BA and Project Columbus III

[wobble2plank]

Joetom,

3/Pilots taking VS will get good T+C's, just like all the managers who took the deal before xmas 2008, other staff will be be getting IVS with legal min T+C's.

This made me chuckle. As the thorny subject of Voluntary Redundancy has been on the cards for some considerable time with respect to the top 500 seniority pilots the T's and C's associated have been set for the same period.

There was, indeed, a caveat attached to the application of VR which quite clearly stated that the conditions of VR were set and, if not taken, would never be as good again. You pays your money and takes your choice. You are complaining in a similar vein to someone who bought a television last year and then found it half price the next. Time is the motivator in this one.

Pilots still maintain their present deal inside pensions, as paying least in and getting most out.

Where did this little gem pop up from? This is about CC productivity but yet again we get mired into a 'but he's got more than I've got' playground argument. This has been explained many times before. Suffice to say that those who contribute less get less, simple truth rules of pension fund accumulation.

Hopefully the adult lead taken by BALPA will either galvanise BASSA into trying to achieve something similar for its membership or push them to the negotiating table to at least try and salvage some scraps from the mess they are in. The next week should be very interesting indeed.

Pinkaroo, I am deeply touched that you are so concerned over my personal position in this whole sorry mess. However, it is just that, my personal position, so stop digging.

[imastweardsothere]

Andy

My sympathies mate. I dont visit the BASSA forum anymore as a result of the one sided rhetoric and 'bullying' that goes on there.

I wish the union that sadly I am still a member of, would provide honest answers and honest information.

The world economy is in the poo. The country is in the poo. The airline is in deep poo. Only BASSA refuses to release information to its members.

I agree with the questions you have, "Why does the BASSA noticeboard in T5 have clippings about Willie Walsh's payrise, but not anything about his refusal to accept it"?

Has BASSA had access to the companies figures? If they have, why wont they release the information to the members? Why wont they deal honestly with their members?

It will be a huge turnaround and a monumental change of tack, but surely BASSA needs to negotiate the change, not have it driven through under SOSR. Lets face it the allowances system depicted above is a bit if a joke nowadays. But then again, peraps BASSA is as well.

Its not a talent or popularity contest, this isnt Big Brother or Celebrity Get Me Out Of Here, this is events which are affecting real peoples lives.

Real people will lose jobs and homes.

[Katieatdoor4right]

Well said!!

[exeng]

Where did this little gem pop up from? This is about CC productivity but yet again we get mired into a 'but he's got more than I've got' playground argument. This has been explained many times before. Suffice to say that those who contribute less get less, simple truth rules of pension fund accumulation.

Apologies for thread creep but that statement is somewhat of an oversimplification in my opinion.

The statement is true if you are a member of the latest scheme (effectively money purchase). It is not necessarily true if you were a member of APS or NAPS. For both Flight Deck and Cabin Crew (and others) your final pension is loosely dependent on your final pay (with details too numerous to mention here).

So if you joined the airline as a check-in agent (in APS) and stayed for 30 years retiring as a check in agent (without any promotion) then your pension would be based upon your final salary with any increments. If you start as an F/O and stay as an F/O for say 15 years and then become a Captain for 15 years your pension will be based on your final salary as a Captain (PP24) although for 15 years your contributions would have been based on the salary of an F/O.

Same is true for Cabin Crew I might add who join as Main Crew but end up as a CSD.

I know at least two people who are still in the same grade on the ground as they were 38 years ago and it is folk like this who, to an extent, fund the additional benefits a lot of us enjoy.

I wish you all the best in emerging from the current mess relatively unscathed. Whilst I hold a healthy suspicion of anything that comes from the mouth of BA management it would seem to me that in truth these are difficult times for the airline and that something has to give.

I'm sure it has been looked at by all (hopefully BASSA also) but temporary concessions would be the route that I would have wished to see - however I suspect that BA are looking for more permanent solutions.


Regards
Exeng

[Stall Pusher]

Dear Moderator. Not sure which part of my last post you did not like. Sorry about that. SP


The point you have all missed is that things will get better/are getting better. Already the price of oil is rising and the FTSE has gained 15% since the beginning of the year. Walsh has got to hurry up screwing his workforce, otherwise by the time the cuts are made the airline will be in profit again! Obviously it would be as profitable as Luthansa is now (who have just awarded their cabin crew a pay rise and improvement in T&C's), if it wasn't for the disastrous fuel hedging positions we currently are tied to.

I am very surprised that the managers responsible for Fuel Hedging have not been dismissed or reprimanded, for virtually bankrupting British Airways. Mr Wals was very quick to sack Gareth Kirkwood and David Noyes over the T5 debacle. Why is he so selective with who he fires?

The problem for the cabin crew is that WW is not offering any hope. If sacrifice is made now, there will be no compensation later when the profits roll back in. Management will benefit through their bonus award package, but reductions in T&C's will stick forever. This is unacceptable.

BA management have a long history of incompetence. Under Bob Ayling's BEP savings of £42m were demanded. This is when the new low pay contracts were started which are now apparently too costly as well. However BA went and wasted £67m ( and much more than that probably) painting the aircraft tailfins in new ethnic desgins. Later as we all know, that decision was reversed and even more money was wasted painting them into the current 'Chatham' design. Once bitten, twice shy I am afraid.

Anyone would think BASSA have not even negotiated or offered a viable alternative, but they have. Unfortunately with Walsh it is his way or the highway. Confrontation is inevitable.

[Andyismyname]

Stickpusher, welcome back. The price of oil rising is bad for an airline.

Why hasnt BASSA advised its members of the true state of the business.

We need to negotiate permanent salary cuts now to stop them being imposed under SOSR.

If we union negotiates cuts, the airline will go broke, looking at the cash burn v cash reserves, potentially by the New Year.

The payback later..............will be still having a job.

[JayPee28bpr]

This is an interesting article that may impact your thoughts on BA's cost reduction plans and, indeed, its general business planning for the foreseeable future.

Basically, the article states that two US carriers (Delta and American) have reduced fares in Business Class by over 50%. Business Class to LHR for June is now under $2,000. How does that compare to BA CW?

Link to the full article below:

Delta, AMR See Revenue Vanish as New York Business Fares Tumble - Bloomberg.com (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=athn1c8K0PUA)

[Open Lies]

:ugh:If one thinks that prem pax are going to return and thus both the revenues and yields to the post credit crunch levels, you're living in cloud cuckoo land.:ugh:




Bankers, lawyers, M&A have all slashed there travel budgets, both slashing the pax count and the seats they travel in.

Were flying aircraft that are configured to carry Premium paying customer's - that no longer exist. There are many article on city boards stating that Prem travel will never return to the same levels that we have enjoyed for so many years.

Its simple - we have a fraction of the money coming in - but the same money going out. It 'ain't rocket science folks.

Please tell your BASAA reps to listen to reason. If you guys go on strike when the rest of us will be taking pain through pay cuts & productivity I honestly believe that you could bring the whole company down. If you don't believe this - start doing some INDEPENDENT research in the companies financial state. Stop listening to the broken record that is BASSA.

This time its for really folks - don't be a sheep and make your own independent mind up. :eek:

[Stall Pusher]

Andy. BA is not going bust. It will not be bust at the end of the year. We may have a different CEO by the end of the year, but the airline will still be there.

If BA really thought that premium travel was not coming back to previous levels, they would not be making the investment in the new First Class cabin. Crew are continuing to receive Premium training courses, so the upgrade for First must still be on the cards. First travel will recover. True there will not be so many bankers sitting in there, but there are a lot more millionaires around these days.

The blueprint for getting us through a difficult time is no different now than before. If there are too many empty seats, you simply have to cut capacity. BA have not done this quick enough and you have to ask yourself why? Before now First cabins have been closed and crew compliments reduced. Why has this not been done?

The reason is political. The plan was to only offer part time if you transfered to the new fleet. So far this year we have run with a surplus of cabin crew getting loads of 24hr av's, when unpaid leave, part time or VS should have been offered.

Only two 744's have been grounded this year, yet we are taking delivery of 4 new 777-2200ER's. New routes have stated to Saudi, extra service to JNB and new destinations are being added like Las Vegas, Maldives etc. Harldly the moves of an airline about to go bust.

If BA was in such a desperate state, OpenSKies would be grounded and the new LCY/JFK service shelved until the market improves. If you cannot fill the Club cabins in mainline from LHR to JFK, why start a new business only operation in competition with your own product? It does not make sense.

Suddenly there is a change of tack by IFCE. Events have overtaken the master plan and management are playing catch up with the situation. They are doing now what they should have done in January.

[nuigini]

Has BASSA had access to the companies figures? If they have, why wont they release the information to the members? Why wont they deal honestly with their members?

Because if BASSA has seen the figures and noticed that the management isn't using the recession as "an excuse to change the terms and conditions", their only argument would go flat as a pancake.

I suppose it's better for them to tell íts members that they haven't seen any of it.

I heard from one crew who had heard (these rumours) that BASSA will not negotiate until they have seen the books. Go figure.

[TorC]

As BA CC myself (Eurofleet) I have to say that I am starting to despair of this whole situation, and am doubting that many of my colleagues have any ability whatsoever to trully see what's happening to BA and the industry in general. How that will translate if it comes to any kind of vote absolutely terrifies me.

Over the last few days, so many that I have worked with are simply spouting along the lines of "BA is not in financial trouble, it's all lies", "Willy just wants to destroy BASSA", "It's illegal to make anyone redundant", and the latest now is from those crew who, having read the subject title of the VUW offer, think that they are being asked to give up ALL payments (including allowances) for 1-4weeks, think it only applies to crew (so is therefore unfair), or think they are being asked to work their days-off.

That's scary, but what's worse is that despite many postings on the BASSA and other CC forum sites, it seems that BASSA itself is quite content to let this confusion run riot amongst it's members.

That said, I have to also say that I'm finding the (mostly) level-headed debate on here to be quite uplifting, despite the seriousness of the subject matter. There may be hope!

[nuigini]

That's scary, but what's worse is that despite many postings on the BASSA and other CC forum sites, it seems that BASSA itself is quite content to let this confusion run riot amongst it's members.

It is scary. It has reached the point if BASSA were to ask its members to jump they wouldn't ask why but instead how high.

[deltaguy]

TorC Part of the problem is as I see it is the bitterness and anger between BA management and BA cabin crew. I have worked for the airline just over 20 years and the tensions between the two sides seems to be increasing on a weekly basis.

I have a lot to be thankful for BA has been good to me. But I can see why this anger and resentment has happened over the years.

Hence why we are now at a point where there is no trust or mutual respect. BA may be telling the truth and we are as a company in dire trouble. But the very people it needs on side are working against the company and dare I say there is even an element that don't give a dam if the company goes under.

I think its very sad that we are where we are now, but I fear that there is going to be major trouble ahead for Mr Walsh as they seem intent on screwing the cabin crew community out of their terms and conditions, while other departments (non customer service departments) seem to be getting let off somewhat lightly.

[wobble2plank]

Deltaguy:

Mr Walsh as they seem intent on screwing the cabin crew community out of their terms and conditions, while other departments (non customer service departments) seem to be getting let of relatively lightly.

The only reason that other departments 'seem' to be getting away lightly is because they have already rationalised! This fact has been conveniently hidden from the majority of BASSA members as the hierarchy in BASSA realise that they have a long way to fall if they were to catch up with the rest of the company. Ask the engineers how their conditions have changed, the ramp rats, loaders, Ground handling staff, pilots etc. All of the T's & C's are remarkably different to 10 years ago.

The CC however, are not. This may be seen as a triumph of BASSA negotiating, no is an easy word, but what it ultimately has been is that the company couldn't, at the time, be bothered with the petty, militant approach. Now, however, they need to take the bull by the horns and take BASSA/UNITE head on.

Now 10/20 years of painful adjustment comes at once and people wonder why the CC are complaining? Sorry but it has been coming for a long time.

[TorC]

TorC Part of the problem is as I see it is the bitterness and anger between BA management and BA cabin crew. I have worked for the airline just over 20 years and the tensions between the two sides seems to be increasing on a weekly basis.



Yes, tensions/emotions etc will fluctuate, as they will do in any form of relationship. That's only natural.

What is also natural in most relationships, if they are honest and true relationships in which both parties want the best for each other, is a willingness by both parties to talk/listen/question/understand/give/take etc and to try to move towards a common point of resolution, at a cost acceptable to both parties. This is what seems to be sadly lacking in the BA/BASSA relationship. I accept that blame lies on both sides. I do not accept though that it lies in equal proportions.

As an employee, I relate myself directly to BA, not via BASSA. I have a seperate relationship with BASSA. Most of the time, I'm fairly content with my relationship to BA. It feels to me to be quite a healthy and open relationship. BASSA and me though, we are on shaky ground, and maybe about to argue over who gets to keep the cat.

[wiggy]

"Only two 744's have been grounded this year, yet we are taking delivery of 4 new 777-2200ER's"

But what about the additional 744's and the 757's that will be grounded this Winter (someone will remind me of the numbers involved in a minute)?

[Perry-oaks]

16 grounded in total.

[TopBunk]

Contrary to the MOS:rolleyes: reports, he BALPA deal that meets the company demands and wil be balloted on includes:

Basic pay reduction by just below 3%
Flying rate reduced by about 20%
Increased annual work LH and SH
Fewer augmented crew on LH
Reduced report times for SH (due T5 improvements)

This is the result of an intelligent negotiation between an Association and a Company. It still has to be voted in, but I'm sure it will be; and BALPA retains the right to null and void it if any other area doesn't fulfill their part of their commitment in its entirity.

Meanwhile BASSA are apparently denying that there is a problem at all. Well, folks, stand by for a few hard proposals and realities in the next fortnight if your reps don't wisen up.

I wish you well as individuals, but look forward to the obliteration of BASSA and their total ignorance of reality. Bring it on Willie - well overdue and something that the rest of the company are relishing - just ask any engineer, for example.

[wiggy]

Topbunk

Just for clarity, to avoid any possible misunderstanding and you being misquoted ... :ok:

Do you mean the Flying Hour Rate is down 20%? (i.e. the payment for each hour flown is reduced by 20%)

[Human Factor]

I think he does. :ok:

[nuigini]

I suppose our clear times will be discussed as they have been monitoring them closely since we began reporting at the CRC. In that case many crew do have themselves to run as many rush off the aircraft, even being told otherwise, as soon as the passengers have disembarked.

[nuigini]

TopBunk

Is it true that they want the flight crew to fly their maximum hours?

[wobble2plank]

nuigini

Yes, there has been an hours/annum increase for both LH and SH which brings us closer to the maximum annual flying rate. This is at no extra cost to the company hence the productivity gains.

Work more, paid less.

More to come for the CC.

[FloridaCandle]

BA is not going bust. It will not be bust at the end of the year. We may have a different CEO by the end of the year, but the airline will still be there.

BA WILL go bust if anyone is stupid enough to go on strike.

Thankfully, unlike you stallpusher, many crew do are able to see the bigger picture and I just pray that others wake up before it's too late.

Remember BCAL - everyone said they wouldn't go broke and look what happened there. :ugh:

[deeceethree]

It seems that BASSA are now really fearful about the loss of Ts & Cs for the senior/older end of the pay/perk scales. They don't seem to have done an awful lot for the younger, newer entrants or those at LGW. Essentially, BASSA appears to have been a club run by the seniors for the seniors, and everyone else has been bullied and lied to to keep them in line. These 'club-members' are beginning to sweat and panic as their cosy little lives are now seriously threatened! No more cosy trip selections or dictating behaviour during disruption.

Such a shame that so many of its members have allowed themselves to be led up this garden path.

The train smash is coming, and coming quickly. Casualties will abound. And Stall Pusher will probably only realise that as they zip up his/her body bag!

:ugh:

[nuigini]

I also hope others will come to their senses and see what exactly is happening. I recently came home from a trip and some crew really scare me with their selfishness. One girl said she would rather see the airline go bust than having her terms and conditions changed because she can't afford to give up any money. How clever is that?

[nuigini]

It seems that BASSA are now really fearful about the loss of Ts & Cs for the senior/older end of the pay/perk scales. They don't seem to have done an awful lot for the younger, newer entrants or those at LGW.

This also explains the suggestion that BA should introduce a new contract with new terms and conditions and let future crew work on existing fleets instead of introducing an entirely new fleet. This shows that BASSA only cares about excisting crew and their salaries.

[Stall Pusher]

Well TopBunk. It is about time that BALPA entered into an intelligent debate with BA management, after the embarrassing situation your union got itself into over OpenSkies.Wasn't very intelligent was it?

Fancy you lot taking a pay cut whilst our dear CEO continues to pump money into your nemesis! Willie seems to get whatever he wants from the pilots.

I do not know why the pilots on this forum keep attacking BASSA. All I hear from them is how weak and expensive their union is, moaning about the reps etc.

BALPA ought to take a leaf out of BASSA's book and not get pushed around by Walsh. He has got those OpenSkies contracts all ready for you in the drawer. You will wish you were flying for JetStar.

[wiggy]

Welcome back Stall Pusher,


So I take it you still have no thoughts on the consequences of 16 aircraft being grounded this winter, not the 2 you claimed your post #760?....

[TightSlot]

It's beginning to get nasty in here - Could we put the handbags away please ladies and try to stay calm and sensible. Please remember that this is not a thread about BALPA - It is not a vehicle for flight crew to attack cabin crew, or vice versa. No further warnings - offending posts will be deleted from now on, without warning or explanation.

[overstress]

Stall Pusher:

Your postings betray your prejudices all too clearly.

What you didn't post was that the BALPA deal will not happen unless all the other groups pull their weight.....

So unless BASSA learn the meaning of the verb 'negotiate' then the pilot pay cut will not happen!

The pilots have settled with BA, looks like a certain union is going to be standing out in the playground by itself when the school bell rings....

[Stall Pusher]

Dear Moderator. There have been a lot of attacks here on BASSA.;)

The 757's were going anyway to OpenSkies.....but now they are not.

There are eight 744's being 'rested'.

It is strange that BALPA have looked into BA's books and decided on a pay cut for its members, when the following should have been considered:

1. Why has British Airways been mis-managed to a degree that Willie Walsh and the Board have turned a profit before tax of £922m in 2008, into a loss before tax of £401m this year - a staggering difference of £1,323m!

2. Half of this amount appears to be the cost of fines levied on the company by the regulatory authorities over criminal actions, for participating in illegal fuel surcharge and cargo cartels.


3. Doesn't a company the size of British Airways deserve a Chairman that is prepared to devote his full attention to the matter of running the company successfully, rather than leaving it in the hands of someone who only works part-time in the job?

It seems that if the pilots are happy to reward incompetence on such a grand scale by donating part of their salaries away, it necessarily follows that perhaps this was not an intelligent thing to do.

[747-436]

2. Half of this amount appears to be the cost of fines levied on the company by the regulatory authorities over criminal actions, for participating in illegal fuel surcharge and cargo cartels.

How much mis information is being fed to people, these fines were accounted for in the accounts for year ending March 2007! See the Annual Report from that year.

[Currock Base]

Stallpusher,

To answer your first question. Yes there is a difference of £1.3Bn year on year. One billion is an increase in fuel costs as the oil price went to a record high of approx $150 a barrel. Yes it did dip later to around $50 but is heading back up again $70 at the moment you'll notice unleaded is now back over £1 again. As for the other £300m that is the recession people aren't paying the higher fares and the banks aren't travelling as much as they did.

As BA can't stop a recession or change the price of oil, that leaves employee costs and productivity. We're doing our bit and many parts of the company have over the last few years, so over to you. It will be less painful if you negotiate.

To you second question, the fines were in the previous financial year's figures not last year's. So the figures are worse than you choose to believe.


CB

[Virginia]

Well BA is doomed anyway when the oil runs out!

I seriously doubt that BASSA will be stupid enough to strike, at this point in time it may not be the wisest of moves, I also seriously doubt that BA will go bust.

[slan22]

hi,
i would just like to make the following point.

willie will be taking his cue from the cabin crew unions at the end of june - as cabin crew, i'm sure that you are aware that bassa has a poll on their website - the information taken from that poll will be presented to willie at the end of the month and based on that information he will make his decisions.
i can't see that willie will be listening to individual voices - possibly hasn't got the time.
you can argue away here but if you want your voice heard you need to either fill in the bassa poll or get amicus to start up a similar poll.

i've spoken to lots of crew who don't seem to realise that completing the poll is important - otherwise, willie will just be getting a minority point of view. scary for all of us.

so, my advice is, to get off your b*******s and make sure your voices are heard.

[TorC]

Virginia


I seriously doubt that BASSA will be stupid enough to strike, at this point in time it may not be the wisest of moves, I also seriously doubt that BA will go bust.


Well that's a very cosy and happy-ever-after point of view.

What sort of foundations have you based it on?

[Classic]

Can those who believe that BA is pulling a fast one and is preparing to make a fortune in the forseeable future please provide some sort of statistical basis for this notion?

There are plenty of numbers out there showing our dire financial position, but I've seen none from Bassa to support their argument.

Lots of emotive rhetoric to stir up the troops, but no stats to create a reasonable argument.

[Glamgirl]

There has been a lot of talk on here (and other places) about Bassa suggesting cost cuttings (albeit temporary). However, I can't seem to find anywhere what those suggestions are/were.

Could anyone please enlighten us? Or have they not released this information, but telling members to trust their reps?

There is another forum around where there is so much hatred and bitterness towards management, fellow crew, pilots and anyone else that it's actually quite shocking to read. I know this is not everyone, but it must be very draining being so angry all the time.

Gg

[PC767]

2008/2009 annual report & accounts. Chief Executive's Review.

"This focus on premium markets may look strange at a time when premium traffic, according to IATA’s latest figures, has declined by around 19 per cent in the first three months of 2009, and when we have been forced to cut back our premium capacity by parking aircraft and reducing flying.

We check our vision against our short-term actions regularly and are convinced it remains valid. For a start, it marks a continuation of the work we have already done to improve our products and services. We remain convinced that this is the part of the market where we need to be powerfully represented when conditions improve – as they inevitably will."

[TorC]

Glamgirl


The latest that I could find was the BASSA Latest News update of 31May (on the BASSA website). This was the idea that instead of Newfleet, there should be Newcrew. That's to say that new crew would work on current fleets instead of the seperate proposed new fleet.

Beyond that, I can't see much of any substance. There are a few more news-flashes post 31May, some of which (Walsh set for £2.4m pay out, for example, posted on 11June) have yet to be updated with current, correct info.

I think you can safely go with the 2nd sentence of your 2nd paragraph.

As to your 3rd paragraph: Yes, I've noticed quite a few crew lately that are so drained that they find it hard to do things such as post take-off PAs, 2nd bar rounds on band4 sectors, hold a delicup/tumbler at it's base, offer the choice of meals/sandwiches, play the foreign language PAs, play the subtitles on the safety demo video and other such demanding aspects of our job. I even had a briefing recently where the CSD told us that the service routine was "chuck it out, clear it in, read the paper". Truly inspirational!

The above mentioned crew are good at running off the aircraft and through Terminal 5 though, so I guess they can't be that drained after all :rolleyes:

PC767

That was then .... this is now. To be fair though, I do see the point you are trying to make. But do you expect premium loads/yields NEVER to improve? I'm sure they will, but in years, not months, and probably not at the £s we have been used to.

Let's hope that the mention of "work we have already done to improve our products and services" wasn't relating to hot towels in WT+ as we really wouldn't want to be caught telling porkies would we?

[Glamgirl]

Well, those are the crew that I'm ashamed to call colleagues. It can be a tiring job at times, but take the rough with the smooth and it's a darned good job to have. If everyone could just do what they're supposed to do when they're supposed to do it on the aircraft we would be the best in the world. Problem is, too many think passengers are an inconvenience and distraction.

This kind of attitude bothers me a great deal, and I just wish people could do their job as they're supposed to.

Anyways... I'll keep dreaming and hoping...

Gg

[TorC]

GG .... Don't despair, you are not dreaming and hoping in solitude. Really, you aren't.

[Andyismyname]

Stall Pusher, and BASSA,

I am saddened by the way there are so many attacks on the CEO, and in one post the Chairman.

Why cant BASSA stop picking convenient bits of history and move forward?

Hedging is done by most businesses, and indeed by many individuals. Who hasn't bought a bottle of Scotch and filled their petrol tank on the day of the Budget...........just in case the Chancellor increases the relevant duties? That is hedging!!

Prudent companies also buy harvests when the price is low, or in the case of airlines with a known need for fuel, buy fuel when they think the costs is advantageous.

I find it somewhat ludicrous, and sadly bizarrely hypocritical, that BASSA is able to use this line to us Cabin Crew. Lets face it, we kniow a Sale, or a bargain when we see one......or we think we do!! Who hasn't bought things at Abercrombie and Fitch, Maceys, Walmart, Tesco or ASDA when they thought they were getting a good deal? This is exactly what BA were doing. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't.

um.....and those attacks on 'price fixing' always seem to forget that people have actually gone to jail over it.......and they are still locked up!!

With T5, the buck stopped with Willie. Yes he sacked 2 people. I dont know, but perhaps they were the people who failed to tell Willie that there were problems?

I think it was last year, that BASSA portrayed Willie Walsh in either a 'pirate' or 'burglar' style outfit in a newsletter, and included a 'letter from the future' bemoaning a time when changes had been undertaken.

Could BASSA perhaps stop the personal attacks, and the fiction, and deal with the facts, as they affect us NOW?

The past is the past. The CEO is the CEO. The world financial crisis is real, and affecting all businesses. Can you please release the figures that you have seen. It will take a change of tack, but crews will respect you for the blatant honesty. We have had it very good for a long time.

Please stop dwelling on a view of the past, and successfully negotiate our future in British Airways.

[Stall Pusher]

Andy. You need to get real.

Walsh should have been sacked over T5, but two Directors were sacrificed in his place. Why?

It is all unravelling now. Here is a post from another forum:

There is a different option available at Gatwick...instead of working for free we are getting offered £80-100 to come in on our days off to do overtime because someone somewhere has cocked up the manpower figures...AGAIN!! http://www.crewforum.co.uk/forum/smileys/smiley129.gif

[Andyismyname]

Stall Pusher

How about releasing the figures that BASSA have seen and enlightening the members?

[QRS]

Glamgirl:
If everyone could just do what they're supposed to do when they're supposed to do it on the aircraft we would be the best in the world. Problem is, too many think passengers are an inconvenience and distraction.

This kind of attitude bothers me a great deal, and I just wish people could do their job as they're supposed to.


Glamgirl, this kind of attitude has been around for decades. I'm not sure if the 'get as much out of it whilst doing as little as possible' behaviour is endemic in BA cabin crew or representative of society at large.

Either way, you highlight a major issue.
Some crew seem to think that getting to their destination with as much rest and as little personal inconvenience as possible is the main objective.
As opposed to recognising that they are paid to do a job that has the added bonus, when they have finished work, of arriving somewhere desirable (or not!) at the other end.

I'm looking at the loads for my next trip to India. Half full both ways.
To me that's extremely disappointing. To some of my crew (those that haven't gone sick because they 'don't do India') I'm sure it will be a cause for celebration.

WW doesn't get twice the quality of customer service for twice the money. He doesn't even get the best customer service for twice the money.

If it bothers you and me it enrages WW.

I remember asking a Gold card member for his thoughts on travelling with BA recently. He said that after refusing to fly with us for a while he had noticed a marked improvement in the cabin crew. He added 'it's amazing what the threat of losing your job can do to your motivation.'

Nicely put.

[Stall Pusher]

When I read the headlines of the Daily Mail today, it dawns on me what Walsh is doing. It is an act of Filicide.

I believe he is deliberately bankrupting British Airways so that it can be taken over cheaply and at the same time, the liabilities of the pension fund can be jettisoned and everyone's contracts will be changed as they are re-employed. He tried a management buy-out at Aer Lingus, but was rebuffed by Bertie Ahern. What is happening at BA is a modification of that.

Andy, I am afraid your loyalty to Mr Walsh and BA are greatly misplaced. Look after yourself and find another job, that is what I am going to do. British Airways has now become a laughing stock and a source of ridicule.

[jackcat]

Walsh should have been sacked over T5, but two Directors were sacrificed in his place. Why?

One of those 2 "sacrificial lambs" was Cargo MD at the time of the price-fixing scandal. Delayed retribution?

[Human Factor]

There is a different option available at Gatwick...instead of working for free we are getting offered £80-100 to come in on our days off to do overtime because someone somewhere has cocked up the manpower figures...AGAIN!!

Not necessarily. It's generally cheaper to pay overtime than it is to employ extra man power (no NI or pension contributions for example). I'm sure you could volunteer to work for free if you really wanted to and save the company £80 - 100 per day.;)

[zebedeee]

"Look after yourself and find another job, that is what I am going to do"

.. Stall Pusher I think you will find that:
a) There are very very few jobs around at the moment, ESPECIALLY in the airline industry
b) You will really struggle to find a job that is as well paid, with as good T&Cs, as BA cabin crew

believe me - I left BA recently :) !

[Joetom]

Stall Pusher,

You are very right the company should have been on a money saving drive last year, april or may I was expecting, but nothink, how about just reducing cash until it suits, so a cunning plan can be put into action.

The plans a foot now would have been very hard to get in last april/may, now the bank managers are calling the company, things will be different.

Wobble to Plank,

A previous post of yours tells a truth, the CC do appear to of had a great job done by their unions in the past, they have maintained very good T+Cs and well done to them and the unions, but now the cash numbers are bad and the CC staff numbers are big, lots of pressure to have some fast track change now, good luck to the CC anyways.

Meetings talking about pensions seem to be getting up to speed now, am guessing a closed sign will be in the window by april 2010.

Think I will accept VR before they reduce the exit deal.

[nuigini]

I'm looking at the loads for my next trip to India. Half full both ways.
To me that's extremely disappointing. To some of my crew (those that haven't gone sick because they 'don't do India') I'm sure it will be a cause for celebration.

Indeed it will be. Almost no work and longer crew rest.

[Jean-Lill]

We sadly have all worked with the type of crew who have been described here negatively.

BA would be a much better airline without them, it is true their main aim is do as little for the customer as possible and then get to the crew bunks for as long as possible. I have seen them attempt this on some of the shorter sectors.

It is time for these people and the staunch BASSA supporters to realise the seriousness of the financial situation the company is in.

I find it hard to believe BASSA thinks there is no financial problems within BA or in the airline industry generally. They must be the only people on the planet with their heads in the sand as has been the case for decades.

[zebedeee]

"Yes Zebedee, you had to go because you were on an 11 month contract. Anyone would think you left on your own accord. Yes the airline industry is finished...all low cost and poverty pay. Why not earn more money and drive a taxi?"

Actually Stall Pusher I was not on an 11 month contract, I was a Cabin Crew Manager who had been with BA for 13 years and I CHOSE to take up BA's offer of voluntary redundancy.

I was just trying to point out that those who say "oh I'll just leave and get another job" might find things a bit difficult out there at the mo.

[Skylion]

Stallpusher: I am sure that as you feel the way you do your departure from BA can not come soon enough for you, BA or its customers. There is no point in working for an employer- that's the person who pays you, gives you the allowances, nightstops, way of life etc,-if you so passionately hate them. If all those who find people and service a chore and interruption to their rest and leisure would now vote with their feet and leave so that the rest could get on and enjoy the life on offer and work with flexible enthusiasm so that at the end of the day they feel the satisfaction of having done well and, made a difference and given the passengers the feeling that it is good to fly BA.

[Joetom]

Stall Pusher,

I though the present VR deal was upto a max of 75 weeks pay and poss going down to UK min, but you mention max is now at 52 weeks, where did this info come from ? thanks in adv.

Looks like all the managers were offered the 75 deal at Xmas, would expect the Pilots to get 75 in their cosy deal and other staff to get 52 at this time dropping to UK min when it suits the company, so when the company drops to the UK min, all the bottom feeders will get the IVR, some could say this is not very fair, life can be very unfair can't it !!!

[Andyismyname]

Is the current Voluntary Redundancy offer to us Cabin Crew only available subject to successful conclusion of talks with the unions?

[Bellerophon]

Joetom

would expect the Pilots to get 75 in their cosy deal

And you would be wrong to expect that.

Pilot VR offer is two weeks' basic pay, per year served, capped at 52 weeks.


where did this info come from ?

From the Flight Ops, BALPA and the People Dept, in their various letters to me.


Regards

Bellerophon

[slan22]

andyisnyname,

without wishing to be rude - i am surprised that you have not worked out the answer yet.

of course it is dependant on a successful outcome of the talks between ba and unions.

it is also dependant on the poll put out by bassa to guage opinion on the issues which are in the talks.
willie will be asking the unions for an answer by 30th june - so people need to have completed the poll.

i also understand that the closing date for the poll is either today or tomorrow.

are you cabin crew? i seem to be flying with a lot of people who, seemingly, have their heads firmly buried in the sand.

[nuigini]

Joetom,

All mentioned in the message sent out by BF. It says "52 weeks basic maximum..."

Of course it will be based after decision with the TU's.

[Andyismyname]

Slan22, yes I am Crew, and that backs up what I thought the deal was. Was chatting with one of my friends this morning. She thought she could take the offer, and then happily vote for a strike. I suggested she would be shooting herself in the foot is she did a strike vote, she was adamant that she was right. She couldnt understand that a rejection of any deal would end the offer of Voluntary Redundancy and bring on Compulsory Redundancy, using a criteria of the employers choosing.......and she has frequently been "sick" during Wimbledon etc.

There are sooooo many Cabin Crew out there with their heads well and truly buried in the sand.

.............and sadly they aren't getting the truthfull information they deserve from their Union.

[Adi54321]

There's a great little book called "Who moved my cheese ?" - by Dr Spenceer Johnson
In this case BASSA could be likened to Hem; and just like Hem they haven't realised all the cheese truly has run out and its not coming back.

[FloridaCandle]

Stall Pusher - you're the one who needs to get real :mad:

[Perry-oaks]

Just read this on the BBC news web site and felt it had some relevance -

BBC NEWS | Business | BA asks staff to work for nothing (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8102862.stm)

"While some options may seem unattractive, particularly where they involve reduced income, many employees will conclude that the alternative of losing their job looks bleaker Mike Emmott of the Chartered Institute of Personnel and Development (CIPD).

[imastweardsothere]

I just heard the piece on Radio 4's 6 o'clock news, complete with apparent negative quotes from baggage handlers and cabin crew.

..........some people just don't want to remain in employment!!

They didn't cover the CAA data showing that we costs twice as much as Virgin thankfully.

[G-AND-T]

Here's some more breaking news for you guys; unless you improve your game significantly BA will be in real problems. As SLF I've just done 5 sectors with CX in 10 days and their service completely outshines BA. When I go back to flying business class 20+ times a year in a couple of months time BA = NO WAY.

Wake Up guys if you want to keep your jobs...

[HiFlyer14]

Originally quote by Stallpusher:
Andy, I am afraid your loyalty to Mr Walsh and BA are greatly misplaced. Look after yourself and find another job, that is what I am going to do. British Airways has now become a laughing stock and a source of ridicule.

Stallpusher, the only misplaced loyalties about at the moment are those to BASSA. However, judging from the strength of momentum gathering now on here and elsewhere, I believe that loyalty may be waning.:D

Perhaps you are planning on VR - but as Andy pointed out you will not be able to take VR AND strike. The deal will be off.

As for finding another job, I wish you luck. Your pseudonym may well become a self-fulfilling prophecy!

[slan22]

You are presumably an adult, and as such capable of writing like one.
That includes among other things the use of capital letters and punctuation designed to make written messages easily readable for everybody.
CC Mods

[wiggy]

Just out of interest, what has BASSA/CC89 said about the consequences on the morning of 1st July if they don't achieve a deal by midnight 30th June?

[Re-Heat]

Walsh does not want to destroy the company, intending to restart it with no liabilities. Clever though that might seem, it would be not only logistically impossible, but unfinancable, an illegal destruction of current shareholder value (what is left of it), and impractical from the AOC / slot aspect (which is the only value that BA has remaining).

BA is failing - despite many great people - as there remain too many hangers-on, and too many unwilling to enhance customer service.

It is not a question of what is negotiated, but a matter of providing the best customer service in the face of all competition out there, at the most economical price.

Sadly, that is lacking, and despite the efforts of many, the company may fail due to those few.

It seems wildly optimistic to suggest that as the economy will rebound (eventually it will), that BA will return to profitability to be shared in by all.

- (a) the return on capital belongs to the shareholders who put up risk capital, not to the employees who operate in a job market and risk no capital in doing their job
- (b) many good companies have been outrun by recessions
- (c) it does not solve the question of complexity to contracts, requiring more than the average number of accountants, bookkeepers and operations staff to support the patchwork of agreements
- (d) the competition is not standing still


I just wish to ram this one point down the throat of some posters on this thread. Unionism is not socialism. It is not protecting jobs in the economy, it does not raise pay across the economy and it does not help those most needy in society. These people remain shut out due to elimination of opportunity (2 new-contract staff could be employed in place of one on the eldest BA crew contracts).

Unionism of the type operated by BASSA and the RMT is the politics of special interests. It lowers employment levels by preventing companies from operating at market rates, lowering productivity to the economy and raising costs to the public - particularly in the case of a business that has a strong monopoly-type position over LHR slots.

The company belongs to shareholders, not staff. Staff are intrinsic to its success and should be motivated appropriately. Service should never be dictated though by union agreements, nor do extra "profits" belong to staff, unless the shareholders deem that success to be due to extraordinary effort deserving of bonuses.

The shareholders have little to show for their capital to date in BA as a public company - their returns are below the cost of capital (see FT Alphaville » Blog Archive » Airline cycles, redux (http://ftalphaville.ft.com/blog/2009/06/02/56452/airline-troubles-redux/))

If you are the best, the market will pay the best rate in the best job, so move elsewhere if that rate is available. If not, you are operating in a commodity market, and should think about getting some new skills.

The above may seem harsh, but this is the reality of a competitive capitalist market economy.

[Re-Heat]

Stall pusher - some of your points...totally misinformed:

The point you have all missed is that things will get better/are getting better. Already the price of oil is rising and the FTSE has gained 15% since the beginning of the year. Walsh has got to hurry up screwing his workforce, otherwise by the time the cuts are made the airline will be in profit again! Obviously it would be as profitable as Luthansa is now (who have just awarded their cabin crew a pay rise and improvement in T&C's), if it wasn't for the disastrous fuel hedging positions we currently are tied to.
Google - DEAD CAT BOUNCE. Going down again already - fundamentals are dire.

re LCY-JFK - funded by Barclays Capital - reasonably well-known to be the case. BA therefore have nothing to lose by going ahead.


If you really want to participate in the upside - risk some money of your own and buy the shares!

[Joetom]

BA pilots to exchange pay for shares - Channel 4 News (http://www.channel4.com/news/articles/business_money/ba+pilots+to+exchange+pay+for+shares/3215667)

[Channex101]

I just wanna go back to the "BA get paid double what other airlines do" part of the thread
ive spent the last week talking to many of my friends from various other UK and euopean airlines and its interesting to find out that us "new contract" crew are not on as much as people think. Our basic is actually less than some low cost airlines.
I took a 5.5k drop in basic to leave my last airline as a senior grade to work at BA as a junior grade so im actually coming out with less a month, all be it for a better work life as im not selling everything onboard the aircraft including my soul.
I dont know where the 30k has come from, because looking at my last 2yrs worth of P60s... im far from the 29 or 30k mark.

"old contracts" are slightly different.. as we all know! :}

[Joetom]

Channex101,

Do you last two P60's include all the cash the company give you ?

[wiggy]

This has come up elsewhere and the trouble is the "average" figure used by the media is often the arithmetic "mean" (e.g. in Cabin Crews case the total CC salaries divided by total CC numbers) which can be skewed upwards by a few very high earners. More meaningful would be the "mode" figure - the most common salary.

[Fargoo]

The company belongs to shareholders, not staff

There are a great many staff who are large shareholders too and have a vested interest in seeing the company survive. Don't be fooled that the small number of negative opinions on this thread represent the majority - they don't.

[imastweardsothere]

Channex101, the average figure that is getting bandied about comes from a data table published by the CAA.

The table is of the AVERAGE EXPENDITURE PER HEAD for the employer to employ the employee. The CAA has published this table annually from at least 1997. So, sadly the data is out there and it shows that the AVERAGE COST TO EMPLOY a cabin crew member at BA is £29900, and at Virgin it is £14400. (In 1997 for instance it was BA £17200, Virgin £12000.)

So your average pay packet will not show £29900. But is does cost BA twice as much to have us as it does Virgin. CSD's and senior pursers on the old contracts will skew those figures, as do all those managers employed to manage us. They don't come free!!

Look at our pilot colleagues, they have about a dozen managers to look after 3500 pilots. We must have hundreds looking after us........oh but we need it dont we 'cos we are touchy feely people?

And look again at the number of pilots who are on standby each day, it must be less than twenty to cover the entire operation. We have loads and loads of us, sitting on standby. That costs us!!

So, lets not strike. Lets let expensive CSD's and Pursers leave, if they wish, with a Voluntary Redundancy package. Lets alter our rules so that we can work a little harder, but more importantly, more efficiently. Lets do it so that we are less likely to require the use of standby's.

If we strike, there will be no Voluntary Redundancies, only Compulsory Redundancies and conditions and salaries imposed legally under "Some Other Substantial Reason" rules.

COME ON BASSA, SURELY YOU CAN NEGOTIATE THAT?

[wobble2plank]

Re-Heat, excellent post!

Just to add, for the benefit of those who still can't see how a major multi-national airline can go bust!

Cash flow is king in this industry, the main reason being that any airline is dependent upon its suppliers for the continued smooth operation of its core business. A minimum amount of cash 'liquidity' is required to enable the company to access short term suppliers credit, eg. 30-45 day payment windows. Loss of liquidity results in either a draw down or a removal of this short term credit facility.

This leads to a loss of faith in the parent company and a requirement to pay 'up front' either by credit transfer or cash for all services. That means, catering, landing fees, ground handling services, hotels, navigation fees, ATC fees, fuel, ground transport etc. etc. etc. the list goes on.

As the company has financial problems already, the requirement to provide up-front cash for these services further exacerbates the problem leading to a major cash flow crisis. The company becomes unable to access competitive loan rates from banks or creditors instead having to rely on 'risk' rates which can be exorbitant! This further leads to loss of confidence by investors. Here we are talking about MAJOR investors, banks, investment companies, pension companies etc. who have millions of shares. If they start to sell then the downward spiral begins. The company's value drops, credit becomes more difficult and bookings dry up totally as consumer faith disappears. Small investors begin to sell before the share price plummets too far.

Eventually the money runs out totally and the company collapses with any material assets going to the receivers to offset investment losses.

Look closely at the last few months of Alitalia before their 'bailout' by Berlusconi.

This scenario is never far away for ANY airline even in the best of times.

Remember 'Civilisation is only ever three meals away from Anarchy.'

[Human Factor]

Eventually the money runs out totally...

In fact, the money doesn't need to run out totally. For a company the size of BA, if the overall reserves reach about £500m, it's game over. This is the "liquidity" that wobble writes about. :eek:

[Re-Heat]

Exactly - once the banking relationships, credit lines, and hedging relationships are terminated due to low liquidity, the decline only accelerates.

[imastweardsothere]

And the longer that the Trade Union groups take to come up with suitable agreements, the sooner the accelerating down the decline happens.

[wobble2plank]

imastweardsothere

And the longer that the Trade Union groups take to come up with suitable agreemnents, the sooner the acceleratiing down the decline happens.

This is an even bigger problem than most people think. It is a double edged sword consisting of loss of forward booking confidence by the consumer leading to lost revenue and corporate loss of trust in the ability of the management team leading to a downgrade in the 'investibility' of BA stock. Both directly impinge the value of the BA shares thus reducing the overall worth of the company.

Our share price is trickling down at the moment due to corporate uncertainty over the restructuring package and its ability to sustain the business over the medium to long term. The militant, brash posturing of the unions in the face of the current employment environment is annoying the consumer.

The share price climbed on the back of the BALPA deal and is now dropping as the 30th June deadline arrives. The threat of IA could be the final straw that breaks the camels back. If the unions can wake up, smell the coffee and get on-board with the company then there is a possibility that such stabilising action will galvanise the city and banks into providing BA with a financial life line that it needs at a cost it can afford.

If not, then I fear we may be sliding ever quicker down the slippery slope to becoming the next General Motors.

[nuigini]

Just out of interest, what has BASSA/CC89 said about the consequences on the morning of 1st July if they don't achieve a deal by midnight 30th June?

WW will go through with his plans which includes less crew onboard. The offers for part-time and VR would also be withdrawn and instead CR takes action.

BASSA would probably react by sending out strike ballot paper! There is also a scheduled union meeting on July 6th.

[wobble2plank]

There is also a scheduled union meeting on July 6th.

Horse? Bolted? Door?

[Mmmayday38]

Bellerophon, you tried to help clarify the pilot's VR deal, please see your below quote:



"Pilot VR offer is two weeks' basic pay, per year served, capped at 52 weeks."



You are nearly there. We were told that if we had completed 20yrs we would get 52wks basic pay. The top 500 senior pilots were to be sent out the VR proposal automatically. If you were junior to 500 you were able to contact flight ops and request a VR proposal to be sent to you. I am just below the 500 figure in seniority and have 20yrs service. For this reason I think it is fair to say that all "500" pilots would have been offered the 52wks.

Anyone below this would have had to have a formula applied to them as they were probably just below the "20 yrs" service. I do not know what formula was applied and you may be correct that it was 2 weeks pay per year served(?).

I am aware that some of the CC I have spoken to have felt that we were possibly offered a better VR deal than you are being offered. I do not know your full terms and conditions but I can confirm that our offer does not include allowances/flight pay, it is simply based on basic pay.

[Andyismyname]

Hot rumour - BASSA reps are not turning up for all the meetings with the company! Doh!!

[Bellerophon]

Mmmayday38

I do not know your full terms and conditions

I think you'll find they are exactly the same as yours! ;)

You're correct in saying that, for some people, their offers vary slightly from the "two-weeks-per-year" formula that I posted in the interests of brevity, although I'm told that is the basis of the calculation. Part-timers benefit greatly in that no reduction is applied, 20 to 26 year pilots benefit slightly by receiving the maximum 52 weeks, whilst trainers, by my calculations, lose out slightly.

In passing, I can't help but notice that the management severance deal at Xmas was 3 weeks per year capped at 78 weeks, and, so I'm told, LGW ground staff were recently offered 4 weeks per year capped at 78 weeks.

I didn't have to request a quote - for some reason it arrived automatically - and I shall leave as soon as possible; but I'm sorry, although not altogether surprised, to learn you're thinking of leaving.

Best Regards

Bellerophon

[Poof in Boots]

Just some other news: Willie Walsh's plan to have staff work for free has been condemned as "illegal" today by Yvette Cooper, the Minister for Work and Pensions.

Any savings from the BALPA deal have been lost as passengers book on rival airlines due to all the bad publicity from BA management, scaremongering its staff over the airlines financial position.

Is British Airways trading whilst insolvent?

[Poof in Boots]

"WW will go through with his plans which includes less crew onboard. The offers for part-time and VR would also be withdrawn and instead CR takes action.

BASSA would probably react by sending out strike ballot paper! There is also a scheduled union meeting on July 6th."

Who gives you the authority to make statements like this NUIGINI? You do not know. It is an opinion, but you write it as if it is fact.

[Human Factor]

Mmmday38,

Sorry to hear you're possibly on your way. It would be nice to think that it's not due to a lack of support from above but I suspect it could be.

ATB

[Andy_S]

Willie Walsh's plan to have staff work for free has been condemned as "illegal" today by Yvette Cooper, the Minister for Work and Pensions.


Willie Walsh's plan is to ASK staff to VOLUNTEER for UP TO 1 months unpaid work, or take unpaid leave.

And you have the nerve to accuse BA of scaremongering......

[Poof in Boots]

I have to be polite here Andy, otherwise I will get moderated off. You cannot work for free under Minimum Wage legislation.

You can take unpaid leave. You can do charity work and not get paid. A company cannot ask, coerce, threaten, scaremonger.....its staff to work for free. That is why there is the legislation.

[nuigini]

Who gives you the authority to make statements like this NUIGINI? You do not know. It is an opinion, but you write it as if it is fact.

Who gives me authority? It's a forum where you don't need any authority whatsoever to write. Feel free to respond. Do I appear to be a supporter of BASSA?

[Poof in Boots]

Sorry Nuigini. Personal attacks are not allowed on this forum. You must play by the rules.

I was pointing out that the tone of your post seems to assert that you had inside information, when in fact you don't.

[nuigini]

Feel free to interpret!

This is also your second post saying that you either have to be polite or no personal attacks. If you are on that level perhaps you should find another forum to discuss.

[Hotel Mode]

You cannot work for free under Minimum Wage legislation.

You got a reference for that? Minimum wage legislation allows pay to be aggregated over a period, so unless the unpaid section takes that total pay below national minimum wage it does not apply.

So in the case of 1 week in a 28 day pay period, unless the remaining 3 weeks came out below min wage for 4 weeks, its irrelevent. I'd be suprised if any BA staff were affected.

[Andy_S]

You cannot work for free under Minimum Wage legislation.

That's not what I said though, is it. I said it wasn't illegal for WW to ask for volunteers........

[Poof in Boots]

You cannot volunteer to work for free alongside colleagues who are being paid. Just to remind you before this discussion goes on, Yvette Cooper is a Minister. She does not make mistakes. However much some of you admire Willie Walsh, he is acting "illegally" asking for volunteers to work for free. I hope this clears the matter up.


British Airways Employee Says Willie Walsh Should Be Sacked As Staff Are Asked To Work For Fre | Business | Sky News (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/British-Airways-Employee-Says-Willie-Walsh-Should-Be-Sacked-As-Staff-Are-Asked-To-Work-For-Fre/Article/200906315310705?lpos=Business_Article_Related_Content_Region _1&lid=ARTICLE_15310705_British_Airways_Employee_Says_Willie_Wa lsh_Should_Be_Sacked_As_Staff_Are_Asked_To_Work_For_Fre)

[Andy_S]

I don't want to go too far off topic, but....
Yvette Cooper is a Minister. She does not make mistakes.
You are kidding, right?

She's a politician. She'll say the first thing that comes into her head if she thinks it will gain her a bit of favourable PR. 'Court of Public Opinion' anyone?

[Poof in Boots]

Under the provision of the Act, voluntary work can ony be undertaken by a registered charity. Here is the appropriate part of the act:


Voluntary workers

(1) A worker employed by a charity, a voluntary organisation, an associated fund-raising body or a statutory body does not qualify for the national minimum wage in respect of that employment if he receives, and under the terms of his employment (apart from this Act) is entitled to,—
(a) no monetary payments of any description, or no monetary payments except in respect of expenses—
(i) actually incurred in the performance of his duties; or
(ii) reasonably estimated as likely to be or to have been so incurred; and
(b) no benefits in kind of any description, or no benefits in kind other than the provision of some or all of his subsistence or of such accommodation as is reasonable in the circumstances of the employment.
(2) A person who would satisfy the conditions in subsection (1) above but for receiving monetary payments made solely for the purpose of providing him with means of subsistence shall be taken to satisfy those conditions if—
(a) he is employed to do the work in question as a result of arrangements made between a charity acting in pursuance of its charitable purposes and the body for which the work is done; and
(b) the work is done for a charity, a voluntary organisation, an associated fund-raising body or a statutory body.
(3) For the purposes of subsection (1)(b) above—
(a) any training (other than that which a person necessarily acquires in the course of doing his work) shall be taken to be a benefit in kind; but
(b) there shall be left out of account any training provided for the sole or main purpose of improving the worker’s ability to perform the work which he has agreed to do.
(4) In this section—
“associated fund-raising body” means a body of persons the profits of which are applied wholly for the purposes of a charity or voluntary organisation;
“charity” means a body of persons, or the trustees of a trust, established for charitable purposes only;
“receive”, in relation to a monetary payment or a benefit in kind, means receive in respect of, or otherwise in connection with, the employment in question (whether or not under the terms of the employment);
“statutory body” means a body established by or under an enactment (including an enactment comprised in Northern Ireland legislation);
“subsistence” means such subsistence as is reasonable in the circumstances of the employment in question, and does not include accommodation;
“voluntary organisation” means a body of persons, or the trustees of a trust, which is established only for charitable purposes (whether or not those purposes are charitable within the meaning of any rule of law), benevolent purposes or philanthropic purposes, but which is not a charity.

[Dnomyar19]

In passing, I can't help but notice that the management severance deal at Xmas was 3 weeks per year capped at 78 weeks, and, so I'm told, LGW ground staff were recently offered 4 weeks per year capped at 78 weeks.

the LGW ground staff who left before 1st April were offered 3 weeks for every full year served up to a maximum of 25 years. In other word 75 weeks pay.

[Glamgirl]

People keep saying the company is "begging" staff to work for free. I didn't read the email that way. It was one sentence at the end of an email, saying that if anyone's interested, it may be considered.

What's the difference now and previous occasions where we've been asked to volunteer to work in the terminals during disruption?

I don't think it was necessarily a clever thing to put it in the email in the first place, but this has been blown out of all proportion.

PiB, I had a read of that link you posted, and the article has some statements in there that aren't true.

Gg

[Poof in Boots]

What link is that GG?

Now that this issue over 'Working For Free' has been aired, perhaps volunteering to work in the Terminals alongside people who are being paid, is actually illegal?

If staff feel intimidated into offering their services for free in the hope they may receive some sort of 'favour' in return from a company, like an advantage in promotion prospects over someone who did not volunteer, then I would say that it was not fair and illegal.

This area of the Minimum Wage legislation needs to be tightened up, as BA have abused this in the past, like when volunteers worked through the night on the changeover to T5. Why should someone with no committments have advantage over someone with a family?

[Glamgirl]

PiB,

The link I referred to is one you posted earlier today. Sky news article written by a staff member (allegedly) ring any bells?

Gg

[JayPee28bpr]

For all those of you agonising over this, please see the note below from Barclays Stockbrokers today re Ryanair:

"Irish no-frills airliner Ryanair announced more cuts in jobs and aircraft, citing the Irish government's €10 per passenger travel tax for the move. The group said it will cut its base aircraft by one at both Dublin (from 17 to 16) and Shannon (from 4 to 3) this winter. The move will result in the loss 350 jobs at Dublin Airport and a further 300 jobs in Shannon Airport."

The more you agonise over the "fairness" or "legality" of "working for free". the more likely you are, like the 650 Ryanair staff in Ireland, to be released from all work voluntary or otherwise at BA. Remember Ryanair is profitable, and still cutting aircraft/routes/jobs. BA is not in such a luxurious position.

The "work for free" argument can be put to bed very easily. Very many of us are contracted to work 35 or 40 hours/week. Many of us work in excess of this without any overtime payments. We may be said to be "working for free". Yvette Cooper does not spout off about this any time.

Maybe BA should just describe what they're asking for as "unpaid overtime", then we'll all understand it.

The whole "legality" argument is a nonsense. If BA want to cut their payroll bill, they will. You have a choice: "unpaid overtime"; pay cut for everyone; maintain pay for most and make enough others redundant to achieve the necessary cost reduction.

[Glamgirl]

Could anyone clarify if anyone who volunteers (flying wise) would still achieve allowances, just forego their basic? I've heard this flung about Galley FM, and can't seem to get the answer anywhere.

For the record, I've no plans whatsoever to work unpaid, I just wanted to know in case I get the question from another crew member.

Gg

[TorC]

Gg

Yes, allowances will still be paid.

As per info from the intranet VUW Key Facts page: "This is a deduction from basic pay, all other payments or benefits continue to be paid"

[Glamgirl]

Thanks for that TorC.

So, basically, this whole song and dance about unpaid work being illegal is null and void, as crew would still get paid allowances.

So much drama....:rolleyes:

Gg

[Poof in Boots]

No it is still not legal, as allowances are paid as 'subsistence allowances'. You are not meant to save them. It is like giving a charity worker free food.

If a minimum wage basic is not paid under the terms of the Act, working for free is illegal.

Regarding RyanAir, at least the are parking aircraft in anticipation of a downturn. This move by them shows that they will go out of business as well if there are no passengers. There is still the rise in the UK's APD to come!!

[TorC]

My thoughts exactly Gg

While I DO see it as a drastic step, it is also very clear that it is entirely voluntary and sits alongside the other BRP options. For those unable to consider PT or VUL, but who do wish to do something, as allowances will still be paid, it's another (slightly less painful) option to at least consider.

Just to quickly remind people:

1) it's voluntary
2) can be 1 to 4 weeks
3) only basic salary is affected, allowances etc ARE paid
4) deduction can be spread over 3 or 6 months

[Jean-Lill]

It's amazing where people get all this incorrect information from about working for free being illegal due to the minimum wage act.

It is NOT illegal to work for no pay providing it is totally voluntary.

People work free for charities and they are not acting illegally nor is the charity in accepting their offers to work for no pay.

The minimum wage act only applies to paid work.

Anyone has the right to work for no pay if they choose to.

[Poof in Boots]

Just to remind people:

1. It is not charity work

2. It is illegal under the 1998 Minimum Wage Act


Jean Lil. The Employment Minister today said it was illegal. Do you disagree? Is she wrong?

[TorC]

as allowances are paid as 'subsistence allowances'. You are not meant to save them. It is like giving a charity worker free food.


I see where you are coming from on that. But surely, the giving of food to a charity worker is done at the time (ie lunch at lunchtime, to be eaten there and then). Our allowances are paid in arrears at the same time as our salary, and we have (presumeably) therefore already spent them in advance.

Your theory would apply more if our allowances were paid to us directly at the time each one was triggered.

[TorC]

Pib


The Employment Minister today said it was illegal.


Not to doubt you, but I've been trying to find the EMs statement on the www, but can't see anything anywhere I have looked. Do you have a link for anything that's been reported, as would like to hear her exact words.

thanks

[JayPee28bpr]

"Regarding RyanAir, at least the are parking aircraft in anticipation of a downturn. This move by them shows that they will go out of business as well if there are no passengers."

I assume you meant "upturn" not "downturn" in your post?

In respect of Ryanair going out of business as well, I actually think you misunderstand the dynamics here. Ryanair has more cash/near-cash than any other airline in Europe. They can withstand a downturn longer than anyone, they can cut fares more and for longer than anyone. The latter has been their strategy in recent years. They learned it in their formative years from Aer Lingus actually, who did pretty much the same to them when they were small and Aer Lingus had a near-100% share of the lucrative London-Dublin route.

Anyway, the point is this. Ryanair will mothball their fleet to preserve cash just like anyone else. However, at some point weaker airlines will go broke, as has already happened to a couple of the charters and all those "business class only" shops that collapsed last year. As the weakest die, so the stronger players (of which Ryanair is now the proverbial 800# gorilla) pick up the routes/passengers. The total market may be smaller, but they have a bigger share.

The problem BA has is that it will go under well before Ryanair. Ryanair will be the last one standing. For it to fail, or even shrink in size, ALL air travel will have to cease, and we're nowhere near that happening. The weakest link in this is probably Aer Lingus, which started with less cash than most and is burning it fastest. Net-net that's good for Ryanair, even though it would hit the value of their shareholding in Aer Lingus.

BA is not in a strong cash position either. I'm not of the "BA will disappear" brigade. Its routes and LHR slots are worth a fortune long-term. However, BA could be so badly weakened that it has to seek further defensive mergers on unattractive terms (are you going to be rebranded as Iberia soon?), or is actually the subject of a hostile bid from an aggressive new airline keen to increase its route network (ring any bells?). Both those options are likely to be worse for BA staff than anything proposed by a currently independent BA right now.

[Hotel Mode]

2. It is illegal under the 1998 Minimum Wage Act


No its not. Its a voluntary pay deduction spread over 3-6 months, Unless that takes the subject below 5.78 per hour its entirely legal.

Now back to the actual topic please.

[Re-Heat]

PiB

I have never read such misinformed information written with such authority. You're not in management are you?

You cannot volunteer to work for free alongside colleagues who are being paid. Just to remind you before this discussion goes on, Yvette Cooper is a Minister. She does not make mistakes.
Ministers do not judge the law. The law courts do that. Anything said by ministers is irrelevant in determining legal outcomes except intent expressed when forumulating the original laws. In simple terms, working for free is not legal if it is always for free under the period of contract. She is not wrong, but she has no idea of the structure, and as such is irrelevant in judging BA's offer.

You display a rigid and uneducated view of the law - as HM states above, structuring through a spread of wages is possible, and furthermore the legal minimum would apply only to the period of your contract. Taking any tax year as an example, remuneration still considerably exceeds minimum wages.

Ryanair operate with many FOs who receive expenses for "training", and little in the way of salary above minimum wage.

Perhaps if BA structures it as "retraining", they could get away with paying those crew with no customer services skills for periods in excess of a year...no there's a thought...!


PiB - you don't win the argument if you shout louder...

Nuigini offered what was quite clearly an opinion. If you can't understand his/her statement as such, that is not their problem.

[Glamgirl]

Sorry to keep on this unpaid work side track...

What about work experience and internship? Is that illegal too?

I'm pretty sure that the BA legal team would have double checked the legalities of this whole thing.

The same goes for potential ballot from Bassa. What will they ballot for? New Fleet? No can do. It's legal to set it up, so union members can't legally strike over that issue. No change of contract has been mentioned, whence the union will find it very difficult to find something to ballot for.

I'm sure the legal team is working overtime (no doubt paid overtime..) at the moment to make sure management has the upper hand and an answer to everything. Contingency plans are being put into action as we speak, just in case someone in the union decides that a strike is a good thing, or a wild cat/walk out/everyone sick day happens.

Gg

[nuigini]

I'm pretty sure that the BA legal team would have double checked the legalities of this whole thing.

Word GG! The management do many stupid things but I am convinced they would have looked this up in the book.

[FloridaCandle]

I love the way Poof in Boots is quoting the Employment Minister, but is listed as being in the US.

Do you have any idea just how much a joke our Government is right now and how many lies they've been discovered telling?

[Andyismyname]

With unemployment at a 12 year high (source BBC Radio 4. 1038pm), when will BASSA release factual information on BA's finances that it has been given access to so that members have that information?

Why have the Reps not attended all the negotiation sessions with the company?

[cellstar]

Thought I read somewhere that the head of the BASSA union lived in LA? Maybe he couldn't get a connecting flight in time for the meeting? :)

[nuigini]

Cellstar,

The Chairman of BASSA is actually a she! :ok:

[Poof in Boots]

Andy, why do you need the information from BASSA, Willie Walsh has told the world!! Don't you believe Willie when he says how bad things are?

The reps have attended all of the meetings. Where are you getting your misinformation from Andy?

Cellstar, the "Head" of BASSA is a woman, married to an American, hence the LA connection.

Re-Heat. Working for free is such a stupid idea, even Michael O'Leary didn't think of it!! He must be kicking himself now. MOL makes his staff pay for their training and uniforms, why not make them work for free as well!

[legandawing]

Taking a look at the fixed term contract as CC that I had, my basic was an anual pay £12.000 (ish) pro rata.. so any request would just lower the (PR) pay and there for not working for free... just a reduced wage in a financial year and all other benefits in place! I think if crew were on hourly rate then things would be much more complex.. just a thought

[Jean-Lill]

P in Boots

To answer your question about the employment minister and voluntary work, it is unbelieveable the minster would say such voluntary work is illegal-for what reasons?

1000's of people work voluntarily for no pay because they do not want any pay, why have non of them been prosecuted for doing so illegally? Ask the employment minister that question. Additionally ask why none of the charities or hospitals have been prosecuted for accepting voluntary work.

I will repeat myself for your benefit, 1000's of people work for no pay in charities and hospitals, including my medic husband who does several hours a week medical research work completely without pay or expences-because he is dedicated in his profession.

Hospitals and charities have many people who are willing to work voluntarily, it is a well known fact and perfectly legal otherwise it would not be allowed to happen.

It has been in the media this week that BA are considering accepting VOLUNTARY work as a method to survive. BA's legal advisers would have not allowed this to happen if it was in any way illegal.

[Andyismyname]

Poof in Boots, I would like BASSA to admit that it has been given access to the figures and give suitable honest information to it's members.

Several of your colleagues have posted here that nothing is wrong, that Willie is making it all up etc.

A union is meant to protect it's members, not protect them from the truth.

[Hand Solo]

Generally best to ignore PiB's claims, it's a classic BASSA diversion tactic. When they can't win the debate they prefer to focus on one tiny aspect of the dispute and hammer home their point in the hope nobody will recognize the paucity of their arguments. Once BA start laying off cabin crew do you think anyone will be bothered whether or not working for free is legal?

[Lord Bracken]

In a speech in the French capital to the Financial Times/Moët Hennessy Business Club, Mr Walsh said BA had planned “on the assumption of a 24-month downturn, and we have seen nothing yet to persuade us we are over-pessimistic”.

The flag carrier, one of the big three European airlines, is facing a second consecutive year of losses. In a breakthrough in its efforts to cut costs, it emerged that its pilots are to be balloted on a package of pay cuts and productivity improvements tied to a long-term share incentive scheme. There would also be up to 78 voluntary redundancies.

Mr Walsh said the trading environment was “the harshest this industry has ever faced”.

More airlines would go out of business, especially as the oil price was rising again.

He said: “Though some of the financial markets may be looking better, I believe that for airlines, the worst of this recession is still ahead of us.”

A “structural shift” was occurring, said Mr Walsh and he warned demand for business travel, traditionally the main engine for profits at long-haul network carriers, might never fully recover.

“It may be that demand in the highest-yielding, fully-flexible premium business market will never recover to the levels we were seeing in 2007.

“That is a sobering message for all traditional airlines. Premium travel has been central to the viability of their business model for a very long time,” he said.

BA’s premium traffic fell by 17 per cent year-on-year in May and Mr Walsh said some of its biggest corporate customers were “changing their behaviour as consumers”.

Very sobering quote about the structural shift away from premium business travel.

[Litebulbs]

Hmm, comming from the managemnt tree that was fined for dirty tricks. Wise up. WW does not give a 5hite about BA. It is a mechanism to cash for him. 95% of the work force have pride in BA. He does not.

[Andyismyname]

Litebulbs, personally I think Willie cares more passionately about the airline than many of my Cabin Crew colleagues.

Having had Willie stop and chat to me a few months ago I was very impressed by him, and his knowledge of the business. Few of us are probably aware of the hours he puts in, and his dedication to keep us in business, and improve the business.

I disagree with your post. Lets look to the future. We need to change our old agreements. I feel for many crew, especially, many part-timers, BA is just a 'hobby' and passengers an 'inconvenience', but mostly a method, as you said of Willie, of getting cash.

[HZ123]

Welll said ANDY; WW knows this industry very well and is the first BA CEO with this knowledge. Some of our colleagues on this thread are clearly those that do not give a s----e about BA!

[Flap33]

As an employee of BA I have a vested interest in this debate. I still find it amazing that BASSA are pedalling the message that WW is making it all up, stand by your guns lads/ladettes "we'll all be fine! Well, on planet BASSA that maybe true but in reality we are in the pooh.

I went to Mumbai at the weekend and we were pretty much full, great I thought - we must be making some money here. Not so, a quick glance at the PIL showed 42 Upgrades to Club (and I am informed we're more or less giving away Econ tickets at the moment). BASSA would say that they were all paying Club fares (why let the truth get in the way of good yarn).

Our revenue has collapsed, WW has gone public (why on earth would he do that? Do we really want the World to know just how bad things are at BA? No, of course not).

I sincerely hope that BASSA negotiate something, any imposed new contract is going to be worse than what might be achieved by negotiation, if BASSA actually want to negotiate, that is. The comparison between BASSA and Bob Crowe's RMT is remarkable.

BA is a 21st Century airline, in a 21st Century recession. BASSA is a 1970s union. For all our sakes I truely hope BASSA can evolve in the next 12 days to a union that tries to secure a future for its members rather than hammering another nail in the coffin for the rest of the employees.

[Re-Heat]

Re-Heat. Working for free is such a stupid idea, even Michael O'Leary didn't think of it!! He must be kicking himself now. MOL makes his staff pay for their training and uniforms, why not make them work for free as well!
He has already thought of it...if you actually read my previous post, you would see that.

Hmm, comming from the managemnt tree that was fined for dirty tricks. Wise up. WW does not give a 5hite about BA. It is a mechanism to cash for him. 95% of the work force have pride in BA. He does not.
The man is on record for not taking holidays and working extremely long hours. As a CEO who could more than double his salary in other industries (as airlines are such a poor profit-generator), he undoubtedly does care - far more so than BASSA.

Quite honestly Andy,your claim that Walsh cares more about BA than many cabin crew is absolutely preposterous. However there are many people who are naive, in denial and feel they can put their trust in Walsh. His track record at BA is a disaster...so far. Most crew have long service in BA with pensions at stake, it is in their interest that BA survives. They will still be there long after Walsh has gone. Crew who are on a 11 month contracts with no hope of promotion and the possibility of not being called back at the end of their term, would not have the same level of motivation.
So - negotiate with BA to help it survive if you feel you have such a stake in it. You talk about people referring to crew in a derogatory manner, then have the audacity to question the motivation of the 11-month contract crew, whom customers are on record as praising, and noting them to be a breath of fresh air.

Walsh's record at BA is as a man who is motivated - while the first month of T5 was as nightmare, it pales in comparison to virtually all other terminal openings, including Changi, Schipol and Bangkok, all of which were a complete disaster for more than a year. Price fixing pre-dated his arrival, and under his watch, the company generated a high level of profitability before the recent crash. If you frame your opinion of the man solely based upon what you extract from the company in compensation, then we are always going to disagree, so this is a moot point.

It is surprising that in a brief chat, some employees can be convinced of a person's integrity. Sadly history is littered with instances of people believing CEO's, politicians and the rest.
Such as the employment minister, perhaps then? Eh, PiB?

Flap33. You obviously do not support BASSA, please resign if you are a member. I would hate to think that someone who is so obviously trying to undemine their negotiations, should benefit in any way from the outcome.
The union represents the views of its members, not the other way around. If Flap33 wishes to hold a different point of view, it is you that should accomodate, not him/her that should resign their union membership.

Classic autocracy - not a hint of democracy or listening to the members.

[Da Dog]

PiB

1. Watch this space

2. Why? As much as I hate OS, its been given its sum of money to start up, it will be given no more money, its not using BAs hedged fuel, and its not worth anything. It stands alone.

3. Already explained by a previous poster, the route is underwritten by a bank, so you advocate pulling the plug and give all those bankers a choice who they fly across the pond with from LHR, maybe they would fly with us maybe they wouldn't but t least this way we have a captive audience.

Shelving First class is being considered on many routes, as is going the way Qantas have and sell the seat but give a business class service. Problem BA has is that is not "fast of foot" they would of course have to agree everything with BASSA first:E:E

FYI the 777 being delivered in the coming years have no first class.

[TorC]

PiB

It is surprising that in a brief chat, some employees can be convinced of a person's integrity. Sadly history is littered with instances of people believing CEO's, politicians and the rest. Mr Walsh is motivated by his contract terms, not a love of BA.


Yes, wasn't it only yesterday that you were believing the Employment Minister and her supposed comments about BAs offer of VUW being illegal?

I'm still searching for any reports on that. She was in Liverpool yesterday, and spoke about employment prospects for the young.

[Re-Heat]

Lord Bracken, to answer your point. If there was such a sea change away from premium travel BA would:

1. Cancel the new First Class enhancements

2. Ground OpenSkies

3. Shelve the new LCY/JFK service.

1) BA need to think of the long term. Read flyertalk to see just how anticipated new FIRST is - have you flown SIA / CX perhaps and seen how good their service is in comparison. It far, far exceeds BA now.

2) I doubt there would be much value in doing so - the costs have already been expended to acquire slots, L'Avion, crew and marketing. Greater costs exist in IT distribution that could be eliminated by implementing Amadeus' new products instead, or indeed eliminating the complexity of the cabin crew contracts.

3) As I said before, it is funded by Barclays Captial - no cost to BA...

[TorC]

PiB


If the Employment Minister says on Radio 5 Live


Ah, so that's where she said it, thanks.

Was it on 5 live Breakfast by any chance? I'll take a listen on the iplayer.

[nuigini]

Your comments about crew are so derogatory, frankly I do not believe you are BA crew yourself, because what you say is not true. Also you spend so much time on this forum, I do not think you are even employed.

This is your typical argument, isn't it? Whenever somebody disagrees or says something else not along with your line you are accusing them of not being crew or employed. Andy is not the only person spending a lot of time on this forum. So are you!

[Re-Heat]

Since allowances are taxed to some extent as benefits in kind, unpaid work with allowances would indeed be permissible per the first two paragraphs of the Act. While contractually classed as "allowances", they are in fact not treated as such by HRMC, which determines them to be partly benefits in kind ("BIKs").

In essence, without a valuation of BiKs (which allowances are partly treated as, and partly not, depending upon the HMRC assessment), then nobody can say whether or not it is a legal move.

National Minimum Wage Act:

National Minimum Wage Act 1998 (c. 39) (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/acts/acts1998/ukpga_19980039_en_1#pb1-l1g1)


In essence, we are all talking out our rear, so should resist from opining on the matter.


The London City operation being underwritten by Barclays Capital is, I assure you, not a rumour.

[Re-Heat]

Empty flights:

Current loads in F/J - FlyerTalk Forums (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/british-airways-executive-club/965579-current-loads-f-j.html)

[Da Dog]

PiB

Da Dog. OpenSkies loads are being monitored. I do not see how single digit loads from AMS to JFK pay the costs of the operation?


Then it will fail, but remember they are not burdened by the costs BA have, so the number of seats they sell to break even will be a lot less.

There is a rumour that Barclays have underwritten the LCY/JFK operation, but there is no proof. Obviously Barclay shareholders would want to know about this flying junket at their expense, especially in the current trading conditions.

I'm confused, are you suggesting that BA should turn down the business from whichever bank is underwriting the route? If you are then its a bewildering stance to take.

[Monsieur Engreve]

here in france, we are falling about with the proposals put forward by Msr Walsh. we would never be asked to work for free because our management know what the asnwer would be.

[PC767]

The major issue BA staff, apart from Flight Ops, is the permanent nature of change. Perhaps this is why.

Dear Members
A quick word from our talks. We have not got anywhere yet. The battle is still on the Terms and Conditions which as per your strong mandate at the mass meeting are non-negotiable.

This said, you have heard about two of our communities reaching a deal with BA recently via the intranet. The first community is Engineering and the second community are the Pilots.

The Engineering deal was mainly about the amalgamation of two work areas without any impact on terms and conditions. The pilot deal is similar to the engineers in that it does not affect terms and conditions. Traditionally you only got to hear that our flying colleagues have settled but the fine prints were always a closely guarded affair. Not this time.

In view of our incessant demand for openness and transparency and in view of our demand for a shared pain from everyone at BA during this crisis we are in possession of those fine prints and as responsible representatives take at heart your right to be informed as to whether the pain is proportionately applied.

The document, we are glad to announce is not subject to any confidentiality clause otherwise it would have been written all over it and it was found laying around a hotel lobby. So our hope is nobody will be offended. They should not be because it is a damn good deal. This is not a pilot bashing session by the way as they do a very valued and respected job. In fact, pilots’ negotiators have to be applauded for achieving this sort of a deal given the current circumstances. However this is now going to be the benchmark for the rest of us as we all do valued and respected jobs for a valued employer.

The document starts off by acknowledging that “the deepening recession is having a serious impact on BA’s business and the company must respond to its financial position”. “The company will continue to monitor economic and trading conditions, and in the event of any material changes may seek further discussions”. The last sentence is code for temporary solutions in case things improve.

Pay and Productivity Target
“To maintain the overall annual pilot pay bill at its current level (for the financial year ending 31 March 2009) during period 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2011, subject to adjustments in flying volumes”.

What is a pilot’s pay made of?

Long haul Captain +16 year’s service with a basic salary of £116,680
NAPS pensionable salary of £110,205; and an annual increment due on 1 December 2009. The annual increment is £3,471 on basic salary and £3,278 on pensionable salary.
Basic salary: This would be reduced from £116,680 to £113,635 from 1 October 2009 but would be increased to £117,015 from1 December 2009 to reflect annual increment;
Pensionable salary: This would remain unchanged at £110,205 from 1 October 2009 but would increase to £113,483 from 1 December 2009 to reflect annual increment.

Furthermore, all pilots employed on June 2011 will be granted the right to receive a number of “free” shares based on the company share price on that date subject to pre-grant performance conditions having been met
Two further awards will be made on June 2012 and June 2013 subject to the pre-grant performance conditions (explained below).

What does it all mean?

Number of shares available for grant = 6.8/£1.80 = 3,777,777 shares with a value of £13,000,000.

Shares available for Captains 2,153,333 (57%)
Shares available for Co-pilots 1,624,444 (43%)

Number of Captains in scheme 1,600
Number of Co-pilots in scheme 1,600

Shares granted for each Captain 1,346
Shares granted for each Co-pilot 1,015

Value of shares at vest date will depend on share price at the time, so there is potential for grant to grow in value.

We also learn through the document that two key indicators to get the shares will depend on “think customers” and “ready to go” targets that ground staff and other customer facing staff achieve. If we miss any of those targets the cash made available is reduced by 25%. The company motto is “To Fly To Serve”; not We Serve They fly or to be more precise; We Serve, They Earn, we should all earn.

Another target to determine the level of share issue is the Operating Marging. The threshold target is 6% where 60% of the shares above are allocated, 7% = 70%, 8% = 80%, 9% = 90%, 10% = 100%.

Before we forget, pilots’ contribution to head count reduction came to 66.42 heads, compared to our 1000. BA will also “take all reasonable steps to manage this surplus using voluntary rather than compulsory measures.

Again absolute bravo to BALPA. However as we are all part of One Team, it is only fair that BA builds a stake-holding future with all its employees, not just some. We also salute BA’s approach here as it firmly shows that this airline has future potential and this is the kind of information that should find its way in the newspapers. Not all of the damaging news that are being drip fed in order to sap the morale of all those hard working women and men of the “world’s favourite’s airline”.


Yours in solidarity


On Behalf Of The A-scale NSP Subgroup

[Human Factor]

The numbers quoted are right. However, it has missed out a great deal of other details and most of the rest is an error of omission (the second half of the document to be precise).:oh:

Good to see BASSA keeping their standards up.;)

In particular:

In addition to the numbers quoted, all pilots are to reduce their flying hour pay by £2 per hour. Given the number of hours generally flown, this will be between £1500 and £1800 per pilot per year (yes, some guys already fly 900 hours per year!!).

Time Away from Base Pay has been frozen at the rate from two years ago. These are all permanent changes.

The pilot deal is similar to the engineers in that it does not affect terms and conditions.

More bolleaux.

Not sure what the engineers agreed to, however the pilots have agreed to among other things reduced report times and shorter turnrounds between flights (allowing more duty/flying hours on a given day) and an increase to the number of hours we can work in the year (meaning an extra 3 or 4 days work a year). Put into context, a junior shorthaul Captain will lose around £5000 per year for ever (that's £100k over 20 years, BASSA - just thought I'd point that out as you clearly have difficulty with numbers, given that you've seen the same data as BALPA) and have to work significantly harder as well.

The "pay increment" is a red herring as all paypoints have been reduced by the same percentage. To put it in Willie's "work for free" terms, that's a free month every year for ever. Even he isn't doing that and trust me, a few share options aren't even going to come close to getting that back.

Wake up and smell the coffee. Do any of you honestly think that we'd be stupid enough to make sacrifices like that if we didn't know the state of the business, particularly given the recent BA/BALPA history? :mad:

Grow up.

[Da Dog]

FWIW everyone I have spoken to believes that we will never see these shares, they are IMHO just a sweetener to the deal at nil cost to BA.

Before we forget, pilots’ contribution to head count reduction came to 66.42 heads, compared to our 1000. BA will also “take all reasonable steps to manage this surplus using voluntary rather than compulsory measures.

That is what happens when you work for a department that is lean in the employee department. However we (pilots) all know that there is more to come, and the very real threat of CR could just be around the corner. No mention of this from BASSA.

Perhaps the Cabin Crew can lose a few 1000 heads because of the 1970s style inefficiencies built into their rostering agreements. The pilots at this time cannot. I have had my request for unpaid leave turned down now for the last 2 months because the fleet is to busy.

BASSA and the NSP A scale have left out the devil of the detail in their address to members, but we wouldn't want the truth getting in the way, would we??

[Human Factor]

While I think about it BASSA, the document in question only has a header on page 1. The only way to be sure that it was the correct document would be to see page 1. In fact, you must have it because:

... “the deepening recession is having a serious impact on BA’s business and the company must respond to its financial position”...

... is the second sentence of the first paragraph. :oh:

Just below it, also on page 1, a header used is "Combined Pay and Productivity Package".

So why do you insist:

"The pilot deal is similar to the engineers in that it does not affect terms and conditions."

... when you obviously know this is not the case?



Clearly as a Union, BASSA represents the best interests of it's members (one hopes). I would therefore consider extremely carefully what is being handed over by other NSPs before committing your cause to it so wholeheartedly. You wouldn't want to come across as misleading your membership now, would you?;)

Edit: Silly me. I forgot the BALPA reps in fact GAVE BASSA a copy of the agreement.:ooh:

[TorC]

Just to clarify, the info posted by PC767 is an email from the A Scale NSP to groundstaff such as Check-In etc. It was sent out last night.

I guess BASSA may also have seen the found document, but as far as I am aware (as a BASSA member), it has not yet been circulated to us.

[Re-Heat]

Of course, if BASSA strike under false pretences due to these errors of omission, the High Court will strike down the legality of their industrial action once again.

Seems they cannot learn...

[Andyismyname]

Ahh PIB, chill. It's your "never been employed" colleague Andy here. It's a shame we couldn't have met up at the T5 CRC today.

We could have read the BASSA noticeboard together. Sadly it still has copies of an article from The Times dated June 11, about Willie's payrise, but not his not accepting it.

I would have even bought you a coffee, Indi was making them today.

But never mind.

Now, when are BASSA going to secure our future?

[Human Factor]

Just to clarify, the info posted by PC767 is an email from the A Scale NSP to groundstaff such as Check-In etc. It was sent out last night.

I guess BASSA may also have seen the found document, but as far as I am aware (as a BASSA member), it has not yet been circulated to us.

It was released to BASSA members on their forum this morning (as disclosed here) but the BASSA reps have had the full agreement since Monday 15th June, courtesy of the BALPA reps.:rolleyes:

As we know from the Open Skies court case, emails and phone calls are a matter of record and can be used as evidence. Dodgy legal ground if you want to try to call a strike ballot.:=

[TorC]

It was released to BASSA members on their forum this morning (as disclosed here) but the BASSA reps have had the full agreement since Monday 15th June, courtesy of the BALPA reps.:rolleyes:

As we know from the Open Skies court case, emails and phone calls are a matter of record and can be used as evidence. Dodgy legal ground if you want to try to call a strike ballot.:=


Ah OK, thanks for that.

Maybe I should, but I don't ever visit the BASSA forum.

Sorry, that makes my orig post a bit of a waste I guess. I'm going to ignore myself for a while :rolleyes:

[Human Factor]

No problem. It's a shame they won't give you the facts.

Good luck with whatever you decide to do.

[wiggy]

"The pilot deal is similar to the engineers in that it does not affect terms and conditions"

So I'm taking a cut on basic pay, taking a cut in hourly rate, working more hours a year...and it's doesn't effect my terms and conditions....


Well either the BASSA reps are underestimating the intelligence of their membership, or they are preparing the grounds for their defence in the event of a similar hit on Cabin Crew pay and allowances: "Yes, you've taken a pay cut, your allowances have been junked, but remember as promised we kept your T&Cs unchanged...." :ugh:

[747-436]

The battle is still on the Terms and Conditions which as per your strong mandate at the mass meeting are non-negotiable.

This quote is rather telling, for all the moans about Pilots getting shares back in a few years etc, that is because it was negoiated! How can anyone expect BA to give anything back if things are 'non negotiable' ?!?!

[flapsforty]

Mr Coppid, it is indeed a thread about BA CC and what they will contribute to the savings demanded by the current economic crisis/BA's CEO.

A BA CC thread on which a number of people, who according to their profiles are pilots, choose to participate vigorously.
If and when these participating pilots choose to use the pilot group's concessions as an example or as an argument for CC to concede likewise, it is perhaps understandable that the subject gets discussed?

I agree it would be better if it weren't, but as long as pilots participate here and use these arguments, I fear such discussion is inevitable.

[doishquattroserche]

well said flaps forty ,i get fed up with the comparison between "flight deck "and cabin crew myself.We both wear shiney uniforms and work on an aircraft and that is where it should end .Bad CRM or just getting real?

[Human Factor]

Mr Coppid, it is indeed a thread about BA CC and what they will contribute to the savings demanded by the current economic crisis/BA's CEO.

A BA CC thread on which a number of people, who according to their profiles are pilots, choose to participate vigorously.
If and when these participating pilots choose to use the pilot group's concessions as an example or as an argument for CC to concede likewise, it is perhaps understandable that the subject gets discussed?

I agree it would be better if it weren't, but as long as pilots participate here and use these arguments, I fear such discussion is inevitable.

flapsforty,

I don't disagree. The trouble is that it is becoming increasingly apparent that many of our cabin crew colleagues, through no fault of their own, are blundering into something which their own union hasn't given them full knowledge of and look likely to fatally wound our company in the process.

Appreciably, our company could undoubtedly have done a better job with it's own communications and given the "previous" between BA and BASSA, it's unsurprising they've been largely ignored recently.

Keep in mind that PPrune is probably the only independent avenue where this information can be passed (relatively) freely. Our well-known grievances are not and never have been with the cabin crew, they are with BASSA. Yes, the two are linked but not inextricably.

As you rightly say:

...it is indeed a thread about BA CC and what they will contribute to the savings demanded by the current economic crisis/BA's CEO.

Unfortunately, the answer appears to be zero. At best, this will result in BA imposing new terms and conditions on them. At worst, World War Three begins and it's "sayonara", which is why a few of us are making so much of a fuss. I beg your indulgence to attempt to protect 40000 jobs.

Regards,

HF

[Open Lies]

BASSA members... you've got to ask yourself why BASSA is at best deliberately misleading you - and at worst simply lying to its members ...?

Why did BASSA decide to put out only half the facts out in a 'we found it lying around' style document that specifically lied that the pilots T & Cs werent changing - when your Chairperson BASSA (Malone) had been in possession of an emailed copy of the BALPA proposal (directly from a BALPA Rep) since Monday 15th?

Why dont you ask her that specific question and report her answer back here ?

[deltaguy]

Open Lies - A copy of your post is en route to BASSA.

[Human Factor]

Good. Contact Big Jim McC at BALPA and he will back it up.;)

[deltaguy]

Ummmmm interesting. Someones telling porkies and I know who it isn't!!!

[deltaguy]

BASSA have just gone public with their response to the deal done with the pilots. On the crewforum website.

[GS-Alpha]

For those that think it cannot happen...

BBC NEWS | UK | England | Humber | Total sacks 900 oil plant workers (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/england/humber/8108434.stm)

Be warned.

[deltaguy]

GS-ALPHA

This was a walkout. It was unofficial industrial action. A tad bit different to staff being balloted for strike action. :ugh:

[Human Factor]

BASSA have just gone public with their response to the deal done with the pilots. On the crewforum website.

Any mention of the changes to the pilot Terms and Conditions or anything refuting the previous NSP statement which they publicly backed?

Just read it. None whatsoever.:rolleyes:

[Human Factor]

Just for clarity, the pilots deal needs to be ratified by a ballot of BA BALPA members. I have no doubt it will be. However, the company have also agreed that this deal will not be implemented until and unless all other employee groups have made their required savings.

Bet BASSA haven't mentioned that either (it's on page 4 of the "hotel lobby" document). :oh:

[Megaton]

Not sure that the caveat applied to the pilot deal is really necessary since WW has made it clear that either savings are negotiated or they will be imposed. Either way, all other depts will be meeting their savings targets whether they like it or not!

[wobble2plank]

There are some lovely 'bites' from the BASSA letter! :eek:

The significant difference was that management "wanted" to reach a deal. They wanted the pilots done and dusted and out of the way, to increase the moral pressure on other areas.

Fantastic, I'm sure the BACC would have loved to have known this gem before the hard negotiating began. We could have sat back with our feet up and let the company come begging to us. :ugh:

To achieve this, the company has allowed a "sweetheart" deal to be reached

Very unfair. The difference is that over the past 10 years the pilot community HAS reached agreements and changed T's & C's with the company, hence the 'pain' this time round is less.

With this deal, any pretence of fairness or equality would appear to have evaporated. When you examine the pilot deal you will see any losses are paid back later which also fits in with Willie Walsh having his bonuses merely deferred until 2011. If you check out the definition of defer in the dictionary it says "to put off something or leave it to a later time" and this, in essence is the secret as to why BALPA are quick to recommend acceptance. But it seems "what's good for the goose is (not) good for the gander" and cabin crew are expected to give up not only much more but also give it up for good.

Hmm, again, a little wide of the truth. The figures given in the pilot deal mean a loss of at least £4500 per pilot for each remaining year of employment based upon current salary. The 'share deal' was separately negotiated by BALPA to allow for a LTIP which has a large number of triggers and is worth £4000 dependant on share price. Hardly deferment.

There seems to be a real "them and us" situation developing here and that is borne out by Mr Walsh's invitation for crew to work a month for nothing.

Not just crew BASSA, not just crew, everyone. I.e. the 'other' 26000 people working for BA.

In short this "let the pilots off easy, make them senior managers and give them free shares policy" is being funded by you.

Ahhhhh, no. Considering that pilots are effectively and according to FCO's (as was) the aircrafts line managers this should come as no surprise. It is being funded by the pilots being a quantifiable resource and operating longer hours for less money. Achievable due to correct, timely and sensible pay restructuring and adjusting over the past 10 years or so.

Judge for yourselves; take a moment to compare this to the pilot's deal outlined below and you will see the difficulty and enormity of the task that we face. Attaining such a cosy arrangement may not be quite so easy for us to reach and how we may well be "being set up to fail" so that Mr Walsh can justify his impositions come July 1st.

Not set up for a fall or to fail just being asked to negotiate for once and to accept that the years of 'No, no, no and again No, now what was the question?' are over. The company will tackle the disparity of T's & C's for once and for all as the time for BASSA and the CC to accept an adjustment are long overdue.

The funding for the company to survive this downturn is there. The willingness to invest in BA as a profitable airline is there. The business acumen of the investors is telling them 'not until the unions have been brought into line'. This time it will happen.

I don't want anyone to lose jobs over this, hopefully it can all be sorted out like adults and imposition won't happen. Sadly, due to mis-information from the union and thus wasted time and effort on both side I think the time for a negotiated settlement is rapidly slipping past. On a night stop the other day the purser was vociferously against any change with the 'what have I got to lose' argument, whereas the younger crew members actually believed that change was required.

Less than 2 weeks to decision time.

[Stall Pusher]

British Airways is profitable and would be in profit now if it was paying the market rate for fuel.

So how is the loan by BA pilots of £26m going to save BA? Relatively it is a drop in the ocean. I think BALPA could have given a lot more. Why should BA pilots still enjoy 1970's style restrictive practices like accomodation in a hotel before and after longhaul flights at LGW?

Crew on contracts since 1997 have not had the promotions they were promised; many are not even First Class trained. Most earn less than EasyJet cabin crew.

The reckless way Willie Walsh is leading BA will ensure lasting damage. Even if there is an agreement with BASSA one way or another, by the winter, loads wil be so low as passengers scared off by WW's pronouncements of doom and gloom desert BA for other carriers, the management of BA will be looking for more cuts.

The £26m given up (loaned) by the pilots has already been squandered ten times over, by all the negative publicity generated by Walsh.

[Human Factor]

It still doesn't explain why BASSA are insisting that the pilots haven't made any changes to their terms and conditions. Instead of bleating on here, why don't you ask Lizanne Malone and Sean Beatty why they're keeping you in the dark?

[Stall Pusher]

We are not being "kept in the dark" and are perfectly happy with the way matters are progressing.

The BA pilots have not made any changes to their T&C's. If they have, list the changes here.

[Hand Solo]

Equally if BA were paying market rate for fuel last year when oil was $150 per barrel we'd have been bankrupt. You can't have it both ways. If you hedge fuel you need to take the ups AND the downs.

Your claim that BA crew earn less than Easyjet crew is ridiculous. I've flown with plenty if ex Easy crew and they don't agree with you. The suggestion is laughable so drop it.

The £26M pilots are saving isn't going to save the company, it's a sop so that others can't say were not giving anything. If the most efficient group in the company have to contribute theres no excuse for the least efficient not to. As for 'restrictive' practices, do you know what the LGW hotac budget is, and how much it saves over having LGW based 777 pilots? The whole cost is less than a single disruption caused by crew having 2 local nights after a diversion.

[Human Factor]

We are not being "kept in the dark" and are perfectly happy with the way matters are progressing.

The BA pilots have not made any changes to their T&C's. If they have, list the changes here.

Are you sure, Stall Pusher?

LGW

1. Introduce days off shaping

Short Haul

1. Minimum SH turn time 75 minutes plus buffers (5 min earlier report, 5 day trip maximum, removal of 75 minute limit for meals on fixed links & no CES rules).
2. Increase annual shorthaul cap by 12 hours

Long Haul

1. Increase annual longhaul cap by 8 hours
2. Extend Box C by 30 minutes

Other

1. Reduce BALPA credit.



"Cap" refers to how the pilot's hours are calculated. In Shorthaul, 12 hours CAP equates to roughly four days work and in longhaul, 8 hours corresponds to around 3 days work. It does not mean we only work three or four hours a day. It is a mathematical calculation. "Box C" refers to the flight time requiring three flightcrew. There will be fewer flights with four flightcrew. The above list is neither detailed nor exhaustive and is over and above the pay cuts. Ask Lizanne and Sean for the juicy bits. They should find it on page 2 of their document.

Now to reiterate, instead of bleating on here, why don't you ask Lizanne Malone and Sean Beatty why they're keeping you in the dark?

[Stall Pusher]

Wobble, where the chair person of BASSA lives for part of the year is no one's business.

It seems that you have given up some petty 1970's style restrictive practices and payments. Good for you! I am sure BASSA and its membership will be content to make a corresponding level of sacrifice or loan, as your 'work association' BALPA, has for you.

[Human Factor]

I am sure BASSA and its membership will be content to make a corresponding level of sacrifice or loan....

They probably will. Unfortunately, it will be all in one go.:ouch:

[wobble2plank]

It seems that you have given up some petty 1970's style restrictive practices and payments. Good for you! I am sure BASSA and its membership will be content to make a corresponding level of sacrifice or loan, as your 'work association' BALPA, has for you.

Fantastic, you have finally grasped the nettle in this thread. Yes, we have given up some petty 1970's style restrictive practices, that the Cabin Crew STILL ENJOY IN 2009.

The whole crux of this thread is that the company wish to bring those practices for the CC to an end. In the past it has always been too difficult, now however the business conditions make it a necessity.

[Da Dog]

You also forgot the removal of the heavy Captain on HKG and GRU, not to be filled by a Co Pilot, thus making these trips 3 man, I only mention this because it is always used by Cabin Crew and BASSA to pick us apart. :ok::ok:

[Re-Heat]

Fuel costs - if not hedged, the cost over the year would still have remained the same. See the following:

Slide 33 - http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9NjYxOHxDaGlsZElEPS0xfFR5cGU9M w==&t=1


Walsh's comments on BASSA negotiations in IR transcript (p12):

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/External.File?item=UGFyZW50SUQ9Nzc4MnxDaGlsZElEPS0xfFR5cGU9M w==&t=1

Today we are going out offering unpaid leave to all employees in the business. We're offering temporary and permanent
part-time to all of our major groups. And we're also focusing on our supplier spend. And I'll go into these in a little bit more
detail now.

We have, in the main, five main negotiating groups. The first is our GSS, Ground Service Staff. But it also includes cargo operation and Gatwick. We have concluded negotiations with that group. And we signed an MoU that is currently being balloted on. The ballot should finish early next week. And that is a fundamental change in the working conditions in the agreements we have with those groups.

With our Engineering section we've also reached agreement on a -- and signed an MoU that will be balloted on starting next week. Our engineering trade unions are recommending acceptance of that. It's a fundamental change again from the agreements that we've had in place. We've had good progress in our discussions with pilots. And they have indicated that they intend to ballot soon on changes that are proposed.

Progress in the other two areas has been slower with our administrative staff, and in the main our customer-facing staff in the terminals. We are making some progress, but it is slow. And we've injected some urgency into those discussions over the last few days. And regrettably the one area that is lagging behind the other groups is with cabin crew representatives. Now there is a difference in attitude and approach being adopted by the official trade union versus the, if you like, the officials, the paid trade union officials and our elected representatives. The official line is that this is a temporary issue and should be solved by temporary change.

I'm pleased to say that the vast majority of our people recognize that temporary change and temporary solutions are not enough, and have faced up to structural change, and permanent change to address the nature of the challenge that we see at the moment.

So I am confident that through negotiation we will be able to agree acceptable terms to transform the way we operate at British Airways. But there is significant discretion available to management in terms of implementing change. And clearly we will not hesitate to implement change where we believe it is necessary, not just for the survival of the business in the short term, but to ensure that the business is well positioned for long-term benefit.

[Stall Pusher]

At the end of the day, the pilots in BA have got away with murder. It was a "sweetheart" deal.

Walsh wanted to get the pilots out of the way quickly to put pressure on the other employee groups. The same deal is not being offered.

Currently Cranebank is bursting with temporary cabin crew, some called back on three month contracts. Why? Is Mr Walsh so certain that there shortly will be a dispute because he is going to engineer it? Surely jaw jaw is better than war war?

Some full time crew have had their SEP checks brought forward from September to July, 'because Cranebank will be full of new recruits in September'.

Mr Walsh is set on breaking the unions in BA, it is nothing to do with saving money. If there is a strike, it will be down to him and his intransigence

[L337]

Stall Pusher, just because you keep saying the same things over and over again, does not make it any more truthful.

[Re-Heat]

Surely jaw jaw is better than war war?
Sorry, are you confusing BASSA with a union that negotiates?

Walsh wanted to get the pilots out of the way quickly to put pressure on the other employee groups. The same deal is not being offered.
Again, the starting point of negotiations is not the same as the final outcome. You have to go down the road of negotiating to get to a deal you can agree upon. Clearly, BASSA is incapable of doing so.

Currently Cranebank is bursting with temporary cabin crew, some called back on three month contracts. Why?
Since, in all likelihood, crew will be laid off en masse for failing to come to a negotiated settlement.

[L337]

Stall Pusher, you said: The BA pilots have not made any changes to their T&C's. If they have, list the changes here.

Here is a cut and paste of an email sent to all BA pilots. Dated 10th June 2009.

From 1 October 2009
• Pilot basic salary scales: Reduced by 2.61%.
• Flying Pay: reduced by £2 from £11.00 to £9.00.
• Time Away From Base allowance (TAFB)*: Frozen at current rate (£2.87 per hour) from 1 April 2009 to 31 March 2011.
• Next salary review date: 1 February 2011.

LGW

1. Introduce days off shaping

Short Haul

1. Minimum SH turn time 75 minutes plus buffers (5 min earlier report, 5 day trip maximum, removal of 75 minute limit for meals on fixed links & no CES rules).
2. Increase annual shorthaul cap by 12 hours

Long Haul

1. Increase annual longhaul cap by 8 hours
2. Extend Box C by 30 minutes

Other

1. Reduce BALPA credit.


I will be working longer hours for less money. That is the simple truth, and for you to bang on that "BA pilots have not made any changes to their T&C's" is just utter rubbish.

[Human Factor]

... for you to bang on that "BA pilots have not made any changes to their T&C's" is just utter rubbish.

Which brings us back to the original issue. Now that we have proved that the pilots are making changes to their T&Cs, why is BASSA still denying that this is the case?

Stall Pusher? Anyone?

[Matt101]

Does he not understand those crew earning £16,000pa - a fraction of Mr Walsh’s monthly salary - live month to month often struggling to make ends meet and in some cases going without meals?

I am loathed to get involved but I was on the lowest paid wage at BA (Cabin Crew wise) and I earned more than this per year. This pay may well apply to a part time wage but then it is part time - if you are struggling to survive then perhaps you shouldn't be on such a contract, other than that this sentence is purely BASSA drum beating.

Stall Pusher your comments are generally lifted directly from BASSA literature - why not try thinking for yourself?

Yes Pilot pay increments will be retained but it seems amazing to me that BASSA is peddling this as if pilots will still be better off after their pay cut.

A bit of basic maths for you BASSA if you have £100 paid per month and the company take away £50 permanently and then give you £100 permanently you have in effect received a pay rise of £50 as opposed to the £100 you were expecting. You are still worse off (markedly so over a long period of time). Add to that the decrease in flight pay and increase in productivity and you can see why this was an acceptable deal to WW.

I do not want to see CC T&C's decimated many of my friends and colleagues are still there, as they are in Flight Opps and other departments, however this BASSA ranting used to annoy me when I was a member and still annoys me now, I had thought the last elections at BASSA would have unveiled a breath of fresh air - not so unfortunately. Thankfully most Cabin Crew are intelligent well informed people and will, I hope, see the truth past all the gash. Changes can be made that wont hurt the pocket too much.

Best of luck to all involved, I sincerely mean that, a great airline with a great bunch of people I was proud to "fly the flag" and hope to again one day - hence my interest.

[Stall Pusher]

The main reason why Bob Ayling had to leave BA, was that he lost the confidence of the workforce. On his watch the airline's debt soared. After BA he was virtually unemployable. Anyone recognise the analogy?

Mr Walsh has a confrontational style that will ensure industrial action is a reality. If you want to get your workforce onside, to work together altruistically, you do not adopt the posture Walsh has with deadlines and threats of imposition. Especially as the company would be in better shape and better regarded, if not for mistakes he has made. Would anyone fail to agree with me, that BA has suffered a loss of prestige since he became CEO?

The fact that he operates in this way also demontrates that he is not in BA for the longhaul, but just a smash and grab of long serving employees T&C's. Then he will be off.

If he can unashamedly sack two directors over T5, then everyone is at risk who gets in his way. Personally I do not like bullies. As Margaret Thatcher once said: "Bullies must be beaten" (sic)

[wobble2plank]

Stall Pusher.

You present an enticing argument albeit at the wrong time. Whilst Bob Ayling will always be less than fondly remembered he did not have the economic disasters that the current Government has led us into to contend with.

The soaring amount of personal debt coupled with the massive Government borrowing is going to kill off or level any hope of economic recovery for the considerable future. To put it into context the Civil service has ballooned to in excess of 6.6 million under New Labour, that puts it at over a quarter of the workforce. Given that the private pensions debate will mark the next huge hurdle in the company the civil service pension mountain will need to be service by the tax payer for ever.

Taking all of this into account the disposable income that many have been enjoying for the past decade is gone. Possibly never to return in such amounts as we have seen. Personal and private credit will be far more difficult to obtain and the luxuries of travel will diminish with them.

The company MUST re-adjust to the new order and re position itself to take advantage of whatever up turn comes. The margins involved however will be far smaller.

Whilst many people don't like Willie Walsh he does have the backing of both the City and the Board on this one under a promise to return profitability to the investors. He will force through the changes to achieve this.

[Witraz]

Stall Pusher.
Your solution then is get rid of WW and everything will be a bed of roses.
The losses will disappear overnight. The plan to lay up 16 aircraft for the coming winter will be dropped and most importantly those nasty fare paying passengers who have stayed away will return paying the old rates for their FC and Club seats that pay the wages.......
Sorry but somehow I don't think this will happen.

[GS-Alpha]

deltaguy,

No need to bang your head against the wall. I am well aware that the action in my link was unofficial and therefore illegal. The warning was that if you are going to strike, make sure it is legal, or you will likely be sacked.

Unfortunately for you guys though, Willie will not leave you the option of a legal strike. This is the whole point I am making. Your union is backing Willie into a corner. He has no option but to escape from it, and the only way he can, will be to give you a bloody nose. Unfortunately, I am 99% certain he will not leave it there. If you dare to push him, he will break your arms and legs too. This is why I urge you all, to urge BASSA to start negotiating properly.

So many crew are telling me that Willie will regret having a go at the cabin crew, but I am quite sure the reality will be the other way around when the battle is over. I promise not to tell you "I told you so" though. :ok:

[Stall Pusher]

Wobble, I agree with everything you say..except, there is no need to force anything through. Everyone wants the airline to survive and thrive, but there has to be a balance.

The whole situation at the moment is a question of style. The workforce and in particular customer contact staff, must not be left feeling bitter and resentful, as so much of the success of British Airways is founded on the morale of its people. Mr Walsh lacks charisma, he does not inspire people, he does not give them hope. It is just blood, sweat and tears with no light at the end of the tunnel.

When the feelgood factor has gone, British Airways will have lost the magic that seems to be so attractive to our customers.

[Human Factor]

Now that we have proved that the pilots are making changes to their T&Cs, why is BASSA still denying that this is the case?

This is getting tedious. Answer the question please, Stall Pusher.

[Stall Pusher]

Yes Witraz. I am advocating Walsh should go. He has got the right style to be a union negotiator, but not a CEO of a great company like BA. He should have stuck with IALPA.

Regarding the laying up of aircraft, your point is disingenuous as you probably know that 7 of those 16 aircraft were going anyway to OS. The 744's should have been grounded before the summer schedule.

It is generally agreed that Mr Walsh has been slow to react to market conditions and has not cut capacity soon enough. The self inflicted situation over fuel hedging would have been mitigated if more aircraft had of been grounded earlier. Crew have been gagging for part time and unpaid leave since autumn last year, but the LT have held back on offering it.

I would suggest it is best to have a shortage of capacity, rather than a surplus at the moment.

[nuigini]

Apparently from what I have heard negotiations aren't really progressing at all.

This is what I will fear will happen:

- No settlement will be agreed before June 30th.
- BA will implent itsp proposal and also draw back all offers for temporary and permanent unpaid leave, part-time and VR.
- BASSA will go ahead with its scheduled meeting on July 6th.
- Most members will probably vote for a strike.
- BA will go ahead with CR and dismiss 2000 HCE (which means anything between 2000 to 4000 people as presented last week). I could say goodbye then!

[Da Dog]

PiB

The 744's should have been grounded before the summer schedule.


I agree, but then again if you do this you have to have a quick reaction time, no use grounding the planes then taking 3 months negotiating with the Unions about how to handle the surplus, which lets face it is what happens.

The fuel hedging propaganda is a red herring, most people see straight through this, and others have sought to explain it to you, nevertheless I guess because BASSA keep saying it, well it must be true:rolleyes::ugh::yuk:

[TheKabaka]

. Crew have been gagging for part time and unpaid leave since autumn last year, but the LT have held back on offering it.


This is because if more crew have to be hired to cover the lost part time work it costs more money!!! (and it will because of the work practices involved).

By the way BA has made a profit of 1.5 billion pounds on fuel hedgeing in the last 5 years, and has half of its fuel hedged at $60 a barrel for this year (check the current price).

As well as the productivity changes others have posted the pilots have taken a pay cut of about £5000-£6000 a year (if voted). Can anyone call this a sweetheart deal?

[Flap33]

Stall-Pusher, I hope that you are kidding and just trying to stoke the fire. If what you are saying in your recent posts is REALLY what you believe then you need to get your head out of the sand ASAP and smell the coffee.

How many times do you need telling, we are in the mire. Our cash reserve is running out, our revenue is collapsing and our passenger stats are disastrous. Getting the picture?? I would also add that had it not been for som VERY smart guys in currency/fuel hedging departments we would already be insolvent.

BASSA need to get their communications in shape, they should stop lying to their members and spinning their rubbish about the pilots deal, I am a pilot (as if you hadn't guessed) and am looking at £300-400 less per month, no change to my T&Cs - much!! Comparing Pilots to CC is like comparing Doctors and Nurses - give it up.

Good luck on the dole, the way you talk we'll all be there before Christmas :ugh:

[Stall Pusher]

Rod Edington once said that airlines don't save any money with fuel hedging: "you still end up paying the middle man".

Flap33, you shouldn't believe everything that Willie tells you.

Are you trying to say that BA is in a worse financial condiiton than Aer Lingus?

What about Alitalia, how are they going to keep going with all those old aircraft? But they will.

What about JAL with U$20bn of accumulated debt? Makes our little loss rather insignificant.

Will Olympic struggle on or are they doing better than BA? And SAS too, there is nothing in the papers about them going bust imminently.

And Air France/KLM. If things were not bad enough, they lose another aircraft. Will they go bust? I don't think so.

And Lufthansa; they have just given their cabin crew a pay rise. They are investing in their product and upgrading to encourage brand loyalty. And BA is going to take crew off and go low cost as a long haul carrier. Who is right, LH or BA?

And all the US carriers, they seem to be getting along just fine. Why?

I could go on..Qantas, Cathay...what about Virgin? Still there after BA as gone? How could that be true, just because they pay their cabin crew less?

So why is British Airways in such a crisis? Why is British Airways so close to bankruptcy and all these other carriers will still be flying after we have gone.

Perhaps their management have not made all of the gaffs BA's have? It must be true, they are better run and managed, surely?

[nuigini]

LH is definitely doing something right!

One should also take into consideration that they do operate many flights with minimum crew (I have had 4 CC on A321) and they do mixed flying as well. Perhaps something BA should try as well?

[Stall Pusher]

We had mixed flying once, it was called the Mid Fleet. It was a great success, but BA stopped it.

I am sure many people would like to see that agreement re-introduced.

SFG crew love their mixed flying at LGW, but they would rather be at LHR.

Reading back through this thread, it is apparent that the Flight Crew very much like to pose as the intelligent professionals, whereas the cabin crew are viewed as the easily replacable un-educated workforce, that by some freak of nature has a 'militant', solid and too-strong a Trade Union backing them up.

Privately many Flight Crew rather envy the cheekiness and strength of BASSA and wish it wasn't just a cabin crew union. If only their 'association' had the strength to stand up to Willie.

[JazzyKex]

You have mixed fleet flying! It is being done everyday in LGW.

So easy for the junior minions down the road in Crawley to slip the mind of the British Airways Senior Stewards Association...again. :ugh:

[TheKabaka]

strength to stand up to Willie

I assume by this you mean vote for a strike. If so what do you think will be the result of this action?

[overstress]

Privately many Flight Crew rather envy the cheekiness and strength of BASSA and wish it wasn't just a cabin crew union. If only their 'association' had the strength to stand up to Willie.

An easy statement to make. One could easily say that privately many cabin crew envy the negotiating skills of BALPA and there would be no proof for that either.

What is clear is that BASSA, at the highest level, is seeking to distort the information it has been given by BALPA re the pilot agreement. Is this because they wish to further the likelihood of a strike?

What may well happen is this: BASSA will fail to agree by the deadline. I'm told that there is no BASSA plan other than to stand ground over the its agreements. The deadline will pass, BA will impose its new conditions and take all current offers off the table. BASSA will recommend a strike. BA will then use its barristers to go straight to the High Court and seek an injunction rendering the strike illegal - it will use the 'SOSR' (Some other substantial reason) defence. Any illegal action will be dealt with under BA's EG300 absence management policy.

Additionally, BASSA's current policy of mis-representing (by partly quoting) other groups agreements will be used against them by BA in the courts. All communications by BASSA will be examined and used against them, if BA can, to render any strike action illegal.

Meanwhile, BA will be making crew redundant in accordance with the plan.

Controversially, they could declare that the role of CSD is redundant and sack them all. In the interim, BASSA will be hamstrung by the High Court injunction and unable to act. Any strikers will be sacked as the strike will be illegal.

I'm extremely sorry to write the above as I have many friends who are crew, and I have no wish to see them suffer. However these are harsh times and these are the hard facts being kept from BASSA's members.

It may help outsiders to know that two thirds of the cabin crew pay budget in BA is currently spent on only one third of the workforce...

[Flap33]

Stall-Pusher, your resolve is admirable.

General Motors, AIG and Lehmans WERE all massive companies within their sectors. Don't think that because we are BA we can't go the same way.

I hope that you are right, and I am wrong. Time will tell.

[FloridaCandle]

Stall Pusher - I'm with Flap33 and many others who've tried to get through to you. BA is in serious financial trouble. Time for you to wake up and smell the coffee ........ please for all our sakes.

Like you I don't like WW, nor do I trust him, but I'd far rather err on the side of caution than be reckless and be part of a group that puts thousands of us out of work and living on the streets.

Have you seen the unemployment figures lately, do you know how many people are applying for every job out there? :ugh:

[jackcat]

Stallpusher


If he can unashamedly sack two directors over T5, then everyone is at risk who gets in his way.


I reiterate my previous post


One of those 2 "sacrificial lambs" was Cargo MD at the time of the price-fixing scandal. Delayed retribution?


I don't think Gareth Kirkwood was entirely blameless regarding the T5 fiasco either. Just my humble opinion though.

[overstress]

The sacking of the directors: WW had promoted them specifically into the T5 role, they screwed up and were sacked, end of story. This is a red herring to the BASSA failure to agree issue which is what this thread is about.

If WW was to keel over and die tomorrow, BA would still be taking the same survival action, so it is irrelevant to fixate on the man, play the ball instead (as the moderators are fond of telling me! :p )

[Stall Pusher]

If Kirkwood and Noyes "screwed up", why have they not been allowed to speak to the press and discuss exactly where they went wrong? Are they still on the payroll? Where are they working now?

Walsh refused to answer the question twice when asked by MP Louise Ellman at the Commons Transport Select Committees investigation into the T5 debacle, when she asked whether the two directors had signed 'confidentiality agreements'.

Yes it would make a huge difference it Walsh left. We need another CEO like Rod Eddington. He reduced BA's debt and steered us through the aftermath of 9/11 without whacking his employees. I would say that situation Eddington faced was worse than now because it was sudden and unexpected.

If the same measures had been adopted last year proactively, rather than reactively now, we would be in much better shape.

[overstress]

This link here (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/news/article-23478598-details/Two+British+Airways+directors+sacked+over+the+Terminal+5+fia sco...+but+Willie+Walsh+stays/article.do) should help you, sacked=left the company?

Walsh would have been in trouble if the longhaul move had gone badly, but it didn't.

Eddington, as has been mentioned repeatedly above, did not have to deal with the effects of a global economic meltdown, premium traffic did not decline (after 9/11) to the extent it has now, so he could afford not to tackle the elephant in the room. :ooh:

[747-436]

If Kirkwood and Noyes "screwed up", why have they not been allowed to speak to the press and discuss exactly where they went wrong? Are they still on the payroll? Where are they working now? Why are they hiding?

Probably because they are professional business people who might want to work in similar positions in the future, running to the press is no way to do that!!

Back to topic........

[Stall Pusher]

OverStress: After 9/11 First class cabins were closed on most flights and cabin crew compliments reduced correspondingly.

Obviously premium loads must be standing up quite well, otherwise the same measures would have been adopted again.

747-436: So what would these ex-directors put on their CV's if they "sought similar positions again"? What sort of reference would Willie give them? I think they should be allowed to clear their names and talk about the mistakes they made. They did have 45 years service in BA between them, I would like to hear them give their version of events.

We digress....

[Perry-oaks]

It may help outsiders to know that two thirds of the cabin crew pay budget in BA is currently spent on only one third of the workforce...


From the CAA web site - average cost of BA Cabin crew - £29,900

Multiply that by 14,000 cabin crew - £419m.

Two Thirds of £419M is £280m.

One third of the 14,000 cabin crew is 4,600 members.

So the top third cost BA £60,800 each.

But the majority, two thirds (9400 cabin crew) cost BA £14,800.

So the vast majority of the British Airways Senior Stewards Association members are paid significantly less than average but are being asked to support a very well paid few.

So who does Bassa really represent....

[Re-Heat]

Obviously premium loads must be standing up quite well, otherwise the same measures would have been adopted again.
Really, read the investor presentation on the BA investor website. All the data is there.

Shutting cabins is cutting off the nose to spite the face. The profits are made up front; without the opportunity to earn from those cabins - if they are shut - the whole airline may as well not bother to continue. Eddington had them shut short term - we are talking about cuts into Winter 2009/2010.

Far better to cut the crew complement, keep the cabins open, and provide the service the customers pay for.

Or would you rather be in the bunk again?


Regarding the fired directors - those involved in price fixing are still involved in legal action in the US and EU. Hence their lack of media communication. The answer to problems is not bleating to the media, but working through them and moving on...

[JazzyKex]

Stall Pusher writes:

Obviously premium loads must be standing up quite well, otherwise the same measures would have been adopted again.

Actually further steps have been taken!

When was the last time you were on a BA aircraft Stall Pusher? (Too much time on the internet in the BASSA office me thinks when you should be seeing the realities of the 'coal face'!)

The previously empty premium cabins are now full...with invol upgrades. Last flight I operated (two days ago) 51 overbooked, every seat in the 777 taken, only 4 of the premium cabin being full fare pax. A previously unheard of 'diluting of the product'!!! How many of the full fare WT and WTP pax had paid knock down fares? Most. 4 days before we left the flight was wide open with reduced fares available.

Bums on seats and open cabins is no indication of yield. :rolleyes:

Those prices will not keep us in the manner we are accustomed, flight crew or cabin crew (or anyone else in the company for that matter). Looking at the projections from our main prem customers they see no improvement in their premium travel budgets until around 2016 not 2011.

Waking up and sniffing coffee is too late and clearly never going to be enough for (what seems to be) a very vocal but significant minority who do not have the independence of thought to look beyond BASSA's preaching and see the chasm at the end of the path which they are being led down.

However BA got to this position is now irrelevant. Who led us here is immaterial, whether the management should have pre-empted this situation of no bearing.

We are where we are. It is now about how thinly we can can spread our weight to avoid sinking in the quicksand. Do you want to live and crawl out of the other side without anything but the shirt on your back, but still survive OR take the BASSA line and stand to attention in full dress uniform applying the final touches to your hair as the sand passes up over your eyes.

The choice is not BASSA's, but for a fully informed membership to take. If the vast majority of fantastic people who make up BA CC are taken to a strike to later find out the reality of the half truths and propaganda they have been fed to meet the unions and not their best interests it will be an end to BASSA anyway.

[ZFT]

The previously empty premium cabins are now full...with invol upgrades.
The problem with this approach though is that pax who have purchased full fare premium tickets get pi$$ed off with Joe Soap in the next seat having not paid for the premium seat and as a result you could lose what premium traffic is left.
Isn’t this the very reason for dress codes and ‘mums the word’ when travelling on ID tickets?

[TorC]

Op-Up 30 hours before departure! - FlyerTalk Forums (http://www.flyertalk.com/forum/british-airways-executive-club/965743-op-up-30-hours-before-departure.html)

This chap has paid £560 for a WTP trip. (£400 base fare for W plus £80 each way to upgrade himself to WTP). 30hours out he has already been Invol Upgraded to J on the 1st sector, while the flight is still selling deeply discounted W fares.

Full marks to Revenue Mngmnt for at least trying to squeeze every last penny out of each flight. But at these levels, we may as well be paying them to fly.

At least at the moment we are still advertising each cabin at it's correct respective fare, and will consequently still be getting some (probably very few) sales at those prices. But there will come a time when we will have to simplyfy everything and actually start selling J to wherever at £560 simply to generate cash-flow. Doing that, will, I fear, put out an even stronger message regards the state of BA than the work-for-free one.

[doishquattroserche]

stall pusher,
you ask so many questions and avoid dicussing the realities . To compare WW to RE is completely irrelivant .WW is actually more likely to make the very diificult decisions required to keep the company in buisness . I don't like it either . Rest assured ,i'm sure he will be after the pilots again soon ,most likely over pensions.
If you plot a graph,BASSA has done a fantastic job of protection the conditions of service of what is now a minority of senior crew .It is this group that have most to lose and will be staring over the abyss .
If you were running the show,would you want flights to be delayed for not going "one down" when you still had well over the legal compliment of crew,would you ? YES or NO stall pusher?
You can legally depart with the CSD and 3 pursars missing from a long haul jet ,now,i'm not advocating that but when we are struggling to exist as a company what extreme measures would be going through our willies mind?
BASSA MUST negotiate ,for BA's sake,for it's own sake and therefore for all our sake . Some crew will suffer under these new terms ,it's going to be awful but the reality is that the old job aint there anymore.
It's carnage in the outside economy BTW ,just coz the BBC dont broardcast it,things are nasty out there.
Please don't compare cabin crew and pilots ,its a wind up for both parties and irrelivant anyway.
I'm very concerned that BASSA may lead some really super crew into a dead end with no escape.......30th June.........:ugh::ugh:

[deeceethree]

Nigel_Normale,

As much as anyone might agree with your sentiments, you run a real risk of having your post (your one and only post as of this time and date) deleted and your alter ego banished with comments like that. Steady on old chap .....

Stall Pusher is, unfortunately, one of the militant brigade within BASSA - feet of clay, likely a rep, now very cornered and behaving like a wounded animal. You are unlikely to get any commonsense out of him/her. Protection of his/her outrageous salary/Ts & Cs (when compared to any realistic industry standard) is all that matters, and lying and obfuscating is part of the game in an attempt to preserve that position.

Think about it - a lot of jumped-up individuals in BASSA's ivory tower of 'leadership' have been wielding power, to which they have no right, for decades in messing about with BAs operation. They are now faced with losing that power, and are very frightened indeed, so much so that you are seeing the cornered animal behaviour displayed here and elsewhere.

Its going to get very messy, blood everywhere, but Stallpusher and those of similar ilk are likely to get their come-uppance. What the rest of BA hope is that their behaviour doesn't bring down the entire company, although many of these militant BASSA lot are saying they would like to do exactly that! Pathetic! :rolleyes:

[wobble2plank]

Sadly, due to the constant, unyielding intransigence of BASSA over the years, added to the weak willed approach by senior management to the ever growing financial divide within the Cabin Crew community, Willie Walsh is considered the perfect man for the job.

He has no problem dealing head on with problem unions. His approach certainly doesn't make him friends and many would argue that his time at Air Lingus and his subsequent decision to jump before he was pushed was down to pressure from the Unions on Bertie O'Hearn at the time.

Simple fact is that he WILL get the unions who won't negotiate quashed, he WILL force through radical changes on the CC and the ones who will lose the most and feel the pain the most will be those sitting at the top of the Ivory tower. Many would say that they have had years to enjoy the pay situation and have had their time at the top. That is why BASSA are squirming so much trying to bleat their way their way out of a corner.

Hopefully the junior crew will not get hit too hard and we can continue to enjoy a good working relationship into the future without the big bully BASSA hanging over everything we do.

[Megaton]

It's a shame that BASSA didn't negotiate away some of their allowances and have them included in basic pay when they had the chance. For those that face CR a higher basic pay would, at least, have improved their redundancy payment.

[Stall Pusher]

Well good morning lads from a rather wet Boston. I see the rhetoric and diatribe against BASSA continues unabated from my Flight Crew colleagues.

So down to business. Unfortunately most of you are looking at the situation the wrong way round . Rather than the cosy 'sweetheart' deal that your association BALPA has cut with Mr Walsh being a lever to get the other unions to comply with his demands, you should actually be pressing Walsh to back off.

The pilots in BA have so much to lose. What else can you do but fly aeroplanes if the worst happens? You are 'one trick ponies' of the first order and Mr Walsh knows it. If the unions are weakened in BA, it will effect BALPA in the future when Mr Walsh turns on you again with those OpenSkies contracts he has got tucked away in his top drawer.

You really should be supporting BASSA and the other unions, rather than trying to undermine them. Unfortunately the pilot community has rather selfish tendencies and are reluctant to see the big picture. You think you have got off lightly, but Mr Walsh is not going to make the mistake so often made in the past, by fighting a war on two fronts. It is no more than a latter day Ribbentrop/Molotov Pact between Walsh and BALPA.

Most of you are pontificating a load of rubbish about BASSA's position and trying to second guess the mood of its membership. Wait until the meeting on the 6th July. Any move by Walsh to impose changes to T&C's without negotiation, will be viewed as an act of war.

[nuigini]

Wait until the meeting on the 6th July. Any move by Walsh to impose changes to T&C's without negotiation, will be viewed as an act of war.

Without negotiation? What exactly do you think they are trying to do with the TU's? Unfortunately with one which is known to say No, No, No and No to everything that is being suggested. Perhaps this particular union should learn how to negotiate properly and be honest to its members instead of confusing them.

I have really had it with crew that are extremely selfish and unfortunately can't realise, or think for themselves, that a strike will hit us really poorly and have a greater impact on all of us instead of agreeing to a change to our terms and conditions.

[doishquattroserche]

stall pusher,i wonder why i bother to reply but........
"you are one trick ponies" YES FLIGHT DECK ARE ,something we can agree on at last ,a very finite skill set ,not very portable and very specific work . Most pilots would struggle indeed to earn anything like the same money in other industry ,some could,others (most ) could not.
Please explain how that is any different from hip surgeons or architects or currency traders. Cabin crew skill set is much more portable and quantifiable and more easily replaced .End of .
The bit about tea and coffee is sinister ,you trust the pilots with your life but make a veiled threat .What do you think pilots think of crew but chose not to express,is it just a one way street? Most are great,people are people ,the constant comparison with the pilots tiresome , familiarity breeds contempt (of the nigels )(unless you marry one,then their great!)
Whatever is said on here is irrelivant ,but you are in for a shock re -adjustment,maybe,just maybe, if we survive,BA will be a happier place to work.LGW always used to be ,ex BCAL crew and ex LGW longhaul are some of our best crew ,a lot of lovely guys and girls...,and we can at least agree that willie will be ruthless.Stop deflecting away from facts stall pusher,not everyone is against you ,give us a chance, but listen and take on alternative views sometimes...

[Da Dog]

SP

Wait until the meeting on the 6th July

What? You mean the militant 10% whom are whipped into a frenzy by the BASSA Leadership, then decide everyone else's future with a show of hands.

Now where have I seen something like that before? Oh yep it was on BBC 24 last night reporting on the events unfolding in Iran.:ok:

[Joetom]

Picking up on a previous post, Cabin crew total pay is split between basic and extras/allowances etc etc, I don't know what the split is, but would guess as a population, their basic pay will be the smallest % of their total pay, can anyone quote any figures ???

Following on from the above, it will not be easy for Cabin crew to take VR with only 52 weeks pay, would it be worth allowing Cabin crew to use, say an average of their total pay over the last 2/3 years as the weekly amount (basic and allowances) and not their basic pay ???

I feel Cabin crew have been left in a very awkward position at this time, I don't see an easy way out.

1/ Basic is to low and this means small pension.

2/ Allowances/extras being used to top up savings because basic too low.

3/ Being paid well above the so called going rate, can make leaving hard.

I wish all Cabin crew well, but the numbers are not good, you are a large population getting paid well over market rate, the company is operating in hard times and cash is king, and will continue to be king for a long time.

Only option I can see, is the pilots taking a real pay cut and putting that cash up to ease the Cabin crew pay issues, remember, the pilots get the best pension deal in the long run, so could be in their best interests to do this.

[plodding along]

New entrant basic pay is between £11,000 - £18,000.
Full time allowances would be between £1500-£2000 per month (£15000 -£20,000 per year) depending on trips.

The problem is the old contract, I don't have all the scales but a Purser with 13 years service has a basic of £35,000, CSD's go up to £45,000.

There are enough old contract left to make the VR package worthwhile for themselves and the company.

You are right that VR for new entrants is not worth much, their basic is low to account for the huge allowances, unfortunately that was the choice of the old contract crew and BASSA at the time, they protected their salaries/allowances and let the new joiners take the hit.

BA have been trying for years to get an hourly rate, BASSA always says no, I don't think it appropriate that pilots now give up money to fund cabin crew redundancies when the problem is of their own (via BASSA) making.
In fact perhaps the old contract crew themselves could take a bigger hit to help out the new contract crew? Thought not ;)

Be careful what you believe, BASSA is talking of crew on £16,000 unable to afford meals, even on the first years payscale FULL TIME crew will earn over £20,000 unless they never turn up at work that is.

Anyway, the proposal leaves crew pay virtually untouched, it is the prospect of working harder and the thought of losing some of the well paid routes in the future that is causing the resistance.

[wobble2plank]

Oh No! I never saw the 'one trick pony' thing until now! Damn! The MBA I also have and the MCSE qualification must have been a complete waste of time as I am a 'one trick pony'.

Careful SP, you were the one who brought up the debate about getting things personal. As has already been said how does being a qualified professional pilot differ from any other profession where specific skill sets are required?

The differences between the two roles on the aircraft have been discussed long and hard and here is not the thread for it.

When one retreats to the 'I'm not, you are' stages of discussion then there generally tends to be a lack of ability to bring coherent arguments to the table. Pilots have far stricter limits and checks placed upon them which makes their training and standards far more costly to maintain. Medicals, sim checks, IR checks etc. Thus, by maintaining a pay differential the company can attract suitable, qualified pilots into the company thus reducing training/insurance costs. Something that would dry up if the T's & C's weren't maintained to a decent level. Sadly the same doesn't exist for the cabin crew.

As with the Cabin Crew many in front of the cockpit door are also multi faceted individuals who have much more up their sleeve than 'just' piloting around a jet full of your backsides. Trust me, those who were on the JNB with the un-commanded slat retraction are probably feeling very happy with their 'one trick ponies' at the moment. By all accounts they should have been in the brush at the end of the runway but for the quick action of the nags in the front.

As to your 'war', remember that war is what happens when all attempts at diplomacy fails.

Sound familiar?

[nuigini]

The problem is the old contract, I don't have all the scales but a Purser with 13 years service has a basic of £35,000, CSD's go up to £45,000.

That sounds accurate!

Basic salary last year for main cabin crew that started in 1995 was around £29.000.

[Human Factor]

I see selective deafness remains the order of the day at BASSA. Otherwise, I would have had an answer to the following from Stall Pusher. For the fourth time:

Now that we have proved that the pilots are making changes to their T&Cs, why is BASSA still denying that this is the case?


I expect this will remain unanswered along with the question of why the BASSA leadership are apparently intentionally misleading their membership.


I'm going to bow out of this debate now as my point has been well and truly made. I feel for most of the crew, I really do. I question the actions of their union "leaders" as I see no reason for their intransigence. Unfortunately, there are several of the ilk of Stall Pusher who are either too blinkered to want to see the alternatives to their argument or are too ignorant to see the train wreck which lies ahead. They have been given fair warning.

[GS-Alpha]

The pilots in BA have so much to lose. What else can you do but fly aeroplanes if the worst happens? You are 'one trick ponies' of the first order and Mr Walsh knows it. I think you will find that the average BA pilot is well placed to go and do something in the 'real world' with a salary well above that which your typical BA cabin crew member could demand. But that is only my opinion, and you are quite entitled to yours. The fact that we do not want to go do something else because we love flying, does however add some truth to your statement. Willie does indeed know this because he understands pilots, just as he understands unions.

If the unions are weakened in BA, it will effect BALPA in the futureAgain, I am in agreement with you. This is why I beg you to ask BASSA to negotiate properly and stop rushing head long towards the cliff edge. BA will crush you, and it will have been totally unnecessary and a huge shame. You absolutely will not win! Any thoughts of victory against BA in this climate are just plain stupid. After crushing you, they may well target their energy towards BALPA in the future - you are quite right, but it is not this that I am worried about at the moment. I am however, very very concerned for the well being of all of my colleagues in the cabin. BASSA are not going to secure the best possible outcome for it's members with this current plan of action, and that is unforgivable.

[wobble2plank]

HF, the biggest problem is the intransigence of those in BASSA who believe that everyone else in the company needs to change except them.

The time has come for BASSA to accept that change has to come and the protected empires of the senior LH CC is about to crumble, possibly for the good of the more junior members. Instead of blaming each and every other department for taking the time and effort to negotiate a change they should concentrate on negotiating an acceptable position for their members.

[Joetom]

Plodding along and nuigini, thanks for the numbers.

Below is the picture I see.

15/20k Allowances per year,too hi, little tax paid on this, no effect on pensions.

11/18k Basic for newbees, too low, normal tax applied, decides pension pay.

29k Basic for many old timers, too hi (market rate) ditto ditto.

35k Basic for old time pursers, too hi (market rate) ditto ditto.

45k Basic for old time CSDs, too hi (market rate) ditto ditto.

Lowest paid in BARP, others in APS/NAPS.

Only option to keep the above happy is no change I think, but in these times, that option will not be avail, reminds me of an old MOL saying "perfect strorm" and just like we can't control the weather, this will not be controlled by all the horses pulling in different directions, the next few months will not be nice.

[nuigini]

Basic salary these days first years is somewhere around £10.800.

Those who joined in 1997 on the new contract started at some £8000 and would these days be around £19.000 (full-time).

[Da Dog]

Could British Airways really go bust or not? - Times Online (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article6543863.ece)

If you bother to read the whole article it makes very sobering reading:bored:

[Fargoo]

So is it really all over for BA? Is the world’s (former) favourite airline, Britain’s (former) national flag carrier and the (former) operator of Concorde really heading for the scrap-heap?

Seasoned airline watchers say not, accusing Walsh of having an ulterior motive. His apocalyptic missives, they say, are designed to soften up BA’s unions during crucial talks about cost-cutting.

Walsh wants big concessions – and an air of crisis will help. This month has brought voluntary pay cuts from pilots and engineers (pilots still have to vote on the plan), but the battle continues with ground staff and cabin crew. Walsh wants it sorted out by June 30. Industrial action this summer cannot be ruled out.

Walsh has another audience in mind, too, governments and regulators on both sides of the Atlantic. BA is trying to stitch together a merger with Iberia, the Spanish airline, and a strategic alliance with American Airlines. The latter, a deal that would leave BA and American free to collude on price and scheduling on Atlantic routes, faces a rough ride from competition watchdogs. Its fate is in the balance, with a decision expected in a few months.

BA’s management would also like some breathing space from the British government on a swingeing rise in air passenger duty, which the airline claims leaves it at a competitive disadvantage to its rivals.

“In my view, he is attempting to manage the expectations of staff. His view is that there is a serious structural shift here, not just a cyclical blip,” said Douglas McNeil, transport analyst at Astaire Securities, the investment bank.

I'd say they've got it spot on, if BA does go down it will be mainly caused by the Directors mismanagement . What they are doing in public is destroying whats left of the companies image and driving away many passengers worried about the validity of any tickets they might buy.

WW is playing a dangerous game , unfortunately if it does all go to the wall he won't be the one that has to pick up the pieces.

[Da Dog]

and this one may please Stall Pusher and PiB

BA may ditch OpenSkies as transatlantic flights dive | Business | The Observer (http://www.guardian.co.uk/business/2009/jun/21/ba-openskies-selloff-transatlantic-flights)

[Dezso]

I have been following this thread with interest and in my opinion as an outsider, I think that this union BASSA seem to have a lot to answer for. In this day companies need to change and adapt to the market and sometimes that means that jobs need to change, people need to do things different and sometimes people are made redundant.

I understand that Richard Branson can react quickly as he does not have the interference that BA has, in my opinion, from an outsider I would blame the unions equally - you cannot refuse everything the company asks, the hot towel debate sums this up for me. That argument was just insane, sorry but that is how I view it.

I hope you survive and regardless of what you think, you do seem to have a stong leader, popular no - but someone who is prepared to stand up and fight. Maybe in 5 years if you get through this then you will think differently.

[Open Lies]

So....

Going back to my question on post 912....

The question was....

Who will ask Liz Malone, (the BASSA chairman) why she deliberately permitted BASSA to post information that was both incomplete and incorrect ?

It has been confirmed by BALPA that Liz had received the complete, accurate BALPA document 72hrs beforehand ?

I have now had the following cryptic private message from Stall Pusher:

Balpa document

I have the the answer, but I have been gagged until the 25th by the moderator Flaps 40

SP

Is any other BASSA member actually prepared to ask the Chair of BASSA why she has permitted BASSA to lie ?

Anyone ... ?

Or are you all forgetting who a union is meant to represent ?

[Stall Pusher]

Thanks Da Dog/ Fargoo, nice to have some support here.

When Walsh predicted last year that 30 airlines would go bust in the recession, we never thought he would start one of them!!!

Nearly £100m has been wasted on OpenSkies/L'Avion

Walsh should now resign. He has no credibility whatsoever.

There is no way the unions should give up anything in light of this.

[saintjoseph]

barbara cassani/john glosto? if you know you know! :ok:

[Carnage Matey!]

Walsh should now resign. He has no credibility whatsoever

So you think the people who count won't give him credit for delivering a 10% margin, getting T5 to a state where its performance is record breaking, neutering militant staff groups such as the bus drivers or axing thousands of managers? Once he castrates BASSA and removes the annual threat of industrial action the shareholders will thrilled.

[WeLieInTheShadows]

Similarly....

The shareholders will be thrilled when he imposes terms on all groups on 1st July (including pilots) as no agreements were met with all NSP groups.

No deal with Crew/ Groundstaff, deal with pilots is off too is this not the case?

I'm not gloating BTW, just pointing out facts that could hit home to us all in just over one week.

Everyone is willing SP to urge BASSA to negotiate (believe me I'm their least biggest fan!). I ask is anyone emailing or calling BA to negotiate too? You may find this course just a worthwhile, as you all seem to think that the lack of progression stems from one camp.

WLITS

[Plan 10]

I've read and watched this thread with growing alarm, stunned at the ignorance and arrogance displayed by Stall Pusher.

Let's see, where to start? Well your latest displays a fairly profound lack of knowledge about the OS deals; whilst we may not agree with them, they were given £30 million as a start-up cost, and the acquisition of L'Avion brought with it a cash balance equivalent to the purchase price. So nowhere near £100 million. On top of that, they are not getting the other 757's from the fleet, so are running with two from BA and two legacy from the purchase.

All in all a Pyrrhic victory for Walsh; BA pilots would happily have accomodated that deal given the chance, but were forced into a corner by a very savvy legal department, one that Stall Pusher may well find slapping him in the face very soon.

The personal cost to Cabin Crew will be quite dreadful, but the fault for that should land at one door and one door alone; BASSA. For years they have fought to preserve the earnings of an elite few at the cost of other bases and new joiners. For years they have found themselves in the ego-enhancing position of being first point of contact in any disruption, and found that they were listened to when in reality they had no right to that level of importance of influence in airline operations. For years they have ignored the fact that we are no longer in the 70's and a nationalised industry, but have continued to behave as if we are, and chose not to integrate the remnants of that age (look at the wish-list on page one of this thread to refresh memories) into basic pay. Indeed the vociferousness of opposition to the "hourly rate" was quite something, and carried through the community without most of the cabin crew really realising how it would benefit them longer-term, how it could affect pensionable pay, and indeed, how it would apply in the event of compulsory redundancy.

The thing is, I could go on. And on and on. Why should I as a Captain have to defer to a Union for the application of discretion? Please explain that one, with reference to the Air Navigation Order and the particular paragraphs that state that this is all ok but BASSA come first.

I hate to say it, but there is a wake-up call coming, and it will hurt most those who are not BASSA officials, or the highest way-over market-rate paid crew, but the ones who can take the hit the least, the vast majority. And the reason for that will be that for years they have been "served" by a union not fit for purpose, a collection of individuals little more than a clique who will do anything to keep their own particular status quo at the expense of every other part of their organisation being on different terms. And now it has come home to bite, and bite it will, and it will hurt.

The sooner BA cabin-crew realise how their union has sold them down the river the better. The sooner they realise that the intelligence-insulting tabloid "Newsflashes" they send out are littered with innacuracies and untruths the better.

SO why is it not mentioned anywhere that BASSA had the BALPA negotiated deal in hand as of the 15th? Why did they choose the tone they chose for the newsletter? And why did they not publish it in full, rather cherry-pick and spin to suit their own agenda? Why did they not poll their members for how they would wish them to deal with the company's proposal? Why did they not forensically examine the company's accounts to see if they were telling the truth?

Oh sorry; "BA are profitable." So it's all ok then. Stall Pusher said so a few posts ago, so it must be true, and this will all go away.

Unfortunately, Mr SP, you are doing such a disservice to your fellow crew that you are culpable. I only hope the majority can see through you.

I hate to say this, but I will do anything to keep my company afloat, and if that involves crossing your picket lines and working in the cabin, then so be it. I have asked my colleagues the same on the last few flights and there is in my little unscientific poll 100% agreement on that course of action. Sorry, but if you call a strike I will do my best to break it. If you called a JUSTIFIED strike I would support you 100%, but the difference is in the detail, you have no justification.

You have 9-days to negotiate an agreement. Do it. You have neither credibiity nor accuracy in your arguments, your agreements cannot hold water and you will either move with the times, take the financial hit, or be signing-on.

[Glamgirl]

Plan10,

Excellent post! I completely understand where you're coming from. I hadn't heard the flight crew willing to work in the cabin if it comes to strike, but fair play to you. I'll be there with you, as I have no intention of striking - and I will be voting NO strike if it comes to it.

I still can't find any legal reason to strike, and the sooner the militants and Bassa realise this, the better.

Gg

[Plan 10]

Glamgirl, you have no idea how much it pains me to write what I did, but I WILL cross any BASSA picket line related to this dispute and work in the cabin if it will keep my family fed. Had the union a justifiable dispute then I would NEVER coutenance that action, but unfortunately BASSA have already set their stall out by choosing not to preserve a single-list for crew but allow different bases, rates, seniority lists and agreements over the year as long as their core, and the agreements regarding that core were preserved.

Others-be-damned, as long as the elite in BASSA could maintain their position it was ok. Well, it wasn't. By ignoring the issues that were raised by seperate base agreements at Gatwick, the Regions, the integrations of CFE crew etc. they merely solidified their own position. Fortress Heathrow is too simplistic a term, but that is simply what it was, and is. Now, the CSD's on Shorhaul aircraft, the over-crewing over and above levels minimum for either legal requirements or service are being directly challenged and BASSA is squealing for your indignation and support. They are mis-representing facts to try to achieve that goal. They are trying to paint other workers as the demons, even management as being unrealsitic when in reality their position is untenable and indefensible.

This was a long time coming. Had your union been worth the dues you pay they would have seen it, and spent the last few years mitigating it and finding ways to bring their position into line with the market, perhaps with a premiuim element had they the nous to negotiate that.

That they did not speaks volumes about their motivation and their ability. That they may drag the company down is sufficient for me to forsake my politicla sensibilities and consider breaking a strike, and from someone with my history (dating back to the picket-lines on the miners strike and the poll-tax marches) that is not something I would do lightly. But I will in this case if BASSA call a strike, and I will call on ALL my colleagues who care for the company to do the same, as BASSA are unrepresentative, selfish, ignorant of the greater business world we inhabit now and culpable in what is to come.

Thank you for what you write Glamgirl; I know most crew are like you, and you I want to see suffer the least. We all will take a hit in the next few weeks, it is shameful that a selfish agenda masks BASSA's motivations.

[overstress]

Plan10 is spot-on by my understanding of the facts.

I can work a bev-maker and would do my bit. I would say that most pilots would work as described.

BASSA are playing with fire now as their communications to their members will be examined in court should it come to it.

FWIW it took BALPA some time to convince its members that the figures in the books were as bad as they are. The result is the deal they have struck... after long and hard negotiation.

BASSA didn't even see the need to see the books and do not understand how to negotiate....

WeLieintheShadows: All deals will not be off, assuming failure to agree, BA will impose the savings anyway, depts who have agreed will then go ahead with the agreed changes. I'm sure that fact will shortly be seized on and twisted for propaganda reasons.... :hmm:

[Carnage Matey!]

Shadows - BALPA have come up with an elegant solution to the scenario you describe. Our cost saving measures commence on October 1st, 92 days after the day on which WW will issue 90 days notice on the contracts of those groups who don't think they should contribute. By that stage we'll have a clear picture of how the savings are to be wrung from those groups.

[stormin norman]

An interesting fact is that UNITE (formally the T and G) has its biggest block membership
in the UK at Heathrow and specifically within BA with BASSA and the ground unions.

Whatever happens they stand to be the biggest losers with a reduction in membership and thereby funds.

Has anybody seen Tony Woodley ?

[Stall Pusher]

NO Carnage you are re-writing history to suit your biased, warped and anti cabin crew agenda. Your post about the so called "victories" of Walsh were in fact defeats. Even BALPA said that the 10% Operating Turnover Margin goal was taking precedent over the prudent running of the airline. That is how we have gone from a huge profit, to a record breaking loss.

Of the £54m paid for L'Avion there was supposed to be £24m in cash....but no one said what debts the airline had. BA has cash in the bank, but it has debts. As we come up to the first anniversary of OS commencing operations, there is no doubt it has been a huge and naive blunder. Just as the oil price peaked at U$147 and with the wreckage of other failed business only model airlines laying around, Walsh starts up one of the same...and the outcome has been the same.

Of course Walsh gave BALPA a bloody nose over OS, so it is strange that Carnage and his other OTP friends seem to be disappointed that it may not survive.

As I have said before so many times, BA is profitable. It would be profitable now if it was paying the market rate for fuel.

I don't know if anyone has noticed, but most cabin crew avoid PPRUNE and threads such as this like the plague, because it is a pro Flight Deck and anti cabin crew community. Pilots get very upset when cabin crew post comments on their threads, but it is OK for them to display their natural arrogance and talk about "intelligent negotiating", "elegant solution" which sounds pompous in the extreme. The truth is most pilots just moan about BALPA being 'impotent' and 'expensive'. Some have left in protest over the legal humiliation in the OS showdown with Walsh, perferring to use private solicitors who specialise in employment law, as they secretely know (as Walsh does) that BALPA are a busted flush.

So write all you like about BASSA, all will be revealed in the next week or so.

[Da Dog]

SP

I don't know if anyone has noticed, but most cabin crew avoid PPRuNe and threads such as this like the plague, because it is a pro Flight Deck and anti cabin crew community.

Perhaps they avoid it because it does not conform to their blinkered view of the world presented to them by BASSA, such as.........

It would be profitable now if it was paying the market rate for fuel.

The truth is most pilots just moan about BALPA being 'impotent' and 'expensive'.

That is like me saying that most Cabin Crew I speak to don't want to go on strike and don't trust BASSA. Its a true statement but 20 or so cabin crew is hardly a good sample.

Some have left in protest over the legal humiliation in the OS showdown with Walsh

0 to be accurate:ok:
all will be revealed in the next week or so.

Yep its gonna be interesting, would you like to start a sweep stake?