to EG300 / ARIs and is purely voluntary and does not enable a ground and air duty to be linked. Otherwise an appointment (e.g. UKM or de-roster) will be made within a reasonable timescale of 21 days. In the spirit of this commitment and our improved working relationship, BA have agreed to remove the 5 day & No ARI, no Fly rule.

For EF crew in addition to the above, ARIs can still be arranged when linked to a maximum 6 hour flying duty. The details of this can be found in the Eurofleet Industrial agreement.

In support of the changes that BA have made to EG300, and in the spirit of goodwill, BASSA have agreed that unless a crew member specifically wants to be accompanied, crew can now attend Stage 1 ARIs without representation. However, if an individual is concerned or unhappy with any aspect of the EG300 process, BASSA has negotiated an appeals procedure. The crew member should write to the manager of the AU within 21 days detailing their concerns. The manager of the AU will then respond to that letter within 21 days.

BASSA will of course continue to be available to help and support you at any stage during EG300.

The fundaments of this agreement is based on trust and an acknowledgement by BA of YOUR unique working environment. Please continue to keep us informed of any developments relating to EG300. YOU as always are our eyes and ears!

CSD X

Since the introduction of the CSD job framework in 1998, BASSA have been seeking to introduce some form of 'family' concept that would help crew.

For years now our job seems to have been looked at as a mystery, with a touch of glamour but it's not until you do the job that this is dispelled!

Also if you think of the role of cabin crew, what other job do people come to work, not knowing who they will be with for the next few days, instantly having to work as a team, sharing various personal conversations and probably at the end of the trip know more about others than their own families!

Only crew know what makes crew tick!

Why now?

With the demise of the B757/B767 fleet in EF, now seemed the right time to thrash this possibility out.

We also believe it is a win win for both sides.

Come T5 there will be less of a managerial presence, therefore who could crew turn to for advice and support? This would also now enable crew further promotion in EF above PSR.

For BA, having a manager with a ground/air link, this would provide a better and consistent way of communicating with the crew .

Bearing all of this in mind, we have agreed to pick up the discussions that had faltered last year.

These had stuck on what compensation CSD Xs would get whilst working on the ground.

This wasn't a case of throwing money at a problem nor did we want BA to pay peanuts, as both ways would attract the wrong sort of person.

We have agreed to a trial of the new role and if successful, which we hope it will be, will make both the role and numbers required permanent.

This will then benefit you for the future by having managers that understand the role much better and also giving you more promotional opportunities for the future.

We have at the same time committed, again if the role is successful, to reviewing the SCCM roles in EF on the B757/A321.

PS: Do you have a better name than CSD X?

FIXED LINKS

There is a split opinion on this one!

The plus side is obviously your stability to keep a trip and monies that you would have expected to earn.

In the previous trials this proved 99% successful, unless the aircraft went tech or the flight was cancelled.

Is it better to continue on the same aircraft rather than missing then next sector and ending up on the fantastic DME instead of being on a nightstop?

Also with LHR full to bursting, delays now seem more likely.

Our view was if you can do LHR-MAD-LHR, why can we not consider this to be done in reverse?

The negative side, was crew's ability to eat/drink, have a break and phone home.

In the previous trial the intent from the manager involved to resolve the above was non -existent, thankfully she is no longer here and we trust these can now be resolved.

We have therefore committed in agreeing to a trial, the details have still to be agreed, but of course we shall be using our knowledge of the previous trials and will monitor these rigorously. A crucial factor of us agreeing to a trial, is that BA have committed that fixed links will NOT be imposed.

We will only commit to day 2 of a 3 day trip e.g. : DUS-LHR-NCE and you WILL receive a STR payment for operating a fixed link.

POST 97 PAYSCALES

From the outset, BASSA was determined to try and get the 2 pay scales linked together. Unfortunately, the cost behind this appeared astronomical at present and BA were NOT prepared to concede this under threat.

BASSA then took the decision to at least improve the current pay scales, that would enable us to progress in the future. After much debate, the following pay scales will be in place as soon as an NSP is convened. Although the last 4 are non-pensionable for this specific deal for NAPS members, with the 18.75% uplift in pensionable pay (see pension article), this should compensate for this.

Obviously this was NOT what we would have wanted but you will appreciate that there has at least been an improvement and is now a way forward for further possible changes in the future.


The table below refers to LHR main crew pay scales. Due to the different pay scales at Single Fleet LGW the actual amounts will be different to those quoted for other mainline crew. However, the same principle applies. We are still thrashing out exact numbers for Single Fleet crew.
This issue will be ratified at the forthcoming NSP.

TABLE OMITTED

Feb 08 is predicted RPI of 3.25%

Please remember the pay deal of 4.6% from February 1st gives an extra pensionable amount, because the RPI in October was only 3.4% and in February it was 4.4%. So the delay in the pay rise is partly offset by the pensionable increase, and will be totally in 18 months.


The pay deal is a TWO YEAR deal, the four increments on post 97 crew contracts allows BASSA more scope and time to further push for consolidation into the old scales and that is EXACTLY what we will attempt to do.

LGW BREAKFAST

When we were looking at trying to incorporate the breakfast arrangement that existed in EF LGW in to SFG, we had to be aware of the tax free limit on flying pay, which is currently set at £2.50 maximum. After a few sessions of bartering, we finally agreed on £2.43, which creates a buffer to allow for future pay rises, therefore still allowing this to be 100% tax free.

HOURLY RATE

After the shock of BA raising this issue and their desire to try and re-introduce hourly pay, it has now been confirmed by Willie Walsh and BA in writing, that this subject has now been WITHDRAWN.

PREFERED SELLER

BA have also withdrawn this item.

CENTRAL AREA BUS

The BA5 has now been rescheduled to provide transport between the Compass Centre and the Central Area at the weekends. The service started on 27 January 2007 and will run between 0600 and 2357 every 30 minutes. The full timetable can be found on the BA Intranet.

We hope that our BALPA colleagues will appreciate and acknowledge this enhancement.

900 HOURS

The company's existing proposal (from 19th January) is set out below:

As we know, working time rules mean that our cabin crew can fly for a maximum of 900 hours per year. We have already employed an additional 350 crew, at a cost of around £9 million, to comply with this legislation.

There is, of course, an ability to do non-flying work beyond this, up to a maximum of 2,000 hours a year. Some of these days will be used for training and developing our crew.

We do not need to tell you just how complicated the current crew rostering process is. We would like to talk with you about ways in which we could make this process more efficient which would be to the benefit of our cabin crew and to the airline. In doing this, we could create a system that would provide crew with greater certainty around their work and free time. We could take immediate steps to improve this by giving our crew greater notice of the days when they will, and will not, be used.

As a result of our discussion today we are prepared to add the following processes to this offer:

Quote:For crew who are rostered between 870 and 900 hours:

Crew who have reached the scheduling planning parameter (870 hours) will continue to be rostered trip blocks in the normal manner. They will be alerted via crewlink of the fact that they have reached the planning parameter and that they may contact scheduling in order to discuss the potential impact on their forward roster (this will require a system change and we will endeavour to implement this as soon as is practicable).

If there is a risk of hitting the 900 hours legal limit, crew will be given the opportunity to select which trip will be discharged from the roster and whether any replacement trip substituted. Scheduling will accommodate all such requests.

If a crew member does not contact scheduling within 14 days then scheduling will take the relevant remedial steps (i.e. the removal of the minimum number of trips).

The company will also ensure that any crew member affected by the planning parameter, will be brought under it for the subsequent month in order to establish roster stability.

Any trip removed will be accounted for viz a viz 'fair share'

For crew who have rostered hours exceeding 900 hrs:

The option of amending their forward flying duties will be available to bring their rolling average back below 900. This will be done jointly between the crew member and Operations Planning/Scheduling. The trips that are removed at this point will be accounted for in the next roster publication (a new check for 'fair share'). If training is available at this stage then Operations Planning/Scheduling will let the crew member as soon as possible. Alternatively the crew member may choose to have their forward roster stripped in the month following where 900 hours was exceeded with no new trips added during that month.

PENSIONS

It was apparent from the very first discussion with BA on our twelve unsolved points, that Willie Walsh and his management team were not prepared to discuss pensions whatsoever. As far as they were concerned they had reached agreement at the BA Forum on the 5th January and they were not going to talk on the subject.

Interestingly, we even came up with a cost effective way of self funding an increase in pensionable pay. BA said the two Unions (BALPA and AMICUS) who had been in agreement on the 5th January would insist on the same improvement. Tony Woodley even telephoned the General Secretary of BALPA. After he had spoken to the senior BA BALPA reps, he phoned Tony back informing him that they would not allow any group to improve the pension arrangements agreed by BALPA on the 5th January 2007.

So there you have it the highest paid group, stopping the lowest paid group (post 97 crew contract) having a chance to self fund improvements to their pensions.

Trust us we tried, individually and as a group but the conniving on the evening of January 5th 2007, doomed cabin crew to this deal whether we liked it or not.


We have the T&G Chief Financial Officer, Mr ***** working on some examples to share with you on the next flyer. We have asked him for examples for 25, 35, 45, year olds in NAPS 1 and NAPS 2 and a description of how it affects BARP members; these changes only come into place on April 1st 2007.

Also we will ask him to point out in his opinion where the pensions deal is weak and also where it is strong, considering that there was a £2.1 billion deficit and that most final salary schemes have perished.

We have not fully achieved our goal of the ill health pension being reinstated, but we have not given up either! We have however ensured that if you were unable to fly and were to opt for a permanent ground job, your present pensionable pay will be protected with an 18.75% uplift.

One interesting point is that cabin crew in NAPS are roughly split 50/50 between NAPS 1 and NAPS 2. In most cabin crew cases NAPS 2 is the much better option. The main point being that dependant on your pensionable salary, the abatement figure can be very different; so any concerned individual should contact a financial advisor or BA Pensions (020 8513 2222) as soon as possible.

PURSER / MAIN CREW SWAP

To be introduced from September 2007. Details regarding the introduction will be discussed at WW steering. The change will take place incrementally and BA have confirmed that voluntary severance will be offered for WW CSDs and PSRs as well as part time opportunities for WW PSRs. It is envisaged that both of these options, along with future aircraft orders and proposed network expansion will provide promotional opportunities.

DOWNROUTE REPORT TIME

This has been referred back to WW steering panel.

[Joetom]

AndyPandy, Thanks for your last post, much information, I did like the following quote, shows how staff working together is a dream.
.quote.
.
"Interestingly, we even came up with a cost effective way of self funding an increase in pensionable pay. BA said the two Unions (BALPA and AMICUS) who had been in agreement on the 5th January would insist on the same improvement. Tony Woodley even telephoned the General Secretary of BALPA. After he had spoken to the senior BA BALPA reps, he phoned Tony back informing him that they would not allow any group to improve the pension arrangements agreed by BALPA on the 5th January 2007.
So there you have it the highest paid group, stopping the lowest paid group (post 97 crew contract) having a chance to self fund improvements to their pensions".
.
Nice to know BALPA are in charge of Cabin Crew pensions, guess they also in charge of all Ground Staff pensions as well, am sure it's Fair:= := :=

[Da Dog]

joetom........... you have simply fallen into the trap of believing the world according to BASSA. :ugh: :rolleyes:

Q the burning of all text books that don't conform to their way of thinking!:mad:

[Strimmerdriver]

Bassa's statement is factually incorrect
Their settlement is partly funded by £6m pa which was made available by the dilligence of Balpa Reps.
Their strike was stopped by the TNG because they were about to be destroyed by BA.
This "blame Balpa" rubbish has one victor ; BA. I cannot believe the behaviour of Bassa.

[PAXboy]

Thanks for further information. One small point I have just realised: BASSA does not appear to have realised just how mucvh information leaks out these days. In the 1970s, information was in the hands of a few but now it can be leaked without trace and without hesitation. The same thing happened to Tony Blair about Iraq (and a dozen other things) they just forget that people will talk. Eventually, it is possibl eto see which bit of talk was correct.

[Magplug]

The behavoir of BASSA throughout this affair completely defies belief. It is of no credit to them that they have lied to their members throughout and persued an agenda of minutae to force the company towards a strike. To assert that the other employee groups should be grateful to them for their advances in pension arrangements is a complete misrepresentation.

Those of you that saw Tony Woodley (T&G) in the joint press conference with WW might have gleaned from his inferences that he was unhappy at the way the BASSA reps had forced the issues and reverted to the pig-headed unionist ways of the 70's & 80's.

These dinosaurs have no place in this century. They should be taken to the knackers yard and be put out of their misery.

[M123]

I cannot believe some CC think BASSA is telling them facts, while they are telling you lies. It is them who thought a pay rise was justified, while BA (LHR) crew is the most overpaid bunch in the industry, with a great number of people earning more then many many F/O's.

Without being disrespectful to the job, they have not gone through 3 years of full time training, they do not have a 60K+ loan to pay off, and let's be fair, if you want to get that kinda money outside aviation you'd have to work pretty fookin hard. BA cabin crew have nothing to complain about.

While the pilot's union got information of experts on the whole pension deal, BASSA just demanded without back ups. They are, just as the pilot's union, a promoted bunch of people on the job. They do not have the financial and basic understanding of running a business. If they did, they would've cared about the poor underpaid Gatwick crew as well.

BASSA lies, BASSA will always lie to get the back up of their members. Their statement and attack towards the pilots union and the pilots is purely aimed at creating a row within BA. Do not go near them, and if you are, stop wasting too much money and join a sensible union.

Just an outsiders view.

[Litebulbs]

Speaking from a 20+ year LGW employee, BASSA is a LHR union. They only arrived down here after the (I want to say merger) BA takeover of BCal and in small numbers. Where do you think Cabin Crew 89 came from after the takeover in 88?

Not one single Cabin Crew employee is worse off today with regard to the BASSA BA negotiated deal, but a great many are better off. The changes that will happen, were going to happen anyway. Well done BASSA.

[Human Factor]

... except the extra paypoints only apply to LHR.

[Litebulbs]

BASSA is a LHR union

[Human Factor]

Agreed. It certainly is!!

Not one single Cabin Crew employee is worse off today with regard to the BASSA BA negotiated deal.

Correct. Today, they aren't. If any LGW crew stay beyond pp7, they will be then.

[MD11Man]

The average LGW crew is on a 1/3 starting basic pay as LHR. Well done BASSA, you looked after the LGW girls&guys by giving them an 11p pay rise an hour, 6 of which is inflation correction.

Well done BASSA, for getting 4 increments for some VERY (over?) paid CC at LHR.

Well done BASSA, for forgetting about 'that other side of BA' again. :ugh: :ugh:

[Litebulbs]

I feel so sorry for LGW BA employees. It is a dead airport. North terminal is a joy to fly through, it has all the benefits of being an outstation with all the benefits of being a main base. The travel time from the city to either LGW or LHR is the same give or take minutes. Why would anyone want to fly out of LHR, apart from route network, amount of flights, destinations etc etc, I don't know. If only they could knock that bl00dy church down in Lowfield Heath and ignore the blue rinse set in Reigate/Charlwood etc, and get that second runway, then what an airport.

Unfortunately, no, that is not fair, luckily, it is a sea of orange now!