British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations

[Carnage Matey!]

please do not bore me with it as my neighbour here in spain specialises in Eu employment law which superceedes any UK law

Well I hope you can wait until the European Court hear your case because here in the UK it'll be heard by UK judges interpreting the case according to UK laws. If they rule against you then you can to the European Court, but you'll be spending a lot of time and a lot of money waiting for that ruling.

[I-said_no]

As we speak, Ba have made contact with my sister by email who was a 9 month temp, to see if see would like to come back. If that is the case the myth about forced redundancies is just that a myth.

[am i bothered]

SOSR is not really a threat in this case. If no one agrees to the new contract then its impossible to impose. You cant recruit ten thousand people train, security check etc. Logistically its impossible. So the SOSR scare is not very credible.

[wobble2plank]

am I bothered,

You fail to grasp the singularly most important fact pertaining to the issue of new contracts.

If you fail to sign the new contract and allow your old contract to expire as a result you will be deemed to have resigned.

Your rather banal,

If no one agrees to the new contract then its impossible to impose.

Doesn't stand up in that case. There will be many who will take the new contract, LGW staff to cover the training time and the minimum requirement, as laid down by the CAA, of 2 days to emergency train replacement crew.

Your choice, but, if I were a betting man, I wouldn't bet on BASSA winning.

[Carnage Matey!]

I think what people are trying to point out is that there's not a hope in hell of getting that kind of solidarity. 10000 refuseniks? I doubt you'd even get 5000 at first, and by the time the reality of that becomes clear you'll be down to far fewer. Few are going to risk their jobs at the moment. As for the temp contractors getting emails, it's an irrelevance. Those emails have been going out periodically for months now. Getting one now has no significance.

[am i bothered]

Oh please. Do u think LGW can cover both fleets when LHR is ten times the size??

Ridiculous. If its deemed that everyone has resigned the operation would grind to a halt. Not that it struggles at the best of times.

This maybe easy to apply in an office but this is not the case here.]

If this was a simple as some wish to dream ask yoursevles why has it not been done ages ago?

[flibbertyjibbet]

As we speak, Ba have made contact with my sister by email who was a 9 month temp, to see if see would like to come back. If that is the case the myth about forced redundancies is just that a myth.Funnily, I see that more as an attempt to organise strike-breakers. I'm not sure I'd take it as a positive!

[Freddielaker]

There are a lot of posts here which are constrained within 'the box'.

But think outside it. If a strike is called then the operation can be crewed at 1 crew member per 50 pax; forget FCOs, they could be instantly amended by an OMN. Forget any in-flight service, not a problem, we kept going during the GG strike. BA will keep going, but who can hold out longest? I know who my money is on

[TheKabaka]

From memory the MOA (agreements between BA and it's employees) can be terminated with (I think) 90 days notice by either side.

The agreements can be broken at any time, yes it may cause industrial unrest but do not believe they are unbreakable.

[overstress]

Any contract in the UK can be varied with 90 days notice. If you turn up to work after that, you are deemed to have accepted the new agreement.

If you fail to turn up you can be sacked.

[T5 Mole]

Re new hires:

I have seen many businesses that have been permitted to hire immediately following a period of redundancies. There is no compulsion to maintain a hiring ban if no compulsory redundancies take place; SOSR are not compulsory redundancies as such.

SOSR Case Studies:

I-resign.com - Community - Dismissal for SOSR - Some Other Substatial Reason (http://www.i-resign.com/UK/discussion/new_topic.asp?t=7981)
Unfair Dismissal - Some Other Substantial Reason: Employment Law: Michelmores Solicitors (http://employment.michelmores.com/pages/prev_bulletins_detail.asp?ID=71)

[HiFlyer14]

The writing is very clearly on the wall now.

1. The VR applicants will know by next Monday if they are successful. Their leave, to be taken before they go, has already been put in the system for October. So they WILL be going.

2. Ex-temps are being contacted as we speak. Trainers are claiming training is scheduled for October. So they will be ready for 1 Nov. Oh. Could that be the day the new agreements will be imposed?

And yet the thing worrying BASSA at the moment is that IFCE are planning a new EF training course for Club Europe. :ugh:

Even the head banging smilie doesn't quite sum up the sick feeling that all of this brings to my stomach.:yuk:

How does one go about suing a Union for misrepresentation?

[Carnage Matey!]

Ridiculous. If its deemed that everyone has resigned the operation would grind to a halt. Not that it struggles at the best of times.

You are labouring under the delusion that everyone will refuse to sign. They won't. There are 3700 taking part time who will have that cancelled if they don't sign. There are full times who would rather keep a job than risk the sack. There are those who simply can't be bothered with a strike. There are those who do not understand what a strike would involve. There are those who do whats best for them and not BASSA (how many volunteered for Willing to Work against union instructions?). You'd be lucky to get even half of the crew to refuse to sign, and the rest will crumble when they realise they could be out of a job, and are relying on nothing more than the word of colleagues that they won't sign too.

This maybe easy to apply in an office but this is not the case here.

Offices generally aren't grossly overmanned. BA is carrying 30-50% more crew than legally required on most flights. Strip that out and you can lose a whole lot of crew and still keep flying. Cabin service will resume when numbers permit. Apparently Air France only use the legal minimum number of SEP qualified crew on an aircraft and the rest are their for service. How fast do you think they could train crew to do service only?

If this was a simple as some wish to dream ask yoursevles why has it not been done ages ago?

Because Eddington and Ayling didn't have the balls to do it. Thats the only reason it wasn't done.

[FlexSRS]

There was a pro-BASSA post that was removed that was basically saying that the 3700 crew wanting part time would still go on strike as they wouldn't accept part time 'at any cost', basically saying that the cost to them would outweigh the advantages of going part time.

Sadly I think you are wrong. If the BA proposal goes ahead, the 'cost' to those wanting part-time is just that they might have to work a bit harder on the occasional days they pitch up to work. Sure, they might not get their two local nights in Glasgow after being strong-armed by BASSA during disruption, but by their very nature, part-timers want more time at home, and less time in a hotel by a motorway flyover in Glasgow. The only people pushing for a financial cost are BASSA, who offered a paycut that not only the vast majority of CC didn't want, BA themselves didn't even want! Good one.

Oh, and how kind of BASSA to offer an increment freeze. (considering that allegedly most of the BASSA reps are on the top scale anyway, so an increment freeze doesn't matter to them!)

So, what you have to ask yourself is, will crew who are desperate for part-time, and would have seen no way of getting it for 10-15yrs unless they have kids, turn down such a fantastic lifestyle opportunity, when all they have to 'give' in return is to work a little bit harder, and maybe not have 2 local nights? I predict that you would be trampled in the stampede!

[Ancient Observer]

Two points of clarity.
In the UK an employer can make any number of people redundant and recruit any number of people whenever they want. There is no legal time-block between redundancies and hiring. Whoever said there was is wrong.
There are issues in so doing - the individual could lose the tax-free element of any lump sum, and other minor issues, but that's it.

What happens thereafter - in terms of Tribunals, "fairness" and so on, is simply a part of the employer "clearing up" afterwards. The legal view of "fairness" is often not the common sense view!!

As a matter of policy, Unite do not "agree" the criteria for selection for redundancy. They may/may not be more or less vociferous if they are consulted about them, and do not disagree with them, but they do not "agree" them.

Could we please have a comment from a Bassa rep. about their "duty of care" to their members?

[deeceethree]

Could we please have a comment from a Bassa rep. about their "duty of care" to their members?You won't get it, because there is obviously no such thing where BASSA is concerned.

[FlexSRS]

Could we please have a comment from a Bassa rep. about their "duty of care" to their members?

You'll be lucky! General opinion amongst the troops is that they are more concerned about retaining their au-pairs and commuting to their tax-friendly sunny getaways and thinking about the benefits of Val d'Isere vs St. Moritz for the winter hols. You know, the kind of thing that the majority of main crew worry about....

I don't think there has been one satisfactory answer to any of the very real and relevant questions that have been asked by crew on this thread (or over on CF/BF) All you will get is some inane 'Bassa 100%' remark, or something saying 'well, what about the price fixing, and the oil price, and terminal 5'

Seeing as though we're not going to get a proper response from them, would anyone else care to answer how many cabin crew would be in surplus as a result of the hulls being stood down over the winter? I'm not sure of the crewing levels used on WW.

'Carnage Matey!', you seem like someone who would be able to calculate it for us? Or have a ballpark figure at least?

[Glamgirl]

Figures....

My math skills aren't the best, but I know that most 747's have 15 cc each, sometimes 16, depending on route/config.

The 757s have a crewing level of between 5 and 7 depending on route/flight time/departure time

I think these are the only two aircraft types that are being put to sleep for the winter.

Maybe someone else could do the calculations?

Gg

[TopBunk]

Glam

I would suggest that Longhaul aircraft require about 8-9 crews per aircraft and shorthaul about 4-5 crews.

Using your figures 15x8 (or 9) crews = 120 (135) cabin crew per 747 stood down and say 6x4.5 = 26 cabin crew per 757 stood down.

What is it? 8 747's and 6 757's? If so about 1000 longhaul cabin crew and about 150 shorthaul cabin crew. Note - this assumes the same number of crew on board going forward. The numbers in surplus increases if the number on-board decrease.

Just ballpark numbers ....

[Litebulbs]

Now using these figures show where BA are taking a gamble. Just say 1200, but the actual head count is 2000 to go. I would imagine that they would be justified in reducing head count, due to the work not being there. But to then use SOSR to justify reducing the complement at the same time is pushing reasonableness.

As I said earlier, I cannot find both redundancy and SOSR used at the same time. If you then look at VR, then OK the head count will come down, but you still have the existing agreements on crew levels, so a 90 day notice on existing contracts will have to be served. You serve notice on a contract, then you are not using SOSR, therefore you leave yourself open to 1000's of unfair dismissal claims.

[deeceethree]

.... therefore you leave yourself open to 1000's of unfair dismissal claims.Which, if they occur, will take months or maybe even years to go through tribunals and/or courts. And during this time the potential respondents don't have the job or money to follow them up. BA, has both the the time and the money to drag the process out. And even if BA loses, it is a relatively cheap way of getting rid of unwanted personnel ......

I must admit I find the number a bit high, but very recently spoke to a 747 person who seemed to think that as many as 22 (!) 747-400 hulls would be parked up before the forthcoming winter season was over! 22? Really as many as that? Or is he/she mixing up other fleet types in there as well?

[wobble2plank]

As I said earlier, I cannot find both redundancy and SOSR used at the same time.

Litebulbs, why do you feel that there has to have been a precedent set? The details of the previous uses of SOSR pertain only to those who have their contracts renewed. Obviously those to whom SOSR pertains are those who remain. The company just needs to prove that the circumstances in which the action was taken were such that the future trading would have been either badly affected or curtailed. Something I think, in the current circumstances, we can all agree on is that aviation finds itself the victim of a unique set of circumstances. There is no reason why any company cannot reduce its workforce and then apply contractual change.

If we were all to live with the mantra of 'it's never been done before it can't be done!' then there would be no aviation industry in the first place!

[nuigini]

I would suggest that Longhaul aircraft require about 8-9 crews per aircraft and shorthaul about 4-5 crews.



SEP requirement?

747 requires 12 crew (11 can be carried if no pax on upper deck).
767 requires 6 crew (if 6 crew carried pax number cannot exceed 251, otherwise 7 crew, which won't happen at BA since 767 EF is 247 pax and 767 WW is 199 pax).
777 requires 8 crew (ER requires 9 crew).

[Litebulbs]

Wobble,

Very true, as every case will be tested on its merits.

[T5 Mole]

From the earlier link, Litebulbs:

"SOSR did not have to be a reason that the tribunal considered to be sound, merely one that the employer considered (on reasonable grounds) to be sound...All the employer had to do, when establishing SOSR for dismissal, was provide evidence supporting a genuinely held belief that it had a substantial reason which was not ‘whimsical or capricious’."

It may be pushing reasonableness, but I would be hesitant to dismiss the possibility that BA would use SOSR both for reduction in numbers due to planes parked, and reduction in complements on flights as well. It would seem from the legislation and case law in place, that they can do as they please if the industry is in dire straits, the company is losing cash, and the competition use minimum crew complements as well.

On that assumption, the minimum legal crew complement requirements for the airline as a whole (excluding parked aircraft) are shockingly low compared to the present manpower, and BASSA seem to have left the company in the position that it is now free to do as it pleases "for its own survival".

The least they could then do is start a fair rostering system, which would in essence reduce "sickness" markedly, as more get what they want, when they want it.

[TopBunk]

Nuigini

I think you need to understand what I said:rolleyes:

I said that 1 B747 requires 8-9 crews, not 8-9 people. ie 8-9 x the number of people comprising a crew. In other words, to fly one B747 you need 8-9 complete crews.

Currently, a crew comprises generally 15 (occasionally 16) cabin crew plus a flight crew of 2,3 or 4 (averaging probably 2.8). So for flight crew, a reduction of 8 aircraft would require 8x2.8 or about 22 fewer pilots (8 captains and 16 co-pilots, roughly), if you wish to compare.

Maybe your maths come from the BASSA school of logic, ie pure fantasy:ugh:

[arem]

I think your maths are a bit out for your FC numbers - The 744 needs about 10 Crews ie 20 pilots per hull - a reduction of 8 hulls would mean a reduction of 80 pilots - the 10 crews allowing for a mix of various long range ops.

[TckVs]

Topbunk,good maths.....


keep taking those tablets....

[Carnage Matey!]

I would say TopBunks numbers are pretty accurate given the information thats widely available within BA. Perhaps the naysayers would like to explain why he's wrong and they are right?

[Fargoo]

I think TopBunks number are accurate if you don't look at the bigger picture.

New aircraft slip in as old ones are stood down and although less staff will be needed overall I think it's too simplistic a view to just take the number of aircraft stood down permanently or over winter and multiply by the number of crew required.

You really need to calculate the number of crew also needed to fly the new aircraft we have just bought and those that are coming along.

More complicated than it first seems :ok:

[Carnage Matey!]

4 777s coming along (and we were already one down). What else is in the pipeline apart from the odd A320?

[wobble2plank]

Fargoo,

Obviously you have insight into the new orders not yet deferred no?

There are only a few new (3 more I believe after G-YMMM's replacement) 777 aircraft coming this year and nothing for next year at all. The company is desperately trying to delay the delivery of the 380 and the 787 delay is a 'god send' in disguise.

Add to that that the lead in time for training CC and FC are totally different. Whilst the training time for FC on a new aircraft type can comprise of months the same cannot be said for the CC who can be familiarised with the 'standard' cabin equipment and the 'standard' Airbus/Boeing door as the company see fit.

Why do we need the crews now when the aircraft are, at least, 18 months away?

[deeceethree]

I was under the impression that BA's forthcoming 777s consisted of:

4 x 777-200 for 2009
6 x 777-300 starting 2010
plus
5 x leased 777-200 as interim replacement for the delayed 787, confirmed verbally by a Boeing rep in Seattle in August!

(The above are additions to 42 extant 777-200s already in the fleet.)

[The Blu Riband]

I suspect Nuigini was pointing out that BA can reduce its numbers much further by reducing crew numbers to min req'd.

He has always taken the intelligent and pragmatic approach.
So, a bit snappy TopBunk. Didn't deserve a condescending.............:ugh:

[TopBunk]

arem

Mea culpa! Yes I got the FC numbers wrong - I forgot to multiply by the number of aircraft leaving the fleet!

Re the ratio of B747 captains:co-pilots, the establishment for this month shows about a 1:1.5 ratio, ie 3 co-pilots for every 2 captains, not 1:1 as you suggested.

Another way of looking at it, 940 pilots on the fleet, lose 10% of the fleet = 94 pilots, lose 15% approx 140 pilots.

Of course, this can only be an approximation, as the real numbers will be affected by the managment and training establishment requirements and the actual change to the destinations flown to. Furthermore, with 55 aircraft on the fleet (plus 2 stooddown at CWL), BA didn't fly 55 lines of aircraft work, probably nearer 51 (with 4 as spares/under check), and probably this 51 lines has reduced to 47 or so already. ie the work reduction has to an extent already been factored into the pilot establishment, so physically removing the additional airframes may well not have as large an effect as at first appears.

[overstress]

The other way to look at cabin crew numbers is to start at the desired complement, (crews per aircraft and number on each crew), multiply by the (overall reduced) numbers of aircraft and subtract this from the number we have now.

The answer will be a big number.

[CFC]

Just a reminder as to the title of this thread:

British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations

[FlexSRS]

Just a reminder as to the title of this thread:

British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations

All this is very relevant!

By looking at how one group are dealing with a near identical situation, you can learn a lot about your own situation.

Take the manpower surplus that will/has resulted from hulls being stood down. The pilot community can immediately see why this surplus has come about, and have been aware that it is on the way for nearly a year.

BALPA have kept the pilots fully informed, and there is a very good understanding amongst the community of why there is a problem, how big it is, how long it will last and the options we have for dealing with it. There is a whole section of the BALPA forum dedicated to it, with 16 different discussion threads, with reps explaining all the numbers and people suggesting different solutions, asking questions, getting answers from reps and thinking around the problem.

Newsletters are published explaining the situation and the legal aspects, time frames and so on.

Reps are engaging with BA to find a mutually acceptable solution to the surplus, the pilot community is coming together to find a way to protect the jobs of the 100 or so in surplus so they don't find themselves on the dole, it may be we all take some unpaid leave, or we all go 97% part time for 97% pay, that will be decided by consulting the members

Now, my point;

Those of you who are cabin crew, (not reps or foaming at the mouth militants), compare this to how you have been treated by BASSA? Do you feel like you have been properly informed? Do you know the legal ramifications? Do you understand precisely how the numbers of crew in surplus have come from? Have you been consulted as to whether you would like to collectively save people from the dole or just let BA CR them if it comes to that? Do you feel that your reps are engaging with BA as best they can before something is imposed? Do you trust them with your livelihood?

There is a large and growing number of crew that are slowly beginning to realise that they have badly let down. The "no no no/foot stomp/hissy fit" has worked very well in the past, there is no doubt, (unless you work(ed) at LGW/GLA/BHX or are on a new contract, in which case it didn't really work), but that method just isn't going to cut it this time.

It's time to tell BASSA to start listening to you, and stop trying to tell you what to think, you're not all sheep.

Good luck.

[Fargoo]

Fargoo,

Obviously you have insight into the new orders not yet deferred no?

There are only a few new (3 more I believe after G-YMMM's replacement) 777 aircraft coming this year and nothing for next year at all.

Perhaps my ear is to the ground a little more than yours. Either way I have no stake in this dispute just thought I'd mention that the numbers game is never as simple as it first seems.

I think really the only true way to calculate the numbers is to compare overall fleet size before and after the new deliveries and stand downs.

Standing down the 757 fleet for example was planned a long time ago and A320's have been purchased to replace them (these are already with us).
Some of the stood down 747s have been replaced with the new 777s with more 777s coming next year.

As an outsider to this dispute I see clearly why some CC may feel the flight crew members on this board are trying to spin the figures as much as BASSA.

As I said, it's not as simple as taking the number of stood down/retired aircraft and multiplying by x amount of crew. I'm sure BA CC management would love if it was.

:ok:

[Ancient Observer]

Flex....
thanks for that post. The BA/Balpa debate is much more what I would expect, having experienced too many rundowns in my time.
In your opinion, (OR CM), does that show that BA are capable of entering such discussions, and Bassa are not? .........Or is it simply that BA put better staff on to Balpa's case? (Having met some of the senior flight Ruperts in BA, I don't suppose it's better managers).
Are BA CC still in Marketting, or are they in Ops?

[Adi54321]

Watching a financial segment on CNN at the weekend about the next financial bubble set to burst. Apparently there are lots of 3 and 5 year notes about to fall due in respect to the commercail real estate market.

Due to recession and businesses not wanting to move into a new wharehouse/office/strip mall a lot of developers about to default on their mortgages. The losses to banks forcast to possibly run to trillions not billions this time.

Like I didn't have enough to worry about. I am sure that there are crew that still think temporary change is all that is required. It might be that BA are too late to enact SOSR before the bubble bursts. All this protracted "negotiation" and failing to agree might have left us up the creek with no paddle or boat and the creditors asking for our life jacket !

[nuigini]

Do you feel like you have been properly informed? Do you know the legal ramifications? Do you understand precisely how the numbers of crew in surplus have come from? Have you been consulted as to whether you would like to collectively save people from the dole or just let BA CR them if it comes to that? Do you feel that your reps are engaging with BA as best they can before something is imposed? Do you trust them with your livelihood?

Simple answer: no!

Unfortunately not. I would actually prefer if they wrote anything sensibly in their newsletters instead of the usual trashing the management to every extent.

[jackcat]

Acas - Advice leaflet - Varying a contract of employment (http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=816)

[Ancient Observer]

Thanks for that link. Here's a cut and paste of an important part.

Is there an alternative method of making contractual changes
if agreement on a variation cannot be reached?
• Yes. If, after negotiation, agreement on a variation of contract has proved
to be impossible, an employer can terminate the original contract, with
proper notice, and offer a new contract to the employee, including the
revised terms. There will be no breach of contract as a result of taking
such action. If the employee accepts the new contract, continuity is
preserved.
• Proper notice will be as specified (or implied) in the employee’s contract,
or the minimum statutory notice period, whichever is the longer.
• Under the law the termination will be regarded as a dismissal and it will be
open to all eligible employees to claim unfair dismissal before an
employment tribunal – whether they refuse to accept the new contract
and leave, or are dismissed under the old contract and re-engaged.

[APYu]

So the acas documents covers changes in contracts, there will be other relevant documentation covering changes to agreements. Many of the changes being discussed are probably not contractual e.g. 2 nights in LA, CSD not performing a function within the service routine, x days off after a long haul. These will be agreements rather than contractual details.
The process for changing agreements is probably in your union recognition agreement.

[overstress]

APYu, it depends what the contract says, if it says the MOA can be varied then so be it.

[Andyismyname]

Looking at the Amicus ******* page, I am intrigued by the following "Joint NSP currently taking place regarding Pay, Redeployment and Careerlink. Update ASAP".

This is the first time that I can recall during this process that there has been mention of either "redeployment" or "Careerlink".

[stormin norman]

Insiders say the BA redeployment scheme is to radically change for those already on it and those about to enter it.

Does any other company have such a scheme ?

[Ancient Observer]

Stormin,
Lots of companies outside Aviation have such "redeployment" schemes. If you look where the BA HRD/Chief People Person, (!) has been in the last few years - BAe and Post Office, I imagine that BA will look to his experience in those places. However, in those places at least the employer and the TUs talked to each other!! If the TUs are on the ball, and talking effectively to the employer, they can influence all these stages.
First step is defining what the new org. needs, then selecting existing staff in to that (presumably reduced) new org. Some one somewhere in BA will have figured this out, at least in outline. Then you have two main groups - those with a job in the new org., and those without.
Some of those without will already have indicated a wish to either take early retirement, or to be made redundant. They will be allowed to go. Those with a job are not normally allowed to go at this stage as it's too expensive.
For those without, first thing is to look for redeployment opportunities within. Whilst BT have been good at this, the Post Office were not.........they just moved people in to the external redeployment pool. Then "creative external redeployment" comes in. Lots of ways of doing this, but it can be expensive. Most Co.s try the "voluntary" route first, but often with short timescales before they move to the involuntary route. That's when "scoring" comes in to play - things like performance, absence, service time and so on.

Two things to bear in mind. The individual often does not believe that they will personally be impacted until they receive the dismissal letter. All the comms in the world doesn't change this.
Secondly, the "Iron Law of Fantasy" comes in to play. (Doesn't it, PK?). No matter what you've said as an employer, each individual will fantasise about what is going to happen. Those fantasies are normally negative about something horrible (in work/employment terms, not in safety terms), happening to them. Rumours rule!...........and that'll continue for some time.

[Da Dog]

I see BASSA remain as confused as ever:rolleyes::rolleyes:

Playing party politics with members lives is just petty and immature, but regrettably predictable :(:(

[Glamgirl]

Believe it or not, some B reps are starting to doubt the union and its motives...

What's the latest you've got, Da Dog?

Gg

[Carnage Matey!]

A little bird told me the BASSA reps tried to go off on an anti-BALPA rant at the NSP talks at Cranebank and the rest of the union reps told them to put a sock in it. It also turns out that the other groups reps are far from happy about Unite using their members as bargaining chips to help the cabin crew out. So much for the united front!

[Da Dog]

Well after Walsh and Woodlys fireside chat, both side were to go away and find some common ground on how they could move forwards. All this is behind the scene and well away from "official negotiations" .

A date of the 14th September was agreed by Unite for talks to resume, except that............................ BASSA resented being "told" when to start negotiating so ignored the deadline right up until yesterday, insisting that they had never agreed to this.

Further at least one of the high ranking BASSA reps thinks its a good idea to prolong this as it puts more pressure on BA when it comes to the publishing of the October rosters:rolleyes::rolleyes: it will according to them "wind the crew into a frenzy" apparently.

[overstress]

Further at least one of the high ranking BASSA reps thinks its a good idea to prolong this as it puts more pressure on BA

More likely to wind up a certain Irish gentleman and his financial advisor. I wonder who thinks that's a good idea in the current climate?

[The Blu Riband]

Maybe the Bassa chairperson is once again otherwise engaged on personal business for a few weeks.
Part time old contract csd who lives on another continent.

But has her finger on the pulse, and the crew's best interests at heart -- honestly. :}

[stormin norman]

'csd who lives on another continent'

And in another world by the sound of things.

[Glamgirl]

The latest from the madness that is Bassa:

BASSA reps turned up today for our monthly “manpower” meeting only to discover at short notice it had been cancelled. At the informal meeting which than followed, BA informed us they had no balances and currently no plan for the winter programme. So, in a nutshell, they knew as much as us, and therefore could see no point in a formal minuted meeting. This is incredibly frustrating for all crew who have spent the last 12 months on tenterhooks wondering just what the future holds.
The manpower meeting has always been a proper decision making group, but it seems currently, any decisions being made regarding headcount etc, are being decided by the " powers that be " in IFCE, without prior consultation to the people who normally front up this dept. A classic example of the “left hand doesn’t know what the right hand is doing” happened just after our informal meeting ended ,when it was discovered a “comm.” had gone out to all crew from Bill Francis re: the voluntary severance.
As most of you will have seen from this “comm.”, only a small number of crew will be allowed to go on the previously promised date of 31st Oct. These seem to be only in the areas where they exhausted the 1st part time lists - not the ad-hoc lists, which followed, so some CSDs across fleets, and some PSRs on WW. The rest of you who wish to go are now “on hold”.
We are still scheduled to meet BA on the 21st September. Reading Bill Francis’s latest ESS message, he seems to think that meeting will be “a stroll in the park”. Twice he mentions discussion, and once consultation, but strangely enough not negotiation! Remember, IFCE are still championing removing over 2000 of the crew community, so to take ONE SIXTH of your workforce away still means drastic changes, as there are no other simple answers. They will either have to drastically cut the flying programme (unlikely), recruit 1000s of new crew, or those left behind have to work harder - less days off, less leave, less rest down route etc, etc. Therefore any talks with BA will hardly be the stroll in the park Bill Francis is pining his hopes on.
To be brutally frank (and we make no apologies) BA and Bill Francis are all over the place - they haven’t a clue, and they can’t even get the date of the meetings right, let alone sensible workable solutions. It is an utter shambolic mess and one, which BA should be ashamed of, especially as they hold - in their palms - the hopes, aspirations and livelihoods of thousands of their cabin crew employees.
Those of you, who hoped to leave, and now have your life on hold, have our sympathies. Perhaps BA would have been better off achieving an agreed settlement with the TUs and, on the basis of that, deciding how many crew could leave and have part time, instead of rash promises, now at best, on hold.
The “smash and grab” raid on crews’ terms and conditions has backfired spectacularly - the business is turning around, the recession is in decline and all the devious plans hatched by the most unscrupulous management in a generation are unravelling with every day.
Hold firm and stay strong, we feel now the wind is behind us and before long everything BA have been plotting and scheming will be exposed as nothing more than an opportunistic scam.
More news, will follow next week, we assume but don’t hold your breath judging by the current disarray within Bill Francis’s IFCE “empire”.



My bolds, due to finding those statements quite amusing. A very mature way of informing their members - not. It amuses me that Bassa hasn't realised that the flying programme is being reduced for the winter (aircraft being mothballed), and think that giving VR to 2000 crew means that the company will have to recruit "1000's of new crews". :rolleyes:

Brace brace for incoming...:ouch::suspect:

Gg

[APYu]

Why are they surprised that decisions are being made by 'the powers that be'. Arent those people the ones employed to make decisions, having listened to all relevant view points?

[Carnage Matey!]

No, they believe BASSA should make the decisions. Thats why the mindset of "our offer was very reasonable, why should we give them more" prevails.

[wobble2plank]

The “smash and grab” raid on crews’ terms and conditions has backfired spectacularly - the business is turning around, the recession is in decline and all the devious plans hatched by the most unscrupulous management in a generation are unravelling with every day.

Love this one. BASSA at the forefront of the economic recovery. I sometimes really do wonder what colour the sky is in BASSA land?

Even the economists are totally undecided as to whether or not the recession will kick back in again over the winter. Another 10% is still expected to be wiped off house prices. Airlines have had a dismal summer with most returning little, no or negative profits. This during the summer where most airlines bolster their coffers in order to push through the normal bleak winter period. Business turning around? Not with the yield that most passengers are bringing with them. Possibly due to all those other departments who realised, over a year ago, that cost savings were required and implemented them.

As to the 'smash and grab' raid, since when has that really had anything to do with the recession. BA have been after CC alignment since the early 1990's when it became apparent that their T's & C's were diverging from the industrial standard at an alarming rate! It has always been that the BA management didn't have the balls to actually push it through.

most unscrupulous management in a generation
BASSA speak for 'Damn, they're not going to back down and run away at our foot stamping this time are they!'

:}

[midman]

So what are Bassa's plans to deal with the reduction in capacity this winter? They seem to be up in arms about the proposed 2000 MPE reduction, suggesting that BA might have to recruit to fill these positions "They will either have to drastically cut the flying programme (unlikely), recruit 1000s of new crew...."

Where do they get that idea from?

Has anyone told them that 16 aircraft, 747s and 767s are being stood down? The company is shrinking to minimise losses, and cut manpower costs proportionately. Approximately 200 pilots are expected to leave the business, and yet Bassa seem to feel they should be unaffected by these capacity reductions.

Can anyone find out what Bassa's suggestions are to deal with the excess of manpower in IFCE? I've seen none so far.

[Glamgirl]

Also, plenty (if not all) of temporary contract crew have been told they're no longer required as of 31st October, no matter how long their contract was for.....

Gg

[legandawing]

Quite true, gg all of the temporary crew have had a group Email sent to them, saying that by the end of October their fixed term contracts will be ended prematurely. However in the background over 200 ex temporary crew are still being actively chased for references!
Typical that BASSA failed to mention anything about temperate crew in their latest offering.. Yet they are keen to take our money from us!
It just makes you wonder what British Airways have up their sleeves given original number of 2000 crew, the half published by roster, the number of crew they are still actively reference checking and the fact that in light of their new commercial they are still looking to reduce the number of aircraft for the winter period.
While I will be sad to leave British Airways in October, I hope that there is some grand plan going on in the background so that I can return on the new contract. To be honest even the proposed contract by Bill Francis, is much better than any other contract currently offered within the United Kingdom!
I certainly do not trust BASSA, yet I do believe that BA have something up their sleeve... Here's hoping:confused:

[mandyconn]

You don't trust BASSA but you trust BA? :\

[jetset lady]

It's not about trusting anyone. It's about researching all the facts, from as many different sources as you can find, for yourself.

[Desertia]

I nearly let a bit of wee out when I read this latest BASSA gem!:

"The “smash and grab” raid on crews’ terms and conditions has backfired spectacularly - the business is turning around, the recession is in decline and all the devious plans hatched by the most unscrupulous management in a generation are unravelling with every day."

In response to this ludicrous exaggeration from the Dave Spart-style BASSA leaders, I wonder if someone could actually cross-post these up-to-date figures into one of their inner domains of utter tripe, so at least their members know they are talking out of their, er ,ears:

"GENEVA: World airlines face losses of $27.8 billion for 2008 and 2009 as the global economic downturn takes a heavier toll than the September 11 attacks, industry association IATA warned yesterday.

"That is larger than the losses of $24.3bn the industry lost in 2001 and 2002 after the attacks of September 11," said International Air Transport Association head Giovanni Bisignani.

As the economic crisis put the brakes on travel, losses booked by airlines around the world reached $16.8bn last year. IATA raised its loss forecast for this year to $11bn from the $9bn forecast earlier while a $3.8bn deficit was predicted for next year.

"The outlook for 2010 is for more widespread, but still weak, economic growth ... Losses will diminish but a recovery to net profit looks unlikely until 2011," IATA said.

Bisignani said that passenger volumes are expected to improve, showing a decline of four per cent for the year, up from a June forecast for a fall of 8pc.

"Unfortunately, these better volumes have a limited impact on the bottomline ... the reason is that the yield has fallen dramatically," he said.

"Prices of fuel are increasing in anticipation of the recovery that we do not see in our business," said Bisignani.

"Even with better volumes, we don't see industry revenues returning to 2008 levels until 2012-2013," he said, pointing out that following the September 11 attacks, it took 3.5 years to recover lost revenues.

European carriers are expected to be worst hit this year, with losses of $3.8b, twice as much as the $1.8bn initially predicted as long-haul markets are hit badly. North American carriers should lose $2.6bn, more than twice the earlier estimate of $1bn, said IATA.

Middle Eastern and African airlines are each expected to lose $500 million while Latin American carriers should break even. Asian-Pacific airlines should post losses of $3.6bn, slightly up from the previous forecast of $3.3bn. "

[wobble2plank]

From IATA. An organisation that obviously knows less than BASSA about the state of the global aviation community.

IATA increases airline losses forecast to £11bn

Continuing weakness in demand, pressure on yields and rising fuel prices will lead the world's airlines to lose $11bn in 2009.

That's the stark warning from the International Air Transport Association (IATA) in its latest global financial forecast, which blames the worsening losses – up $2bn on their previous forecast – on rising oil prices and exceptionally weak yields.

Passenger yields are expected to fall 12 per cent over the year, led by a 20 per cent fall in premium demand, while cargo yields are expected to fall 15 per cent.

IATA also predicts industry revenue will be down $80bn or 15 per cent by the end of the year and revenues may not return to 2008 levels until 1212.

Losses are expected to continue into 2010 to the tune of $3.8bn.

Giovanni Bisignani, IATA’s director general and CEO, said: “This is not a short-term shock. $80bn will disappear from the industry’s top line. That 15 per cent of lost revenue will take years to recover.

“Conserving cash, careful capacity management and cutting costs are the keys to survival. The global economic storm may be abating, but airlines have not yet found safe harbour. The crisis continues.”

But then yield and the concept of yield has never figured in BASSA land. According to BASSA if the airline has bums on seats then they must be raking it in. The spin placed upon the current situation is almost as laughable as their 'Disruption agreement' cost saving figures. Not quite though.

2010 will be a very, very difficult year. Without the reduction in capacity, grounding empty aircraft, phasing out of older, inefficient airframes and the absolute necessity to reduce costs many airlines will not see the year out.

Can someone also clarify;

they haven’t a clue, and they can’t even get the date of the meetings right, let alone sensible workable solutions

Who are they talking about again? I am certain that this sentence was used about BASSA a while back. Perhaps the unwillingness of BA to meet on the 14th had something to do with not allowing BASSA/UNITE something to go tub thumping with to the Union meetings in Liverpool with? Surely not!

[Bucking Bronco]

Approx 200 CSDs and PSRs have been given VR without any concessions from BASSA.
I'd say that's 1-0 to BASSA at the moment.

Compare that with what BALPA had to give up for 78 VRs - changes to bidline which will be with us permanently, working harder with less pilots.

[wobble2plank]

Changes to Bidline? What was requested was simply a productivity increase and an amendment to report times that were under review anyway since the move to T5. Those only added an extra hour a week in average. The monetary changes were to provide the savings required of each department.

That the company can let a bunch of CSD's and Pursers go without concession just proves the companies point about over manning whereas within the flight ops department the manning levels were obviously correct at the time the VR was made.

Oddly enough, if I were in the position of having to save money I would want to get rid of the top level, most expensive first.

Just a thought.

[Carnage Matey!]

The big difference in the deals is that BALPAs VR is done and dusted as part of the business plan talks. I know what it's going to cost me. BASSA have got 140 people VR'ed with no real idea of what price they will have to pay for it when the final deal is hammered out. Do you think BASSA are going to walk away from the present business plan without making any sacrifices?

[APYu]

So still another 1800 to go from somewhere?

[Carnage Matey!]

Latest from the mad house:

BA - A COMPANY IN CRISIS!
Sep 16th, 2009 by admin


BA’s announcement on VR earlier this week, which left hundreds of cabin crew in limbo while simultaneously exposing frightening inadequacies in their “one step forward, two step back” management and “back of a fag packet” planning, is a shocking indication of just how much this once proud airline of ours is in turmoil.

We now have a moribund company caught frozen between the tail lights of a rapidly disappearing recession and the morally bankrupt headlights that have got stuck on full beam.

Make no mistake it is not BA that is in financial crisis but a discredited management that knows not which way to turn. Of course the blame must lie at the top. It was Willie Walsh who started the whole ball rolling using the same template he wielded while decimating Aer Lingus. He does not care one fig about BA’s future, he knows he will not be part of it, instead he lives for today and every decision is about cutting costs now and to hell what the company will look like in 5 years time. Well, he might not care where BA will be in 5 years but we do.

All respected analysts say that for blue chip companies such as British Airways to survive during recessions, they must continue to invest in their brand (especially if it involves customer service) because it is that, which will get them through the hard times. BA, under the governance of Walsh, have done the complete opposite because they have attacked the very core of what made them global aviation leaders in the first place. Front line ground staff and cabin crew have been the target of a full-on assault and is it little wonder morale has hit rock bottom and many are now saying they would sooner see the company go under than be forced to accept the draconian proposed new terms and conditions. What sort of company is it that ignores common sense and behaves in such a manner that alienates its front line customer service staff in such a fashion?

Even in (what we then thought were) the bad old days of Lord King, Sir Colin Marshall, Robert Ayling, Martyn Bridger, Joy Hordern etc etc we all had some sort of grudging respect for our leadership, believing they had the best interests of BA at heart, but today the chilling truth is no one has any faith in the powers that be. Self-interest and self-preservation are the only gods they have.

Just look at the two men Walsh employed to front up his industrial relations less than 12 months ago. Tony McCarthy and James Ferran were plucked from the evolving and continuing disaster that is the Royal Mail (bet their CVs make no mention of that mess they helped create there) and given the task of dismantling an organisation that once, with some justification, laid claim to be the world’s favourite airline. Before they sharpened their axes did either man stop and wonder, what actually made BA the “world’s favourite airline”?

Neither man has a clue about the airline industry and less so the culture - as far as we know neither has set foot on a BA a/c in the last 12 months - indeed it has sometimes been frightening to listen to them attempt to negotiate on something they are utterly clueless about. Ferran wouldn’t know what MBT or 6 and 3 was if they fell on his head, while McCarthy is far better suited to subterfuge and dirty tricks - two tactics he honed and perfected at his previous work place. In short - and as a consequence - these whole negotiations have been one long farce. If you doubt us just ask ACAS.

Bill Francis, a man with a vague and distant background in cabin services, was also drafted in to front up IFCE but in reality he was just McCarthy and Ferran’s stooge. Approachable and presentable he has not been given any real power of his own. Many times BASSA offered to meet him on a one to one basis to see if we could find common ground but he never had the confidence to accept. Hands tied, increasingly he has become a puppet like figure leading a demoralised and uninformed IFCE management team whose morale is only a fraction higher than those they purport to manage. It is little wonder then that we are where we are this autumn. IFCE is in complete disarray. Those who want to leave, can’t (despite lots of encouragement) and those who want to stay have no idea what the future holds. On board, cabin service routines are now being reduced to pathetic levels, catering is in decline, the aircraft are falling apart, there is no back up or credible management structure to sort out the mess and wherever you are in the world no one cares about BA anymore. We are a skeleton airline, running on a shoestring budget, governed by a second string management.

We simply cannot go on like this, the passengers are not mugs - they will not be fooled by glib advertising and empty words. They know that cabin crew (who more often than not are the reason they choose to fly BA) are being undermined and being deprived of the essential tools that help make their journeys that much more pleasurable. They don’t want a Ryan Air type experience when they clamber on a British Airways jet but if Walsh, McCarthy and Ferran have their way that is precisely what they will get and there will not be any going back.

Over the last 12 months BASSA have shown that we are prepared to make sacrifices and contribute to help BA combat the global downturn but all our offers have been thrown back in our faces because it did not quite match the sums envisaged by the greedy mandarins at the top - who not only saw their chance to “save a few bob” but who were intent on finally dismantling union power too.

The true depth of BA’s skulduggery is yet to emerge but, in the meantime, BASSA would like to send a message to the Board. Please come to your senses - this airline is now in a terminal decline and unless someone quickly oversees a change in philosophy there will be no respite. The vast majority of your customer service staff still care deeply and passionately about the people they serve, tap into that passion - reward them, give them back their tools of the trade, embrace their enthusiasm, restore their belief and respect and above all treat them like human beings. You might be pleasantly surprised just how quickly this airline returns to its glory days. But you have got to act fast - the sands of time are fast running out.




Please note: This message should not be copied, circulated or published without express prior agreement with BASSA.

My bold in there. I'd personally like to thank all our cabin crew and ground staff for being the only reason anyone flies with BA. I'd also like to thank BASSA for not wasting time finding solutions to the problems facing the business but instead concentrating on the important business of levelling schoolyard insults at the people running BA. :ok:

Maybe it's just me but with their increasingly desperate missives it sounds to me like BASSA are the ones running out of ideas, not BAs managers.

[MrBernoulli]

Carnage,

I take it that you received BASSA's approval to copy and paste, lol?

The sooner that BASSA, in its current guise, collapses and dies the better. Then BA can get on with doing business, without the restrictive practices of the Soviet-like dinosaur that claims to be a 'union'.

[Carnage Matey!]

Over on the mad house forum they are praising this latest release as eloquent and accurate, and suggesting that it should be released to the wider world or even placed as a press ad so the public can see what's happening in BA. Personally I think it's a great idea, although I suspect when the general public see what kind of union reps BA are having to deal with it won't have the effect BASSA thought it might.:}

[come on]

"They know that cabin crew (who more often than not are the reason they choose to fly BA) are being undermined and being deprived of the essential tools that help make their journeys that much more pleasurable"

What rubbish! The travelling public has a little more intelligence!

I am ex BA cabin crew, left in 2002 after many brilliant years and set up a successful overseas events company with my partner. We take around 8 - 10 groups every year to India, China, Singapore and Dubai, 30-40 pax at a time, mainly J class. BA were always our airline of choice but we stopped booking them over 12 months ago. The main reason being BA's arrogance, we now use Virgin, Singapore Airlines and Emirates. I'm sorry to say this but my last flights with BA to and from Beijing at the end of last year were dreadful. Please be under no illusion that I or anybody I know would not book with BA (or any other airline for that matter) simply because of the cabin crew, particularly in the premium cabins. I believe BA does have a very good business class product, but the service delivery is often lacking. In my opinion the likes of Singapore Airlines and Cathay Pacific leave BA standing in terms of cabin service. Again I'm sorry to say it but some BA crew give the impression they are doing you a favour being there, I appreciate this is the minority but it is these individuals that leave a lasting impression.

Several of my clients have commented that BA flights can be very hit and miss, some are very enjoyable but some downright appalling.

Just a few comments from an ex BA customer and to those BA crew that now want to burn me at the stake for daring to be critical of you, let me advise in advance -

I am ex BA crew so been there, done it!
I have not applied to be BA crew and been turned down so I'm not bitter!
I don't work for another airline and am gagging to be BA crew!

I do genuinely hope a win win solution is found for both sides but in the mean time, remember those people that are sitting in the seats that they have often paid a lot of money for; you'd be very surprised what they can hear of your conversations in the galley!!

[Glamgirl]

I'm always mortified when some crew claim that it is because of the CC that people choose to fly with us. Get real. Yes, most of us do a great job, but it isn't consistent, unfortunately. I've been on the receiving end of the not so great service, and it's not pleasant.

It isn't difficult doing the job, as such. Yes, we get jet lagged, yes, we sometimes have a pax who is (in our opinion) a PITA. It is difficult not being able to spend Christmas/New Year/weddings/birthdays/
christenings/anniversaries/parties/wimbledon/ olympics/world cup/duvet days etc with our loved ones, but that's part of what we signed up to. It isn't the passenger's fault.

I try my very best to treat my passengers as if they were family. Seeing a colleague rolling their eyes in the galley because someone would like a glass of wine or whatever is not acceptable.

People choose to fly with us for various reasons. Whether it's price, network, schedule or reputation. Some people like the crew, some don't. That's the way the cookie crumbles.

Yes, we are on board primarily for safety, but comfort (ie service) is a big part of it too. Passengers don't particularly care whether you like the CEO/managers or not. They want to get from A to B safely with a smile (or indeed several).

I know that catering has been cut. At LGW we work the best we can with minimum crew on board. It isn't the passenger's fault. Be nice, treat them with respect, make them want to come back to us. The more passengers we get to return, the more money comes in, and the safer our jobs are.

Sorry to rant, but I had to get that off my chest.

As for the rest of Bassa's latest publication, I can't help but laugh. It's full of :mad:

Gg

[Lord Bracken]

Passengers fly BA because of the cabin crew first? Nope.

Amongst your high yield passengers (remember them? That dwindling bunch that pay the bills?) it's:

1. Network from London
2. Club World flat bed (NOT Club World food or service)
3. Frequent flier points and miles
4. Reputation for safety

Somewhere far below that is the person who provides coffee in the mornings, tea in the afternoons and a G&T in the evenings.

[LD12986]

From an aviation outsider, whoever is writing BASSA's missives is seriously deluded and needs a rocket up their backside.

To say that the recession is "rapidly disappearing" is complete and utter nonsense.

All that appears to be happening is that the decline is bottoming out, ie the economy has stopped detoriating further. And remember, this was done by central banks pumping billions into the economy - something that can't go on much further.

Things are not getting better, let alone returning to a state where BA can obtain the bumper premium yields of a couple of years ago.

The economy remains extremely fragile and corporates are still battening down the hatches. From where I'm standing I see no prospect of recovery until very late into 2010 at the earliest (whatever politicians may say of "green shoots").

[jordan]

Just what century are BASSA and their members living in? Have any of them ever given a moment's thought on what's involved in running a multinational business, because it sounds as if you are all living in the 1950's. It's tough out there - wake up and face reality and stop risking the future of a great airline by such amateur and puerile postings that take no account of the real world!

[MrBunker]

Gg,

As ever, an impeccable response. You hit the nail squarely upon the head.

Meanwhile the inchoate rantings that emanate from BASSA continue to provide a modicum of amusement; if only the intent behind them wasn't so full of unjustified self-belief.

Mr B

[wobble2plank]

What I find disappointing is that BASSA only seem to be slinging mud around.

From their last 2 circulars there have been absolutely no suggestions as to how BASSA can progress with their support of the CC, what the BASSA strategy is, where the talks are aimed what the final acceptable result should be etc.

Perhaps a reasonable discourse on what the aims of BASSA are and how they intend to achieve them would be better than all of this nonsensical, puerile drivel.

[From Tunbridge Wells]

Glam Girl,

I'm curious - do you post on the Bassa forum or Crewforum?

[CFC]

Dear Moderators, can this thread be re-named?

Every single poster on this thread is so anti CC its becoming a bit of a joke. When was the last post debating sensibly what was being said by CC? Any comment pro CC is shot down by the so called 'experts' on this forum who seem to know exactly what BA are going to do in the near future...err but have yet to be proved right.

Today we have an update from the Bassa chairperson, who IMHO speaks from the heart about the actual state of affairs within BA. Add this to the latest from BA today re bulk loading second meals ...but only supplying 70% loading... and I think she has hit the nail on the head.

Willie Walsh is dealing in the short term but many of BA's loyal workforce think long term. This is where the confusion arises re pax wanting to stay with BA for whatever reason they give on the day. BA is imploding slowly but some regulars on here would never see that in their small minds.

Another more suitable thread title needed - suggestions 'experts'?

[Glamgirl]

Tunbridge - No, I don't post on those forums, never have. I do read, though. I reckon that if I posted my opinions "over there" I would get shot down in flames, as has been proven with threats in the past.

CFC - I'm not anti CC. How can I be when I am one? I doubt that many on here are anti CC, that isn't what they're posting. Peeps might be anti Bassa, but everybody's entitled to an opinion. Reading the last two comms from Bassa, I am amazed that more people aren't laughing. The comms are full of emotive language and rather a lot of untruths, I'm afraid.

Gg

[LD12986]

CFC - As we are apparantly so anti-CC and ill-informed, perhaps you'd like to explain why your current working practices are in the long term interests of BA?

As a starter, how was BASSA's conduct when LHR was closed due to snow early this year in the long term interests of BA? How exactly does cabin crew getting two night stops at a hotel instead of pulling out all the stops (within the legal limits of course) to get pax home and enable the airline to get the flying programme back on track as soon as possible help BA?

What about the reported downgrade of several First class passengers to Club World on a YYZ-LHR flight? All because BASSA would not allow the First Class cabin to open because the flight operated to YYZ closed, even though an off duty crew member was willing to work so the flight could have operated with a First class cabin? How does downgrading your most important customers help BA?

If BASSA is so concerned about the long-term interests of BA, why did they oppose the introduction of premium crew training which was intended to address the repeated complaint of inconsistent service in First and Club World?

Please do explain. Please exclude the words Willie, Walsh, Terminal, Five, price, fixing, pilots, Nigels and BALPA from your response.

While you're at it, perhaps you'd like to provide some economic forecasts to support BASSA's hilarious assertion that the recession is "rapidly disappearing". As an economist, I'd love to know.

[From Tunbridge Wells]

Apologies all - I wish I knew how to quote someone!
Glamgirl, why are you worried about being shot down in flames? There are lots of different/opposing viewpoints on this forum as there are on other forums

[Carnage Matey!]

When was the last post debating sensibly what was being said by CC

Offer us something to debate and we'll debate with you, but you, amongst others, continually refuse to rise to the challenge.

Today we have an update from the Bassa chairperson, who IMHO speaks from the heart about the actual state of affairs within BA.

Latest rant you mean? I've never read such a load of nonsense! There's no vision, no ideas, just a long venting of the spleen against various BA managers that won't do what BASSA want them to do. We've seen this personalising and infantilising of the argument before, it doesn't work. If LaLa is speaking from the heart why no mention of the fact that the reason there was no progress on the 14th was that BASSA refused to talk because Unite had arranged the meeting, not them?

Willie Walsh is dealing in the short term but many of BA's loyal workforce think long term.

I would say you have the situation about face. Walsh is dealing with the structural changes required to ensure BA has a long term future. You would rather believe the BASSA propaganda that Walsh is only here as a corporate raider intent on selling off the company and enriching himself. Crew, on the other hand, are thinking no further than their next pay cheque. The penny still hasn't dropped that 2000 crew have to go. They are whinging on about how they didn't get voluntary redundancy (but won't offer any productivity increases to permit it) without realising that if they don't wise up soon they could be facing compulsory redundancy.

The essence of the problem here is that due to the total lack of effective comms in IFCE/BASSA the crew do not realise that they are part of the problem, not part of the solution. The company cannot continue employing twice the crew to do half the work compared to the competition, or allowing militant hotheads to hold a gun to the companys head whenever they choose. Crew are ensconsed in their own mental bunkers into which the real world does not, must not penetrate. How else can you explain that how the latest rant can be met with a response from a crew member like this:

" I think that if BA has any chance of getting through the next few months and surviving Walsh it will be due to the good sense of Bassa (lead by Lala) and the determination of the sadly put-upon Crew."

[Glamgirl]

Tunbridge, I have explained previously on this thread as to why I don't post on the other forums. Basically, my identity could be found out, and I've been threatened in the past. And that's just for having a different opinion to the mainstream on other forums. Some people can't handle that.

Gg

[deeceethree]

From Tunbridge Wells,

I seem to recall that Glamgirl and some other cabin crew on this forum have prevously stated they don't wish to be harangued by the harridans and witches that populate the other forums, where threats of physical abuse seem to be the flavouir of the day, if you don't tow the BASSA line. At least here there is a wide spread of reasoned argument though, sadly, little of it comes from the BASSA diehards.

[am i bothered]

BA unions refuse to yield to deal on pay cuts - Times Online (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article6837057.ece)

Tunbridge dont worry the fact of the matter is discussions on here do not seem to have any relveance to the reality of the situation and is simply a pr tool to make others less insecure. Fact of the matter is cabin crew mainly get their information from other sources.

[Glamgirl]

AiB,

You might want to check the comments to that article....

Gg

[am i bothered]

Lol dont care about the comments as they are probably all written by the same people.

[Glamgirl]

AiB, I seriously doubt it. You've just proven something to me, which is that the "militant" (for lack of a better word) CC will not, under any circumstances, listen to an alternative way of thinking. Quotes from various reports/establishments - some CC won't listen, regardless. It seems to me that the only "establishment" these peeps will listen to is the oracle of Bassa. Shame, really, as we've proven on here numerous times that Bassa lie throught their teeth.

Gg

[am i bothered]

There is no reasonable debate here its all purile vitrol against a union and its members.

Good luck at LGW glamgirl one day with more experience you may be able to see the light. Many people have seen this opportunism time and time again.

Shame you are not fighting to improve your terms down there and simply time wasting on here.

[west lakes]

as they are probably all written by the same people.

In which case, as usually happens, they would have been spotted by the Mods & dealt with accordingly!

[Glamgirl]

AiB,

It's not easy fighting for T&Cs when the biggest union couldn't give a monkey's what happens to us. I've plenty experience, thank you.

However, this thread is not about me.

Try again to have a discussion in an adult fashion. I do not post hatred here, I post my opinion. Whatever you want to interpret that as, is up to you.

Gg

[LD12986]

There is no reasonable debate here its all purile vitrol against a union and its members.

There's no debate because no-one will post BASSA's response to articulate, reasonable and pertinent points about the aviation industry, BA, and cabin crew Terms & Conditions and working practices.

All we get back is "BASSA 100%", "you're all anti-CC" and personal attacks on WW and BA management.

[am i bothered]

See thats where you are so wrong GG.

The union under the current leadership has got you into the nsp and achieved you equal transfer rights. You need to look back at the history 1992 where Dan air was bought for a £1 and all the crew were hired on a low cost agreement.

Its not the union that wants to stop transfers?? And the union will fight to continue to allow transfers for lgw crew into lhr!!

The union also achieved working down payments for you guys at lgw

Im not going to type a massive post for you to shoot me down in flames I am not wasting my time. You would be much better off fighting your corner than slagging off your colleagues on a predominantly used pilots forum with their own personal agendas.

[Glamgirl]

AiB,

Wow, Bassa got us in the NSP. Amazing. Do you know what that did for me? I lost 8 years of seniority as Bassa wouldn't let us keep our original seniority.

Working down payment. A quarter of what LHR get - and no closed cabins.

Transfers - Actually, there are people out there who do not want to transfer, amazing as you might find that.

Bassa has sold LGW down the river. They ballsed up our breakfast allowance. They've offered the company a pay cut (same as LHR) when the company didn't ask for a pay cut. At the same time, Bassa offered to take a Purser off the 777, vastly cutting the earning potential for Pursers.

1992? Are you kidding me? That's 17 years ago, for crying out loud! The world (just in case you didn't notice) has changed vastly since then. You really need to move into the present, and look to the future.

You might be happy to grind the company to a halt and help us go bankrupt, but most sensible people would rather not.

Gg

PS. Not shooting you down in flames. Just expressing my opinion on the matter. That's how a discussion works.

[am i bothered]

Well actually GG getting into the nsp is a major achievement and if you dont appreciate it then thats your loss.

Fact of the matter is LGW will never have the same conditions as LHR but the option to transfer is currently and I repeat currently avaiLable to those who want it.

In the past the union may have turned their back on lgw but not anymore and rather than be negative you would do well to to support the union and help to improve what you currently do have.

Fact of the matter is people down at lgw have always been walked over and when they have the option to make a difference they like yourselves seem to accept it as the status quo.

I feel sorry for you as your attitude seems to be to feel sorry for yourselves and with that mentaility things will never get better only worse.

Need only look at one lady from the hkg base who on her own with support from colleagues has gone to court and won with regards to age discrimination etc. I am sure it will be appealed never the less a great achievment.

Good luck and I hope one day you see the light. As I dont see how your complaining and bitterness is going to improve the situation that lgw are in.

If everyone joined one union had one voice you would be suprised at the difference you can make.

Instead when ever they say jump lgw say how high. LCY JFK for example.
But complaining about LHR colleagues seems to be a better option for you.

[somewhereat1l]

The best of luck from Australia BA crew. Don't let Walsh and his cronies take away what you have achieved to line his own pockets.

Just read this on the times online:
BA risks letting a crisis slip through its fingers | David Wighton: Business Editor’s Commentary - Times Online (http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/article6837613.ece)

[Glamgirl]

Please do tell me what the benefits are of being in the NSP. I still haven't found any..

We've been promised, by Bassa, time and time again that "we'll definitely support LGW this time". However, it's been proven each time that it's all mouth and no trousers. Ignore LGW until the brown stuff hits the fan, and then scream for support from us.

I don't actually feel sorry for myself. I have a choice as to where I'm based. I turned LHR down many years ago, as I like LGW (believe it or not). I don't take things lying down, however the problem is that everyone presumes all LGW wants to transfer, so therefore no-one can be bothered with our T&Cs.

I've said for a long time, that due to Single Fleet working at LGW, it will at some point in the future come to LHR as well.

Regardless, this thread is about negotiations. All I'm trying to do here is figure out how to cut costs without cutting pay. Things have to change, there is no doubt about that. However, too many militants aren't willing to budge and inch and are screaming out for ballots (as posted constantly on CF).

My questions for you are: What are you willing to change in regards to your contract? The answer "nothing" does not apply. And: Do you honestly think at this point in time that there is any legal reason for balloting for strike?

Gg

PS. In regards to the lady in Hong Kong. She had the law behind her. Simple as that.

PPS. In regards to the LCY issue. What choice did we have? There were no comms from the unions, even though we were promised info by a set date. All we got was silence. Do you really think that peeps on low(ish) wages are going to turn down an opportunity to earn more? It's not about wearing the hat, by the way...:rolleyes:

[Hotel Mode]

Fact of the matter is LGW will never have the same conditions as LHR

I don't expect you'd care to justify the reasons for LGW being on lower pay would you? Low Y yield? Low business traffic? In other words exactly what's happening 7 junctions clockwise on the M25

[wobble2plank]

It seems the only vitriol about specific personnel is coming from the same few posters.

Reading through this thread the vast majority of posts are concerned with the poor handling, poor communication and dire negotiating of a union. As a union is only as good as its elected representatives then these are the people, as a union, who must take the blame.

Nowhere have any individuals been singled out. Nowhere does any one poster state 'hatred' (an awful word used in this context) for CC. It is all assumed that, by reasoned debate and the possession of an alternate point of view that differs from the BASSA perception, the poster must, ergo, hate Cabin Crew and the ground they walk on.

Totally incorrect.

Most posters who are aghast at the actions of BASSA are, probably equally aghast at the handling of it by the BA management. They are patently aware however of the need for change and thus somewhat incredulous at the lack of prudent support that BASSA are giving their members. They wish that BASSA supports their members correctly and give their members a common voice by using sensible, well balanced and well communicated negotiations. Something that, looking at the last few BASSA communications, they are singularly failing to do.

Unions cannot continue to crow successes from 17 years ago. Neither can they use individual minor successes in respect to laws which would have been held up in tribunal without 'unionistic' support as propaganda. Supporting the entire membership is the remit for BASSA, something they seem to be failing due to their unwillingness to listen to the quiet majority. The real world moves on at a pace, if BASSA can't or won't keep up then it is time for it to end as a union.

[Matt101]

The union also achieved working down payments for you guys at lgw


Just a PofO - that was Amicus not Bassa.

[nuigini]

Read this article:

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article6837057.ece

It looks like BASSA has lied to the newspaper saying that BA wants a two year pay freeze. Who suggested it in the first place?

[APYu]

Trying to think constructively, does anyone have any suggestions on how the relationship between BA and Bassa can be improved - both in the short term and longer term to firstly get through this mess but also to have a working relationship in the future?

[TorC]

Trying to think constructively, does anyone have any suggestions on how the relationship between BA and Bassa can be improved - both in the short term and longer term to firstly get through this mess but also to have a working relationship in the future?

Straight off the top of my head, I'd suggest that bassa realise that they CAN be involved in things such as salaries/allowances and other areas that pertain directly to our renumeration, but that they CANNOT be involved in the minutae of such things as handing out hot towels to WT+ customers, or deciding how a 2nd meal is served on a longhaul service.

I'd like to see the whole Union/Employer relationship evolve into something more akin to a Works Council, where both sides have a clearly understood agreement that the business CAN be run for the good of all on a co-operative basis, rather than on a confrontational one.

I'd go with GlamGirls idea of a new, fresh Union as I very much doubt that the currently incumbent officers could muster the willingness to relinquish any of their power.

[LD12986]

It's probably too late to say this but what BASSA needs/has needed is a leadership that can see past the end of its own nose and has the political nous to judge what battles are worth fighting.

BASSA has created a rod for its own back. If it had let BA get on with what it is here to do - get passengers to where they need to be - and had not been so obstructive about service changes (hot towels in WT+ FFS!) crew would not be facing such drastic changes to working practices.

When BASSA chooses which battles to fight, it should do so in an informed, intelligent and credible mannger - not by launching personal attacks on individuals in BA management, making ludicrous claims that the recession is "rapidly disappearing", refusing to turn up to meetings, proposing cost savings that are shot through with holes and so and so on.

[Baz50]

On the subject of Hot Towels, I know this is a bit off topic and I am only a BA customer but what has happened to the hot towels in club europe?


I usually make at least one flight a week and have not seen a hot towel for about 6 weeks now.

[HiFlyer14]

I agree with others - the union has had it's day now, and many of us are quite literally at the end of our tether with the childish, puerile publications written by the self-named LaLa Lady. That is the only thing that I think I can agree on with them.

It is astounding to see that on other forums there is outrage about the new Club World Service. I am too embarrassed to even confess what the Union reps are advocating. Customer Service??

Rather than meddling in things that are categorically not their domain, the Union should be fighting for our jobs, our salaries and our futures. Instead they have OFFERED a 2 year pay freeze and a 2.6% paycut. For anyone who does not understand the implications of this - it could take you up to FIVE YEARS to earn what you currently earn now if this were to go ahead. So why have we been paying membership fees all this time to PROTECT our salaries??

Thank God that IFCE have not taken up the offer (so far).

I have been holding onto my union membership simply to be able to vote NO if and when the time comes. I now believe that there is no point. I don't need a vote. I will vote with my feet and come to work during a strike.

I intend to resign from this appalling outfit that calls itself UNITE and I would urge others who feel the same to do so.

The loss of membership funds is the only thing that will make them listen. Let's do it. Resign. En Masse.

[LD12986]

On the subject of Hot Towels, I know this is a bit off topic and I am only a BA customer but what has happened to the hot towels in club europe?


They have been dropped as a cost saving measure. The one piece of goods news is that the wider seats will be returning to Club Europe.

[am i bothered]

Hiflyer 14 I think you will find the pay cut was offered and by those who were earning over x amount and to be paid back when the company gets back to profitability which is looking more likely that will be sooner than later. Now the proposal is off the table I am assuming less will be offered and a lot was offered.

With regards to voting No then why are you putting your subs down the toilet?
Just to be one of the hundred or so who vote no against the other 12000. :):)

I am probably right in assuming you are not even a member but just living up to the mantra on this forum.

People here think the silent majority are against the union. Its pathetic and a million miles away from the truth.

[overstress]

'am i bothered': Your first paragraph makes no sense.

Second paragraph: people are not sheep, they can exercise free will!

Your last two lines seem typical of BASSA 'brainwashing' -

- challenge the credentials of the poster
- attack the forum (which gives you the freedom to express your opinion!)
- make a grand sweeping assumption
- use the language of exaggeration and rhetoric

The fact you can do this in three short sentences is, in a way, to be admired!

When will we ever get a cogent argument from the BASSA viewpoint?

[Hot Wings]

Who is LaLa Lady? Is this the Chairperson of BASSA?
I've heard that she is a part-time, old contract CSD that
commutes from France. I'm sure that she can relate to
the needs of new contract crew - especially those at LGW.:ugh:

Perhaps some one could tell us all what percentage of BASSA
reps are on the old contract?

[deeceethree]

I am probably right in assuming you are not even a member but just living up to the mantra on this forum.
Thats rich coming from you, 'am i bothered', when your same post contains the BASSA-originated mantra of: ... when the company gets back to profitability which is looking more likely that will be sooner than later.What utter tosh! BASSA really don't have a clue, do they? You need to investigate impartial, professional opinion, not cherry-pick the limited ideas that you hope support BASSA pie-in-the-sky! The surprise coming to BASSA is really going to fall into the shock and awe category. :ugh:

[am i bothered]

Have you seen the share price lately??

Confidence is rising yields are improving.

As for more fines and IA that's another story!! They can't have both.

[deeceethree]

... yields are improving. And your basis for that is ....?

Lots of bums on seats does not equate to increased yields, when those seats are being traded at a loss.

[CFC]

Yields are'nt improving...are they not. Just trying to get some fare details for a mate and guess what -

23rd September LHR - NRT £3196 - ECONOMY

:ugh:

[Andy_S]

Slightly OT, but anyone who thinks that the recession is already over and that we're returning to healthy growth might want to read this:

UK recession may end in months - Miles | Reuters (http://uk.reuters.com/article/idUKTRE58H0YX20090918?feedType=nl&feedName=ukdailyinvestor)

The most significant comment IMO is that any recovery, when it occurs, is going to be weak.

[Carnage Matey!]

am i bothered probably thinks yield is improving because over on the madhouse forum somebody posted that IATA reported a small improvement in yield globally in July over June. Just a small improvement. Globally, not specific to BA. So they're all celebrating because the recession is over.

CFC - let me help you with your travails. Tell your friend to fly out on Tuesday when the same journey can be had for £469, or Monday when you can do it for £403. Yields are improving are they? The reason your quoted example is expensive (and I'll extend you the courtesy of assuming you haven't just tried to find the most expensive economy ticket you can to use as an example) is because the aircraft is full of low yield economy passengers down the back, so it's hardly surprising that with just 5 days to go to departure the only economy tickets left are the full fare, fully flexible tickets. By way of comparison a Club ticket that day would only cost you £14 more.

[CFC]

Andy S for every comment/article re the recession continuing, there is always one to say how it is ending. You have to take it all with a pinch of salt because these same commentators were probably saying the opposite about a recssion starting.

As for BA continually moaning to its workforce just what bad times their having, they are telling their investors how bright the future is looking.

Exactly the same re union comments, one can take them one way or another.

Glass half full/half empty.

[wobble2plank]

CFC,

Ironically the investors started to return after BA announced sweeping productivity improvements were to be brought in across the board.

The vast majority of those improvements have now been agreed with one or two exceptions. Willie Walsh has promised to 'clean up shop' to major investors and the demise of the summer disruptions due to some nebulous strike action over random topics including ingrowing toenails has to be a major target.

Yield is not improving. Even with LoCo's the 1p seat to an airport somewhere in the same country as your destination is a rare and difficult beast to obtain. As those seat blocks sell out it gets more and more expensive to get on the plane. It has always been that way.

Look around the world and then say that everything will be rosy next year. Unemployment generally tends to drag behind the economic curve by about 18-24 months. Just about all predictions of the recovery are saying it will be slow and painful. Taxes will rise to cover the Governments cataclysmic national debt. Interest rates will sky rocket, the Government will have its hands full trying to stave off hyper inflation. All during the 'recovery'.

As an interesting addition, Mortgage approvals and lending fell in August by 13%. Never a good sign for the harsh winter months.

BASSA must understand that their department is nothing special when it comes to these cuts. In exactly the same way as the Engineers, Flight Crew, Checkin Staff, Managers etc aren't special. All departments have their targets to achieve and, irrespective of whether BASSA feels the good times are rolling back in, Willie Walsh will ensure that they are met.

Once this is over, hopefully, there will be a fitter, leaner BA to take forward.

[JayPee28bpr]

I just thought I'd chuck in another view of all this. Yesterday Goldman Sachs added BA to its "Conviction Buy" list, which is a big reason for the 5% jump in the share price. BA is now the best performing share on the London market in Q3. I think the price has doubled since 1st July.

Why has GS upgraded BA? Primarily because it sees greater possible upside for BA versus competitors as the recession ends, business travel increases, and financial services personnel begin to shuttle across the Atlantic again.

Does the above vindicate the BASSA view of "temporary problems, temporary solutions"? Partly, perhaps. However, it also needs to be kept in mind that GS's numbers will have been put together using "guidance" from BA's Finance team. That will include BA's views on its projected operating margins (ie how much revenue ends up as profit rather than leaking out in costs). Those operating margins will include BA's assumptions on future personnel costs.

So GS's bullish view of BA is at least partially dependent on its opinion of the likelihood of BA being able to deliver decent margins even after cutting fares. Nobody thinks premium fares are going back to the level they were 2 years ago. The buoyant share price almost certainly includes an assumption that BA will get what it wants on personnel costs across the company. It also, incidentally, discounts virtually to zero the possibility of any industrial action. GS shifting BA to "Conviction Buy" reinforces the low risk of strike action.

My interpretation of all this? BA is closer to an agreement (I stress agreement, not imposition) on cabin crew remuneration structures than might be assumed from reading this forum. BA really would not be guiding GS etc to assume improved margins and results unless they were very confident of no service disruption over the next 6-12 months.

[nuigini]

Who is LaLa Lady? Is this the Chairperson of BASSA?
I've heard that she is a part-time, old contract CSD that
commutes from France. I'm sure that she can relate to
the needs of new contract crew - especially those at LGW.:ugh:

Perhaps some one could tell us all what percentage of BASSA
reps are on the old contract?


Is it the chairman of BASSA. Old contract part-time CSD and I think she lives in LAX.

Not sure about who many of the reps are on the old contract but probably the majority of them.

[Baz50]

CFC

Guess what, the fare you looked up for your mate was in fact was for world traveller plus not economy. My company have booked me a return flight just one day later than your mate's and back 5 day later and the return fare is £909, not bad for a late booking I would say.

Club one way on the day your mate wants to travel is only £4 more than the price you said was for economy.

We all know one way fares are the most expensive but most people who travel out want to come back again. Perhaps you did not notice the fares a day or say either side of the date you say your mate wanted to travel were rather somewhat cheaper, did you not notice that important point, it would have saved your mate thousands!!!

[Juan Tugoh]

Perhaps the point was not to save a mate some money but rather to manipulate the truth to support a particular world view. BASSA seem to have been studying New-Labour and their inability to tell the truth.

[CFC]

Baz 50 check BA.com yourself then...'dep.Tue 22/Sep from £3196'...in Economy, WT+ is £3205 if you really need to get facts correct.

As this is the day he has to fly he's gone with VS.

PS Jaun Toguh FYI I do not belong to Bassa.

[Lord Bracken]

Eh? £3196 is a J (full) fare. BA.com is simply giving you the only available seat - Y and W must be full.

£3196
13:45 22 Sep
09:10 23 Sep
Heathrow (London)
Narita (Tokyo)
BA0005
British Airways
Club World
Only 3 seat(s) left at this price, book now to avoid disappointment

Big wow. Flights fill up. What's worrying is that one could go to NRT tomorrow for £352 outbound.

£352
13:45 19 Sep
09:10 20 Sep
Heathrow (London)
Narita (Tokyo)
BA0005
British Airways
World Traveller
Only 2 seat(s) left at this price, book now to avoid disappointment

[PC767]

London Evening Standard interview with Walsh. 16th September 2009.

Are the clouds about to lift for beleaguered BA boss Willie Walsh? | Business (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard-business/article-23744561-details/Are+the+clouds+about+to+lift+for+beleaguered+BA+boss+Willie+ Walsh/article.do)

Walsh continues with his mixed messages. He clearly isn't certain if the interviewer is friend or foe. Rather gauling is the last line. Walsh publicly states that things aren't so bad anymore.

Matters need to be handled very carefully from now on. I'd suggest that recent positive news, whether by chance or management, should see BA improving financially and the brand growing in strength. The race towards industrial action will be counter-productive. Perhaps the recent times article, highlighted elsewhere, is correct. The boat has been missed.

[Juan Tugoh]

Well I did check on Ba.com for the 22nd Sep. At 16.11 today the price was £4702 - but it was a club ticket - there were no WT or WT+ seats available. So like I said before, it seems that facts were manipulated to fit a world view.

CFC I apologise for mistakenly believing you were in BASSA. Will you now do me the courtesy of admitting you were not exactly complete in your description of events?

[Carnage Matey!]

It's true things aren't so bad, but thats a bit like saying the patients out of intensive care but still extremely ill. Just because death is less imminent doesn't mean you can go back to your old ways, that would just mean heading back to the ICU at some undetermined point in the future. Walsh knows he needs to make structural changes to the company and the City are factoring those changes into their predictions. BA does not have a divine right to survive, and as the smallest of the future key players in a consolidated European industry it has to be leaner and tougher to compete. I don't think the BASSA approach of "Things are looking up so you can leave us alone now" is going to work. The savings that can be garnered by dragging the cabin crew working practices into the 21st century more than outweigh the costs of some short term industrial action.

[Baz50]

CFC

I have checked the fares again and my facts were correct the £3199 was for WT+.Club is now £4702, it was less earlier today when I looked.

I also had a look to see how much Virgin were charging on 23/9, no doubt you did too if your mate travelled with them.

The 23rd September must be a busy day for the NRT route for some reason. Try looking at the fares for other days on all routes and if they all reflect the same fare levels as the NRT does on the 23rd Sept perhaps things are changing for the better.

But what point is being made? If an airline can prehaps make a profit on a single sector on one day that unfortunately does not turn the airline from loss into profit instantly.

[LD12986]

Aside from one day (not least a few days before departure) being completely unrepresentative (trade fairs etc can easily produce spikes in demand) don't forget that BA has cut capacity on the NRT route by 50%.

BA's share price is up, partly because the whole market is up. The FTSE 100 hit 5,100 this week which may be evidence of premature optimism. The City may think the worst may be over, but BA is still recording double digit falls in year on year premium traffic. What is certain is that if BA is, as BASSA claims, in terminal decline with a discredited management, GS would not be recommending BA stock. BA has told its insitutional investors that it will radically improve productivity and eliminate restrictive practices and the market expects BA to deliver.

[Pontius]

Aside from one day (not least a few days before departure) being completely unrepresentative

It's the Silver Week holiday in Japan, so that probably supports your theory regarding late booking versus full flights. It's quite a big deal for the Japanese who like to head off to places new during this period.

[KitKat747]

Mentioning a fare for a specific flight was nothing more than a thinly veiled attempt enhance a weak opinion.

The fare on that day means absolutely nothing towards BA entering into a sudden surge of high yield pax which will immediately take them fom loss to profit.

[yaletown]

This has nothing really to do with negotiations, but who will be operating the A318 LCY JFK service? Mainline, Cityflyer or LGW crews? Thanks for the info...

[LD12986]

This has nothing really to do with negotiations, but who will be operating the A318 LCY JFK service? Mainline, Cityflyer or LGW crews? Thanks for the info...


LGW cabin crew will work on this service.

[midman]

Any news on today's talks between BA and Unite?

[Perry-oaks]

From Bassa!

So far, so good ?.....

Well, actually No!

After months of mounting and unsettling uncertainty for the cabin crew community, British Airways finally agreed to resume further talks. These were scheduled to be held today Monday 21st September at the ACAS offices in central London.

This was agreed at the meeting between Willie Walsh and UNITE general secretary Tony Woodley. BASSA was to work along side National Secretary Steve Turner and British Airways would be led by Director of people, Tony McCarthy.

Despite British Airways repeatedly stating the urgency of these talks, they did not actually take place.

BASSA was ready to do business and to give one final attempt to see if an agreement could be reached, our belief is that this would involve serious negotiation.

We were mistaken, British Airways wanted to commence proceedings off with a financial slideshow presentation on future revenue yields by a junior financial clerk from Waterside. Basically just more time wasting and another attempt to brainwash us into accepting the changes they want to impose.

WE HAVE SEEN AND HEARD EVERY TYPE OF PRESENTATION you could imagine, IT’S TIME FOR ACTION not slideshows, this uncertainty has gone on long enough, . Tony McCarthy disagreed and had what could only be described as a “fit of pique “ and flounced out of the talks and registered, ironically another “failure to agree“. Frankly BA’s behaviour is, under the serious circumstances, reprehensible and irresponsible.



BASSA remains available for serious negotiation, if British Airways wish to talk and not walk. We are here to represent your views and concerns .If they do not, so be it, we stand ready to defend our members against any imposition.

[Hotel Mode]

We were mistaken, British Airways wanted to commence proceedings off with a financial slideshow presentation on future revenue yields by a junior financial clerk from Waterside. Basically just more time wasting and another attempt to brainwash us into accepting the changes they want to impose.

WE HAVE SEEN AND HEARD EVERY TYPE OF PRESENTATION you could imagine, IT’S TIME FOR ACTION not slideshows,

So BASSAs stated policy is basically: dont confuse us with any of your numbers, we're desperate to call a strike. Lala lady indeed.

Genius, good luck with that. When are the majority of crew going to wake up?

And to add insult to injury Business Traveller magazine has published this years airline awards.

Best Cabin Staff

1. Singapore Airlines
2. Virgin Atlantic
3. British Airways
4. Cathay Pacific


Doh!

[bermudatriangle]

hotel mode,where is the insult and injury in business travellers airline awards ??
the results are not based on cabin crew alone are they.
website,punctuality,in flight entertainment,business lounges,frequent flyer reward programme,catering,seating and onboard facilities,the list goes on and on.
despite this,third place on the world stage in a very good result,considering the very high standards of competition,
i am surprised that emirates and etihad did not do better.
very disappointed that ba management walked out of todays talks,yet now decide to reconveen in a weeks time.
does not seem much urgency on their part to make savings as soon as possible,considering the original deadline for conclusion of the proposed changes was june !!
thats because the airline is or was,fighting for survival !

[Perry-oaks]

Stop Press - theres more from Bassa!!

A few hours after walking out BA had a change of heart and now requested we reconvene meetings on Wednesday week.

So much for urgency, but at least they have now recognised that talking is better than walking!

[Hotel Mode]

hotel mode,where is the insult and injury in business travellers airline awards ??


The bit quoted was (as I made clear) for Best Cabin Staff - the position lower than VS being the key point here -

BA won overall best airline as a result of the other parts of the product you mention.

Full results here Business Traveller Awards 2009 - Business Traveller (http://www.businesstraveller.com/awards2009)

[PC767]

Not that I place much emphasis on self congratulatory wards, (conde nast awarded BA best business cabin, despite the fact that it doesn't work and rarely has the product promised to passengers, no washbags, no first or even second meals choice, only half the stated wines available..... i could go on) but, are you suprised that BA cabin crew are not no1. We've had a two years of demotivation from the company and todays events are no better. We are fed up, we want an agreement which suites both sides and we want the matter settled soon. I once enjoyed going to work, but the shine has been removed. It seems that everytime I set foot into the CRC there is another BA induced drama.

Look, I'm affected by the talks but I'm not involved. My message to BA would be to make the first move to compromise. Instead we have a senior director behaving like a spoilt child and storming out of meeting, in front of ACAS, because the unions do not wish to view his slides before talks commence. Here is how I see it. If the company really want this matter resolved now then McCarthy should have let out a small sigh and commenced talks but refered to his slides throughout to illustrate his points. As I see it the scenario was utter pathetic. This site is ultra quick to call the unions immature, and I agree at times their public behaviour has left something to be desired, but BA are no better. It leads me to believe that there is a great deal of truth in the argument that BA's actions against it's cabin crew are not about saving money in a crisis
per se. It seems that BA are stalling because they know that no matter what they will be imposing 100% what they want, and they know the most likely result will be industrial action. January is a quiet month. How about stalling until the begining of December, imposing their new requirements thus allowing any industrial action to occur in January.

Bassa's proposals may not have been acceptable to BA. To the vast majority of cabin crew BA's proposals are also unacceptable. No compromise will ever be reached whilst the senior partner behaves like the junior. Somebody has to take the lead or we will fly headfirst into a strike, which no matter how much cold analysis states will be cost effective in the long run, will have a detremental effect on BA's reputation. We need to strike a balance here. The vast majority of our passengers care not a jot about the longtime cost effectiveness of BA, only that they do what they say the will for the right price.

[wobble2plank]

So, from Lala land:

We were mistaken, British Airways wanted to commence proceedings off with a financial slideshow presentation on future revenue yields by a junior financial clerk from Waterside. Basically just more time wasting and another attempt to brainwash us into accepting the changes they want to impose.

After the previous from fortress BASSA:

We now have a moribund company caught frozen between the tail lights of a rapidly disappearing recession and the morally bankrupt headlights that have got stuck on full beam.


and:

Make no mistake it is not BA that is in financial crisis

plus:

Over the last 12 months BASSA have shown that we are prepared to make sacrifices and contribute to help BA combat the global downturn but all our offers have been thrown back in our faces because it did not quite match the sums envisaged by the greedy mandarins at the top - who not only saw their chance to “save a few bob” but who were intent on finally dismantling union power too.


Which never, ever totalled even what BASSA though they were worth!

And BASSA wonders why BA wants to give them a financial presentation?

So the world turns.

Ho Hum.

[LD12986]

After months of mounting and unsettling uncertainty for the cabin crew community, British Airways finally agreed to resume further talks. These were scheduled to be held today Monday 21st September at the ACAS offices in central London.

This was agreed at the meeting between Willie Walsh and UNITE general secretary Tony Woodley. BASSA was to work along side National Secretary Steve Turner and British Airways would be led by Director of people, Tony McCarthy.

Despite British Airways repeatedly stating the urgency of these talks, they did not actually take place.

BASSA was ready to do business and to give one final attempt to see if an agreement could be reached, our belief is that this would involve serious negotiation.

We were mistaken, British Airways wanted to commence proceedings off with a financial slideshow presentation on future revenue yields by a junior financial clerk from Waterside. Basically just more time wasting and another attempt to brainwash us into accepting the changes they want to impose.

WE HAVE SEEN AND HEARD EVERY TYPE OF PRESENTATION you could imagine, IT’S TIME FOR ACTION not slideshows, this uncertainty has gone on long enough, . Tony McCarthy disagreed and had what could only be described as a “fit of pique “ and flounced out of the talks and registered, ironically another “failure to agree“. Frankly BA’s behaviour is, under the serious circumstances, reprehensible and irresponsible.

BASSA remains available for serious negotiation, if British Airways wish to talk and not walk. We are here to represent your views and concerns .If they do not, so be it, we stand ready to defend our members against any imposition.


This (my bolding) is from BASSA who have previously procrastinated and refused to turn up to meetings?

Given the choice of language ("a junior financial clerk from Waterside"), I would take BASSA's account of Tony McCarthy's "fit of pique" with a pinch of salt.

[Lets Get Wasted]

"The bit quoted was (as I made clear) for Best Cabin Staff - the position lower than VS being the key point here -"




It could possibley be down to the fact that most business travellers are males and are voting on the Virgin dollies image rather than on the delivery of the service !

[Plan 10]

Ahh, once again, here is the level of representation being shown by those to whom BA Cabin Crew are paying a tithe of their salary every month. It rather speaks for itself...

The Talented Mr. Francis? Sep 20th, 2009 by admin

If you’re already familiar with the 1995 Antony Minghela film - wherein Matt Damon plays a charmingly plausible, yet at the same time, ruthless and deadly character, who unleashes murder and betrayal amongst the “beautiful people” of an ex-pat community on the Italian Riviera - then perhaps comparisons with the current leader of cabin services may initially appear to be somewhat harsh.

Yes, of course Mr. Francis is highly unlikely to commit murder any time soon - unless the death of our community, career prospects and a once great airline counts - yet his modus operandi, backed by a ruthless ambition, is strikingly similar.

The cabin crew community, on the whole, is a warm and welcoming environment in which to work. It is a strange phenomenon but no matter how experience has proven otherwise, each new head of cabin crew is welcomed with open arms and with an almost deferential respect. Crew want to believe in them and hope that each new manager will be the one that recognises the good job that they do, treat them with respect and provide them the tools with which to do it.

Obvious really.

Cabin crew simply want to come to work and be allowed to get on with doing the job that they enjoy doing. They don’t require armies of managers to make this happen. Left alone, most crew will simply get on with doing what they do best; providing the top quality service that our passengers expect to receive from British Airways.

When he first took over the job from Simon Talling-Smith, it was in many ways, a welcome change from the personality fuelled PR machine that had gone before him. Gone were the life-size photographs and crew TV guest spots, and in was the low key, straight talking “I’m one of the good guys and I’m listening” approach.

Whether circumstance, or instruction from above has dictated otherwise, this has proven to be somewhat baseless. The words may be reassuringly fluffy and inclusive, but they barely sugar coat a very bitter pill. He has tried to win people’s trust but to what end? To protect current crew? Or to deliver what no other head of cabin crew could achieve; low cost cabin crew. Five years from now, will history cast him as hero or villain? You will not have the luxury of hindsight and must make up your own mind - now.

We believe that people’s trust, including ours, has been abused. Substance has been replaced by sound bites; “minimize the impact upon current crew” and “ we will all just work a little bit harder”. The guiding principle of “putting the customer first” all spring easily to mind, yet over time have been proven to be little more than empty catch phrases, designed to lull a community into sleepwalking towards their own demise.

In reality, Mr. Francis’s ethos is somewhat harder to swallow; his style is to portray the relaxed “nice guy” image - and he may very well be exactly that - but the changes that he intends to introduce for you are not, and it would be a far more honest approach if he admitted exactly that. Either he knows this and is simply conning you into believing otherwise to further his own agenda, or he simply doesn’t realise the implications of the changes he intends to introduce.

He plans to try and reduce the crewing levels on all long haul and most short haul flights; it would not be unreasonable to think he would also have spent a great deal of time and thought on how to reduce crews work load accordingly. Far from it. Only this week, he has announced plans to cut the catering for our second club world meal to 70%. This is the most financially important premium cabin.

He also expects to bulk-load all of the components that make up the tray and catering and expects cabin crew to lay up each individual tray. A massive increase in workload with current crewing levels, yet at the same time he intends to remove a Purser from the club world galley on all aircraft types. Why do this? Simple, British Airways no longer will have to pay Gate Gourmet or Alpha to set up each tray; you will be doing it and they will pocket the money saved. Oh yes, it also will not be counted towards cabin crews’ cost saving target - but caterings.

How did he come to this belief? He “trialled” it. Not on an aircraft. Not with real crew in a real working aircraft environment, but in 4 chairs in a classroom at Waterside, carried out by three managers and a grounded Mexican ICC crew member. On the strength of that, he decided it worked just fine and all his so called “principles” remained intact. You can count on some reassuring words of spin to that effect very shortly

Have no doubt, this is the way our management wants to work in the future; they may make the mistakes but you will be picking up the tab. They do not value knowledge or experience; in fact they resent managers with an understanding of cabin crew, those that speak up are quickly sidelined and replaced with those that share this “new vision”.

It may shock you to learn that British Airways entire management team that worked on the current round of proposed changes, have barely ever set foot upon a British Airways aircraft, let alone bothered to understand the role of crew. They don’t understand your job and they don’t want to. They simply believe that you have had it too good for too long - and the reason for that? Your union and your agreements; hence you will no longer see the words “Agreement” or “Negotiate” in their communications, only “principles” and “consultation”. Don’t believe us? Then take a look back at every word they have written since February this year and you will find the proof you need.

This is their vision of the future; they are stealing our airline from under our noses and nobody has noticed. Everything that British Airways stands for, its traditions, its history, its ways of working, is on the verge of being torn down. Families worked for this airline from generation to generation; they won’t in the future. Why? Because it suits the egotistical and selfish agenda of the new regime that runs this airline.

Everything that was done before is worthless and “we know best” is the new mantra of the day.

The jury is out on whether Bill Francis is the puppeteer or the puppet - Tony McCarthy - Director of People - and his assistant, James Farren, now call the shots. They may have made a mess of the Post Office - simply look at the headlines this week to see their legacy - but they are also arrogant enough to continue to think that they always know best. Supported by a chief executive who urges staff to work for free at the same time as accepting a deferred bonus of £30,000.

They demand flexibility and yet are in turn both dogmatic and inflexible.

Their approach is not one of harmony or partnership but of “doing as you’re told” and feeling lucky to have a job. They don’t believe in knowing or understanding the job as their people do, but of simply telling them what to do and when. No worldwide rosters being published or crew cleaning the aircraft in Shannon on the London City -New York are just the beginning, it’s all part of the game plan. We will tell you what to do and when to do it and if you don’t like it? Then leave, we will simply get somebody in on a cheaper contract, who won’t know any better.

As for Bill Francis? Well, he is either a part of that and believes in it wholeheartedly, or he does not have the principles he claims to have by defending his people against it. Either way, the end result is the same.

We are now in the middle of September and after months of uncertainty we are no further ahead; had British Airways accepted the BASSA cost saving proposal when they were first offered, this would have been money in the bank to aid the self titled “fight for survival”.

Instead, as the green shoots of recovery are beginning to be noted in many areas of the economy, it is increasingly being seen as more an opportunistic determination to end union involvement, and with it, reasonable terms and conditions for the people who work hard for this airline, than mere cost cutting.

A Times article on 17th September, (CLICK HERE) also appears to confirms this.

Each week, the news surrounding our company supports this view; mergers with various airlines ebb and flow, new price fixing scandals have come to light (this time with cargo) and rumoured cash offers to buy other airlines all alongside an increasing share price would all appear to support the view that the only true “crisis” our airline faces, is a moral one by the people who purport to lead us.

British Airways will only commit to a single day of meetings; this is planned for Monday September 21st, read into that what you will. Rest assured we have given our final position, it has been rejected, nonetheless it remains our final position. We believe in all of us having the right to a decent future and if that involves having to fight for that right, so be it.

We will hope for the best outcome but will also be prepared for the worst

‘Let the poor drink their milk, while the rich eat their honey, let the bums count their blessings while we count the money”



Matt Johnson - The The 1986

Certainly getting your money's worth in representation there.

[LD12986]

Good to see BASSA remaining focussed on the fundamental issues at hand, and not being distracted by engaging in personal attacks on management.

Well done everybody!

Note how BASSA refer to BA as "our airline". Sorry it isn't. It is owned by its shareholders. And this may be a radical idea to BASSA, but management should have the right to run the company without interference from BASSA.

[CFC]

Mmmmm.....after all these months of continual anti CC/Union rhetoric from the 'experts' on this site, do I sense a weakening of your shallow arguements re CC negotiations?

Tony McCarthy - Director of People, BA, storming out of meeting in front of ACAS representatives says a lot about the style and type of management we have had to put up with for the last several months.

Either BA have'nt got a clue (similar to many on here) or they are just stalling to get Xmas out of the way - but was'nt that the excuse for the delayed talks in the summertime.

This whole shambles gets more pathetic by the day.

Over to the 'experts'......

[Da Dog]

Despite my contempt for everything BASSA, my insider tells me that Mr McCarthy did indeed have a "hissy fit". In fact they went further and suggested that just as with the post office he does not have a clue on how to handle the unions, despite being employed for just that "union busting" reason.

Talk to anyone at Royal Mail, and ask them what happened to long serving very loyal workers, ask them about temp contracts, and flexible working. The Royal Mail should have been fit for privatization, instead it has been left a complete shambles, and it appears that the unions have far from been busted by McCathyism...................

[wobble2plank]

The Talented Mr. Francis? Sep 20th, 2009 by admin


This whole article sums up the sad state of BASSA, their total incomprehension of what the management function does for a company and what the individual managers remits are. It is also shows the reasoning as to why BASSA have singularly failed to represent their members.

Instead of understanding that the role of the manager is to run the operation they are in charge of to budget or under, delivering savings and cost targets on time with the lowest overheads possible to the board and the shareholders, BASSA believes that the managers should be there in a harmonic duet to make the lives of the staff easier.

It has never been so in business. Never ever. No company would make money if the collective were allowed to dictate working conditions, triggers and staffing levels. Hence the role of management is to achieve these aims. They are NOT there to molly coddle staff. The senior mangers are briefed by junior managers who themselves interface with the staff. The senior managers have a responsibility not to the staff but to the board and the shareholders. That is not to say that protecting your workforce should not be a primary business aim, it should be but when drastic action is required these people are paid to take it.

Cabin crew simply want to come to work and be allowed to get on with doing the job that they enjoy doing. They don’t require armies of managers to make this happen. Left alone, most crew will simply get on with doing what they do best; providing the top quality service that our passengers expect to receive from British Airways.


Quite true for most crew, unfortunately the sickness figures over the years have shown that CC are the most likely to 'drop a sickie' when a day off is needed. No accusations here, most don't but that minority led to the 'sickness' policy which BASSA then had a hissy fit about.

The vast majority of managers for the CC are there to sort out the tortuous agreements, time off, disruption allowances/agreements and sickness procedures that BASSA hold so proud. If we all turned up correctly and did our jobs to the letter of the roster then there would need to be far fewer airport standbys as they would only be needed to cover the predicted delay disruption.

It may shock you to learn that British Airways entire management team that worked on the current round of proposed changes, have barely ever set foot upon a British Airways aircraft, let alone bothered to understand the role of crew. They don’t understand your job and they don’t want to. They simply believe that you have had it too good for too long - and the reason for that? Your union and your agreements; hence you will no longer see the words “Agreement” or “Negotiate” in their communications, only “principles” and “consultation”. Don’t believe us? Then take a look back at every word they have written since February this year and you will find the proof you need.

Abject semantics. Why should the 'senior' management board an aircraft and 'see what you do'? They have an army of junior management that brief them on every aspect of CC work. Failure of middle management to brief adequately senior management led to the two heads rolling over the T5 debacle. It has always been so. As to 'Negotiation', 'Agreement', 'Consultation' and 'Principles', pretty words that fit whatever context the user wishes to use them in.

Instead, as the green shoots of recovery are beginning to be noted in many areas of the economy, it is increasingly being seen as more an opportunistic determination to end union involvement, and with it, reasonable terms and conditions for the people who work hard for this airline, than mere cost cutting.

All other departments have reached agreement on cost cutting measures designed to allow the company as a whole achieve a leading role during the recovery. The share price rise is running on the back of those agreements. Why does BASSA have the arrogance to believe that they should be exempt from such cost cutting when they have one of the biggest departments running well over market rates still utilising crewing levels from the 1980's. Oddly enough many other departments agreements have trigger actions only allowing the cuts to be put in place when ALL cost savings have been agreed. Hence the company will want to achieve all its projected savings to appease the investors and reduce corporate debt.

Aviation is lagging the recession by at least 18-24 months and the UK economy is forecast to lag growth in Europe by at least 12 months. Future rosy? Not for a long time to come.

BASSA had its chance to negotiate with BA before the 30th deadline. BA has ticked all its legal requirement boxes for it to impose contract change if it wishes. BASSA have, once again, squandered to right to make meaningful negotiation and is now embarking on a weak smear campaign.

Now, over to the BASSA experts to defend their unions rhetoric.

[mandyconn]

Just out of interest did you guys obtain BASSA's permission before copying the article onto this site?

[Carnage Matey!]

I didn't. Report me to BASSA!:ok:


says a lot about the style and type of management we have had to put up with for the last several months.

That is when BASSA has deigned to turn up for meetings, which is pretty infrequently. The reps are well ahead of management in the walk-out stakes.

[Juan Tugoh]

Just out of interest did you guys obtain BASSA's permission before copying the article onto this site?

Why should anyone refer to BASSA before posting a copy of this info? It is not sensitive in any way, after all BASSA published and distributed it. It may be embarrassing to BASSA as it shows how petty and childish they are attacking people rather than debating ideas, but it is not sensitive.

As their arguments are so sage and cogent BASSA will be grateful that their message is now reaching a wider audience and the power and obvious veracity of their message will be convince BA to change its approach.

Or maybe they just believe in Orewellian control.

[mandyconn]

Just like any communication whether it be from BASSA or BA there is always a line at the end stating the article should not be copied without express permission.

I will call BASSA's lawyers now - will keep you all posted.

Have a nice day.

[deeceethree]

I will call BASSA's lawyers now - will keep you all posted.Hmm. I get the distinct impression that if BASSA's lawyers express no interest in this, you won't be keeping this forum posted at all. :hmm:

While you're at it, you might wish to inform the lawyers about the physical threats of violence made by BASSA militants against other far more level-headed BASSA members, all in public forums. Go on, tell that to your lawyers and then keep us informed. :rolleyes:

[Carnage Matey!]

Ahhhh, poor old mandyconn thinks that just because BASSA ask that you don't copy something you can't. A bit like when kids draw a little copyright logo on their designs I suppose. Similar infantile mentalities I suppose, but then BASSAs members have been brainwashed into thinking BASSA are the law.

[Da Dog]

I have just seen a couple of postings on pprune that need to be bought to the attention of the mods.

There is a topic running on the site about BA cabin crew and someone has posted BASSA's email communications on there.

Can the mods look into this as copying BASSA articles without permission is not allowed so I thought. Someone on the site has already pointed this out but has received the usual smart comments.



Better look out everyone, Monkey Business means business:D:O

[mandyconn]

I will keep you posted.

Remember you can't hide behind a user name on a forum........:ok:

[deeceethree]

Remember you can't hide behind a user name on a forum.....Something you need to keep in mind too?

[mandyconn]

Oh really? I have nothing to hide.

[deeceethree]

Neither has Carnage, I'm sure. You, on the other hand, seem desperate to protect BASSA's inane ramblings, for no other reason than being miffed when someone questions them. :rolleyes:

[mandyconn]

Sorry you need to go back to my original posting. It was about obtaining permission to copy a email/article that clearly states permission needs to be obtained before copying.

Thats the only question I raised.

How does that make me trying to protect BASSA?

[wobble2plank]

mandyconn,

You seem to have a slightly naive view of internet communications distribution.

Unfortunately the 'Don't distribute this without permission' at the bottom of a page has, in this case, absolutely no legally binding powers whatsoever.

It is quite simply akin to say to somebody in the canteen 'Don't tell anyone I told you this but.....'.

If posted documentation were to contain sensitive business information which could be used by a third party for commercial gain, libelous information on individuals or information of a sensitive nature to the business operations or products it originated from then yes. But then that would be covered under the recipients confidentiality agreement as written into their contract.

I assume the BASSA members have no such confidentiality agreement?

The inane ramblings of the BASSA heir-achy contain little more than passing amusement for some on this forum and a wealth of useless, nebulous mud slinging for the recipient membership.

If legal proceedings were to be progressed then the original recipient of the specific documentation would have to be identified. Unless BASSA digitally watermarks every single one of its documents to specific members then this is never going to happen.

So, back to the discussion, I think we can leave the 'lawyers' bit out from now on.

[deeceethree]

mandyconn,

Thats the only question I raised.

How does that make me trying to protect BASSA?You were the one who threatened lawyers and harped on about "Remember you can't hide behind a user name on a forum". If that isn't playing BASSA's little game then I don't what is. :ugh:

[Perry-oaks]

The CRC is littered with the discarded ramblings of Bassa - I understand that members of the crew forum actively encourage each other to photocopy and hand out these communications to other crew.

Mandyconn - I suggest you point the Bassa lawyers at the Crew Forum first.

[Freddielaker]

Just out of interest did you guys obtain BASSA's permission before copying the article onto this site?

What mandyconn really means is that she would prefer the article not to be seen by anyone who can recognise it as the pointless, childish drivel that it is

[MrBunker]

It doesn't behove us to sling mud any more than it behoves LaLa and her reps to make oblique comparisons to a fictional murderer. However if, as seems to be the wish, we seek balance would one of the crew members who are bold enough to correct us on here please go to the stop press pt 2 thread on Crewforum and remind the second poster that flight crew have Been asked to take way more than a pay freeze (reduced crewing levels, 2.61% paycut and reduction in flying allowances) and this will not be recouped even if we do see our shares as these are a fixed pot of money's worth - not a fixed number of shares. Indeed the only pay-freeze mooted was by BA for CC - BASSA volunteered a strangely familiar 2.61% but without the other diminutions to our t and cs.

Would be immensely grateful if one of you could ensure that your efforts to keep the equilibrium in this discussion could be brought to bear over there too.

Many thanks.

[Andyismyname]

Mandyconn

While you are on the phone to BASSA's lawyers, ask them about SOSR.

[Lets Get Wasted]

Mr Bunker wrote- "It doesn't behove us to sling mud any more than it behoves LaLa and her reps to make oblique comparisons to a fictional murderer. However if, as seems to be the wish, we seek balance would one of the crew members who are bold enough to correct us on here please go to the stop press pt 2 thread on Crewforum and remind the second poster that flight crew have Been asked to take way more than a pay freeze (reduced crewing levels, 2.61% paycut and reduction in flying allowances) and this will not be recouped even if we do see our shares as these are a fixed pot of money's worth - not a fixed number of shares. Indeed the only pay-freeze mooted was by BA for CC - BASSA volunteered a strangely familiar 2.61% but without the other diminutions to our t and cs."

Why don't you go on there and remind him/her yourself.Or are you afraid of being exposed,or your girlfriend/wife/boyfriend being exposed ! :uhoh:

[CFC]

Andyismyname
While you are on the phone to BASSA's lawyers, ask them about SOSR.

Andyismyname - you are like a cracked record continually blurting this out - do you actually not think that UNITE has not considered this?

Please start a new ramble.

[MrBunker]

I see. Is that the best riposte you can muster in order to try and keep this on an adult level? Therein lies some of the problem we allude to. It's mud slinging and banal intimations of character weakness. I don't post on there as I'm not a cc member. My wife doesn't post on there because, despite what people say, there is no brooking of any heterodox opinion and people who think differently are almost always met with nigh on abusive retorts. To ask for a clarification of fact by a member of your coterie is hardly about risking exposure, despite the occasional history of threats of violence against the person on anonymous cc forums. You may or may not choose to believe thus but the opinions of a vast majority of people at work are not of any significant consequence to my day to day mental balance.

To my mind, a response that might have served you to better purpose would be to acknowledge the factual inaccuracies being bandied about and corrected them to allow the debate to continue around the facts.

That the best you can muster is to make a LaLa-esque allusion to my personal moral courage is at the heart of all that's dysfunctional about this debate.

[CFC]

Carnage Mutey wrote:

That is when BASSA has deigned to turn up for meetings, which is pretty infrequently. The reps are well ahead of management in the walk-out stakes.

Another cracked record....can you actually supply dates for these meetings that Bassa failed to show up at?

[SR71]

He also expects to bulk-load all of the components that make up the tray and catering and expects cabin crew to lay up each individual tray. A massive increase in workload with current crewing levels, yet at the same time he intends to remove a Purser from the club world galley on all aircraft types. Why do this? Simple, British Airways no longer will have to pay Gate Gourmet or Alpha to set up each tray; you will be doing it and they will pocket the money saved. Oh yes, it also will not be counted towards cabin crews’ cost saving target - but caterings.

Mein Gott...service personnel expected to do a little extra service...

Tremendous entertainment this.

The collective myopia is staggering bearing in mind whats going on in the world around us...

[HiFlyer14]

Oh good idea Mandyconn, can you also ask:

Why BASSA are publishing these inane pieces instead of spending our money on actually agreeing something?

Why BASSA are offering a 2.6% pay cut BEFORE asking our permission to do so? Ditto Pay freeze, increment freeze, 767 to EF, etc. etc.

Why BASSA are discussing the serving of WT+ hot towels and the 2nd Club World service when the role of a Union is PROTECT JOBS AND SALARIES?

Oh and weren't you the one who had some earth shattering info at about midnight a few weeks back? You never did get back to us with that did you?

Thanks Mandyconn...I won't hold my breath....

[nuigini]

BASSA has put us in this situation!

Do they actually know what they are doing and how to get out of this mess? I don't trust them for a second and I fear that their behaviour will punish its members. Frankly, some crew are too naive to realise this and standing behind them (UNITED WE STAND).

Looking at CF it appears that it is mostly the same people this matter. Far less than 100 people (if not half that number) and out of how many members? 3000?

[deeceethree]

CFC telling off others here for sounding like a "cracked record"! How entertaining! :) You probably meant 'stuck record'?

In any event, it doesn't change the noise coming from from the BASSA stable that is nothing but the same unsubstantiated nonsense repeated ad nauseum. Talk about pot calling kettle! :D

[CFC]

Nuigini wrote:

BASSA has put us in this situation!

How did you get to that conclusion Nuigini?

Was it also the Unions fault that a BA Director stormed out of yesterdays 'so important' meeting?

Its getting more and more obvious that BA are just stalling for time - I wonder why.

[wobble2plank]

Its getting more and more obvious that BA are just stalling for time - I wonder why.

BA don't need to 'stall' for time. They have done all, in the eyes of corporate law, they require to be able to impose change.

The timing is entirely up to them.

[Lets Get Wasted]

MrBunker wrote - "I see. Is that the best riposte you can muster in order to try and keep this on an adult level? Therein lies some of the problem we allude to. It's mud slinging and banal intimations of character weakness. I don't post on there as I'm not a cc member. My wife doesn't post on there because, despite what people say, there is no brooking of any heterodox opinion and people who think differently are almost always met with nigh on abusive retorts. To ask for a clarification of fact by a member of your coterie is hardly about risking exposure, despite the occasional history of threats of violence against the person on anonymous cc forums. You may or may not choose to believe thus but the opinions of a vast majority of people at work are not of any significant consequence to my day to day mental balance."


Best riposte ? I'm not giving you an arguement,nor a debate,or even a counterstroke.I'm giving you a suggestion.If you want to debate with someone on CF,then wouldn't it be more effective to do it on CF ? Instead of trying to get someone to relay messages between the two forums ! So to answer your question,then,yes,this is the best riposte as a way of a suggestion I have !

If you don't want you wife to then message on your behalf on CF because you're in fear of abuse or violence against you or your wife,then it's pretty pointless argueing/debating with an individual of CF on a forum(Pprune) that they may not be a member of.Or hoping that another member of CF who is also a member of Pprune will be kind enough to pass on your riposte to them,and then hoping for a reply back from CF to Pprune via the 3rd party is very ambitious.

You obviously have access to CF,so do your own dirty work and don't expect others to do it for you !! :=

[MrBunker]

Which rather backs up my point. Dirty work? Please, if able try not to emotionalise the argument. To ask for clarity to be brought to bear is hardly exhorting a proxy to carry out my "dirty work". Your reply bears that ever so typical over-emoted tone with it. If you don't feel that having the debate conducted with facts alone is worthwhile than so be it but it's not your place to tell my wife to go ahead and post. As I stated earlier I'm not CC so will not post on CF under someone elses pseudonym. The original misapprehension was passed on to me. If in do doing my wife elects to not correct it because she disdains the vituperative nature of that forum, that is entirely her choice. Nor, if you read back did I ask for a third party 'riposte' back on here (I think reply more apt but, to each their own).

I make the observation again, at the nub of the problem in attempting to hold this debate is a general indifference towards using provable, unemotive factual information and an overblown reliance on rhetoric and grandstanding.

[MrBunker]

That aside I suppose it's all sadly academic. The outcome to this will be whatever it will and the febrile intra-staff relationship will continue unabated. To me that's the real and enduring fault at the heart of this airline up and down all the reporting chains.

[bks]

I have been following this debate for quite a while now and it really is going on and on. I have always held the belief that BA crew should fight for what they can but clearly something needs to give and more 'Negotiating' needs to happen.

I am currently in the hold pool/talent pool and my application doesn't expire until August 2010. I am in no rush to start BA particularly in these times but am hopeful that things will get sorted.

I flew with BA last week on 2 JFK flights and spoke to some of the crew on both flights about the current situation but got very different opinions amongst them. Some wore the BASSA Lanyards and said things like "We will fight, we are 14,000 etc etc" some saying things like "We will fight before they cut our jobs and hire new people"

2 i spoke to said they felt uneasy about the hold pools and the fact these people including ex temps are all referenced with paper work done. She felt BA had something planned however still supported any strike action. She also added that we don't want new starters joining because then they can get rid of current crew like her who have have been at BA for 12 years. Very mixed opinions really whilst saying this she did say Good luck with a big smile. It was eye opening to say the least.

I was quite shocked with some though who when i asked about trips on WW said lots of crew call in sick for night stops and this year alone one did the same for Miami, Vancouver and that next month she wants to do the same for trips to Hyderabad and Mumbai on the basis they "Pay crap all" she also said the system at BA is corrupt with some people getting lots of long range trips and she kept getting night stops and that whilst the hotels are nice in some destinations India and Africa pay terribly and no one wants these flights ever. Others standing by agreed.

I was quite shocked at this! Clearly there are some issues in the crew community. Personally i can't see how such important talks have gone on and on since a June 30th deadline. Clearly BA are up to something the cost of having fully referenced hold pools and people in HR costs money.

I maybe wrong in my thoughts. On a happier note i must say the crew were friendly and nice despite some rash opinions and rants when i spoke to them in the galley they certainly all were passionate about BASSA and their jobs at BA.
:)

[LD12986]

she also said the system at BA is corrupt with some people getting lots of long range trips

On this often repeated point of managers at certain outstations seeing the same CSDs time and time again, why isn't anything done about this?

Surely BA's internal audit dept should be picking this up? As BA used to be SEC registered (I'm not sure it still is), it should have a very robust system of internal controls and management testing to ensure that things like this do not happen and compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act.

[overstress]

some destinations India and Africa pay terribly and no one wants these flights ever. Others standing by agreed.

This is no secret and many crew I have spoken to want to change it. There is too much of a collective reluctance to change the gravy train (for some) and the result will be like a blow to the stomach for many.

[wiggy]

Isn't that the reason for "Destination Payments" for some of the supposedly less popular destinations?

As for some destinations being poor allowance payers, restructuring allowances onto a Time Away from Base basis rather than destination specific would solve that little problem - dare I mention that's the system pilots at BA have used for years. Perhaps someone from the Cabin crew community can tell us why they haven't undertaken such restructuring.

[drew3325]

Having just caught up on all the posting on here I thought it was time to add another. Never got any answers the last time I posted so see what happens this time.
1) The extensive postings about "copying "entertaining missives" (and I use that phrase in its broadest term) from one site to another makes me wonder that in this day and age if BASSA didn't want them reproduced elsewhere there are ways and means of stopping it. However it is a two way street and "leaking" what was marked as a strictly private and confidential document, to its members did nothing but add to the confusion way back in the heady days when this episode was all "kicking off". After all it was only a draft! And sending out text messages to member says "Check you mail - urgent update" just added to the fire!.
2) The constant "Personal" attacks on members of the board of BA, especially WW in respect of what he is trying to do - perhaps if one took the time to read what his role is all about at British Airways as well as seeing a copy of his "actual contract" as CEO of BA - all of which are in the public domain - one would see that its not a "personal vendetta against cabin crew"
3)The people that have posted in respect of BASSA not acting in the best interests of their members - have you done anything about it. Working for a firm of solicitors that has specialist employment lawyers I am more than happy to point you in the right direction as to what you can and cant do

and I guess finally, as the partner of a BA crew member with many friends at BA, the consensus amongst them now seems to be well "what ever happens will happen - lets wait and see"

I wonder once all the "FACTS" are known and the bickering stops will it all be as bad as some make out. (Am sure that will not go down well in some parts).

Finally though I would like to add a thank you for keeping me entertained and updated with the going on in the world of BA cabin crew.

[thunderbird7]

Why hasn't it changed? Blindingly obvious! Those at the front of the gravy train are the same people that negotiate for the rest of crew as BASSA reps. The corruption in CC rostering has been known about and talked about for years and recently highlighted with the suspension of a rostering bloke for 'allegedly' taking 'cash for rosters' . Its not rocket science when you see the same old faces in NRT HKG BKK SIN and fly with other crew who never go there.

What is more unbelievable is that the masses put up with this and don't vote out the greedy, self-centred people who are feathering their own nests.

This rant is nothing to do with the current negotiations but just a comment on the system in general!!

[Nutjob]

Haven't posted for a while but things do seem to have changed. I always subscribed to the "need for change" and was prepared to make concessions. I've been unimpressed with BASSA's approach over the last few months and felt that their conduct would end up with a worse solution being imposed upon us.

But I have to say, BA seems as bad lately and McCarthy storming out of meetings (and I gather that the BASSA line on this IS true this time) does BA no favours either.

How long will this ridiculous stand-off go on? Every time it's "no progress" and "further meetings planned for xxxx". Well as every deal is off the table, blank sheets of paper are out and we seem to be back at square one then how are BASSA and BA going to sort this out?

If BA needs these savings desperately, then they need to get on with. Otherwise, this will be seen as the opportunistic raid that BASSA believe it is. :confused:

[SR71]

Not that its any of our business I suppose, but can someone restate the BA proposals that BASSA are so upset with?

It might serve to refresh our minds after 90 pages of debate as to what exactly is being discussed here and whether or not in the light of the ensuing micro and macro-economic developments, it is reasonable?

Just a thought...

I've read the whole thread but can't be bothered to sift back through it to find the info...

[nuigini]

Speak to our ICC in HKG, NRT and SIN and they will confirm that they see the same crew over and over again!

[etrang]

On BASSA's web site they helpfully provide e-mail addresses, including one at their legal advisors, OHParsons.

General enquiries: Office AT bassa.co.uk
Questions & Answers: QandA AT bassa.co.uk
Legal questions: bassa AT ohparsons.co.uk (no spaces)
Euro Fleet T5 Office: LHREurofleet AT bassa.co.uk
World Wide T5 Office: LHRWorldwide AT bassa.co.uk

So if anyone is still interested in the legal advice offered to BASSA members, rather than asking other posters, you can contact their lawyers directly.

And mandy, i've just checked and ohparsons say this e-mail address is not "confidential information".

[Jean-Lill]

Inconsistent Crewing levels have not changed which one would expect would have happened with a marked reduction in cabin service in the tourist cabins on short haul routes regardless of this current situation concerning industrial discusions if there are any.

I was a pax on a BA Airbus 319 yesterday on a 2 hour flight and there were still 5 cabin crew, 2 were serving about 6 club pax and 3 more serving a combined drinks/bevs service handing out a cookie at the same time. The toursit section of the 319 had a capacity of about 70 seats of which about 60 seats were occupied. Do they really need 3 crew for 70 pax when only a drinks service is offered in 2 hours?

The 3 of them completed the entire drinks service in well less than 15 minutes, then the they went round trying to sell tax free items which took about 10 minutes. So for well over an hour they had nothing to do. I would have thought even without the current industrial unrest they would have reduced the amount of cabin crew to suit the service requirement. 3 in toursit made the cabin over-staffed.

[deeceethree]

Jean-Lill,

And there lies the rub! BA wants to reduce its heavily overstaffed cabins but BASSA are playing hard-ball because, as a union, it can't see past its own snout. And not only are the cabins over-staffed, they are overstaffed with some very expensive cabin crew. Given the perilous state of the world's finances, and in particular the finances of the air travel/freight industry, BA is having one hell of a job convincing the snout-in-the-trough-ers that they have to bite the bullet.
So for well over an hour they had nothing to doTrust me, there are some (but not all) who are more than happy to keep it that way. They don't seem to understand that when they are on duty they should be working!

[Carnage Matey!]

So, the bloke down the pub tells me the 90 day consultation period for cabin crew redundancy is up on 30th September, and on the same day BASSA will meet BA for last ditch talks with a blank piece of paper. Wonder what'll come out the other side if BASSA don't shift from their position?

[Ancient Observer]

Are there any other views about McCarthy's alleged "storming out"?
If he's in charge of "negotiations", it sounds like, er, unusual behaviour. Or is it just another attack on anyone from the BA Exec. team?

[Da Dog]

AC

If you read my posts you will see that I am anti BASSA in almost all respects and I try not to post just to wind people up with unfounded speculation( but sometimes it happens) Please believe me and my previous post. Said person had a 2 year old style strop, intentional or otherwise it happened.

This is very worrying.

[Terminal 5]

Seems like one part of the union isn't happy with the other.......

. COST SAVING TALKS PAGE (http://uniteba.com/COSTSAVINGTALKSPAGE.html)

[LD12986]

The rhetoric that we have been subject to is outdated, offensive and
unnecessary. We note that in their piece on their website, BASSA claim to
have been "ready to talk all week, day and night if necessary".
We welcome this stance, as at the last meeting at ACAS BASSA stated that
they were unwilling to stay beyond 3pm having arrived late (they finally
arrived after 11am) for a 10am start.


Strong words indeed. A critical meetiing with BA and BASSA reps can't stay past 3pm? Was there something on TV? Seriously, this is poor.

[Hotel Mode]

Strong words indeed. A critical meetiing with BA and BASSA reps can't stay past 3pm? Was there something on TV? Seriously, this is poor.

Its ok, like the Pope Lalalady is infallible, so, AMICUS are making it all up (oh and BA set them up when they broke away in 89 so they are really just BA management). I think a grassy knoll and some black helicopters were involved but i'd lost interest by then. :ugh:

[drew3325]

I wonder if Bassa's Legal Representatives would be happy to answer questions regarding whether or not their "client" has been acting in the best interest of its "members"?

I here the latest from Galley FM that disillusioned Bassa members who are tired of seeing their "monthly subs" go towards paying for "creative writers" to write character assassination missives published on on its website, are seeking to break away and form a new union. After all a union represents its members and those who run can just as easily be voted off it as they are voted onto it. If the shareholders and board of BA deem it necessary to give a "vote of confidence" to the likes of WW then perhaps its time for unhappy BASSA members to give a vote of "No confidence" on its Executive! Perhaps the breakaway union is just for the "crew" who arent on the mega salaries, best trips, best allowances, 30% contracts but the ones who have little to loose financially with the BA proposals and see that in the current economic climate there is a need for change. You cant have your cake and eat it. Perhaps they are also the people that read the newspapers and watch the news on tv and see that its not just BA that are making job cuts and cost savings but also the likes of Virgin, Lufthansa, Japan Airlines as well as many of the American carriers. Surely not every airline can be "wrong"!!!!!!

[keel beam]

BKS

Clearly there are some issues in the crew community.

Lets Get Wasted

BASSA volunteered a strangely familiar 2.61% but without the other diminutions to our t and cs."


If I may add my two penneth worth as an employee of BA.

Has BASSA at any point met with all Cabin Crew, (or as many as is practicable.... NB not the odd hundred or so that turn up at an outside mass meeting!), to ask what THEY want, what THEY are prepared to concede and how THEY want to progress if an unsatisfactory offer results?

[keel beam]

LD12986

compliance with Section 404 of the Sarbanes Oxley Act

BA withdrew from SOX when they delisted from the American stock market.

[beerdrinker]

Have they delisted?

Aviation Week (American magazine) dated 14th Sept page 12 "Market Focus" quotes closing price on Sept 9th - BA Current Week 34.96; Previous Week 29.50; Trailing /E 14.0 Fwd P/e 9.7 Pct Chg YLD 35.3 up.

Other airlines listed include Jetblue Southwest and Air Tran, all of which are not listed on the London FTSE. So I reckon BA are still listed on the NYSE.

BD

[TopBunk]

BD

Are you sure that BA is British Airways and not Boeing Aerospace?

I believe BAW (or was it BAY) delisted as stated some years ago.

[Andyismyname]

Topbunk, you are right, the airline delisted from the NYSE in 2007, saving 10 million a year.

[LD12986]

I'm not surprised. Section 404 compliance is an absolute nightmare for companies the size of BA!

[midman]

How are Bassa responding to the pretty unprecedented lambasting from their Unite colleagues? Turning up late, using offensive rhetoric, undermining any hope of progress etc.

And is this how its membership wish to be represented?

[beerdrinker]

No it is on the list headed Airlines

BD

[Plan 10]

For the last four days, following Mandyconn's post, I've simply been a nervous wreck, hiding in the corner of the room underneath my username, quivering at the slightest rustle of the trees or ring of the telephone, and not answering the door incase it was the BASSA police come to drag me away for my rightful punishment.

So I've decided to change. I am now a reformed character, nevermore to post any of BASSA's missives on this forum again, and I may even change my mind about their literacy, relevance and value-for-money (the people who write the "Eyes-Only" posts, that is) over time. Please accept my humble apologies, I will never post another BASSA communication again, I'm just too scared. :(

[Plan 10]

This a letter from Steve Turner, UNITE’s national officer for C.A.T. in response to the events of this week

To: All British Airways Cabin Crew
BASSA members
Dear colleagues

UNITE - British Airways Cabin Crew Negotiations

With reference to the above, I felt that it would be appropriate to update you on where negotiations are between your union and British Airways.

Firstly, I know BASSA do an excellent job of communicating with you and have kept you accurately informed of progress on a regular basis. I also know you as a community are rightly extremely supportive of your representatives. This is a testimony to your cohesiveness as members and the organisation of the branch, which gives me, your National Secretary, a real sense of pride and support during negotiations.

I have been tasked by the Joint General Secretary, Tony Woodley to lead negotiations over changes within the Cabin Crew NSP. As always I am accompanied by your BASSA representatives. I am acutely aware of the significance of the impact of proposed changes on crew and have approached our discussions with a seriousness and integrity that befits the situation you face.

Sadly I cannot say the same is true is respect of British Airways. They have constantly misrepresented both my position and that of BASSA.

Therefore for reasons of clarity I felt it necessary to take the unusual step of updating you personally to avoid any misrepresentation of the true position of your union, Unite.

Both BASSA and I were available to convene talks immediately subsequent to the meeting of the General Secretaries and Willie Walsh. A series of dates were agreed upon as acceptable to both sides, this is a simple matter of record.

To suggest otherwise is regrettably a somewhat transparent attempt to distract attention away from the real issues that we face.

They will not succeed we will continue to remain clear and focused on exactly the reasons why these talks are being held and that is to secure the future of your hard won agreements for all cabin crew within British Airways.
In respect of the meeting held this Monday the only agreement on talks were that there were no preconditions. This remains the case.

The fact that BA have attempted to place the precondition on talks of watching a presentation and accepting a £140m (or 25% reduction) cost saving, is neither helpful nor will be accepted. Indeed, sadly, they have also attempted to place the same preconditions on the meeting of the ACC NSP, again this in not acceptable to our union.

In refusing to go ahead with the NSP the company have refused to resolve serious immediate issues that affect you the crew. These issues will not go away, and by not addressing them they simply add to the myriad of industrial relations problems that we face.

In respect of the future talks, let me place on record there has been no ’agreed principles’ through ACAS. For Bill Francis, who was neither present nor involved in any of the discussions on Monday to state otherwise is simply not true. Sadly this is something that I have come to expect from his communications as they have tended to reflect a much distorted version of reality.

Your BASSA representatives and I will attend talks on you behalf, where we will seek to resolve the current situation with the best interest of you, our members, at heart. While the company may wish to portray differences of approach between Unite branches at BA for their own ends, let me reassure you that this is not the case and that we are speaking as one on behalf of all of our members within our community.

We will return to the Branch on the 5th October, where we will update you and let you guide us on matters. At the heart of our union, are the interests of you our members and through out any future talks this will remain my sole priority.

Yours in solidarity

Steve Turner
National Officer - Civil Air Transport

Oh dear. My finger slipped.

[keel beam]

Plan 10 - you are safe! It is a UNITE missive!

[deeceethree]

Hardly surprising to see this drivel from Steve Turner:
Firstly, I know BASSA do an excellent job of communicating with you They have constantly misrepresented both my position and that of BASSA.To suggest otherwise is regrettably a somewhat transparent attempt to distract attention away from the real issues that we face.Sadly this is something that I have come to expect from his communications as they have tended to reflect a much distorted version of reality.All the above examples are amazingly accurate descriptions of BASSA behaviour, except for the first quote - BASSA are all hyperbole and bugger all substance when it comes to 'communicating'! A union in such complete denial can only meet an untidy, miserable end.

[Skylion]

Why should BASSA absolutely refuse to listen to BAs presentation explaining the economic and business background?

[Carnage Matey!]

Wasn't it Steve Turner who turned up for an imaginary meeting with BA, TV cameras in tow, after the negotiating deadline had passed?

[Carnage Matey!]

And the latest:

Unite fears BA suffering an identity crisis over
moves to introduce low-cost carrier charges


Unite, the UK’s largest aviation union
and the largest union representing
workers at British Airways, is today
(Saturday) accusing BA's management
of suffering an identity crisis. It comes
as the airline's management
announces that it will charge for seat
reservations, a move Unite believes
tarnishes the carrier's image further
and is another misguided attempt to
mimic the low-cost airlines.
Unite warns hefty charges - around £60 to book an
aisle or window seat - for passengers already paying
premium prices wishing to select seats on-line or sit
together as families will drive customers away from BA.
Steve Turner, Unite national officer for civil avi-
ation, described the announcement as “complete
madness from a management team rapidly losing its
way and undermining the proud standing of British
Airways as the UK’s national flag carrier”.
“Unite is becoming increasingly frustrated with BA
and its attempts to address change in the industry
by adopting the practices of low cost carriers.
Clearly, the management are suffering an identity
crisis. But BA’s market is not low cost, it will never
successfully compete in the low cost market and it
should not aspire to be a low-cost operator.
"BA's management is failing to recognise the extent of
anger felt by customers already annoyed by additional
charges made by low cost carriers. Customers
‘upgrading' to BA do not expect to see add-on
charges for seat allocation, baggage check in, meals
and drinks.
"This is a mistake and a continuation of a misguided
trend in BA that is undermining the airline's standing
both at home and globally. Desperate measures, practices
and tactics adopted by BA’s senior management team
and board are taking our airline in the wrong direction.
Even the Prime Minister opted to use another carrier to
fly to the G20 in the US, and not British Airways, the UK’s
national carrier and the only one with the union jack on
its tail."
Unite is becoming increasingly frustrated with
the slow pace of dialogue with, and the erratic
strategy adopted by, BA's management over
measures to cut costs during the economic
downturn. Unite has repeatedly warned that
continued attacks on employee terms and the
business itself, coupled with unilateral changes
to working practices, is devastating morale
and will bring further instability to the airline
as it struggles to meet the challenges of the
recession.
Despite these frustrations, Unite is continuing to
work to find a mutually acceptable way forward in
on-going negotiations with the company.
ENDS

Looks like Unite think they are running BA now!

[Da Dog]

I hate BA management (along with most coal face employees) but give me BA management over the muppets that are BASSA and Unite. This whole debacle goes beyond BASSA v BA and extends more into future revenue for UNITE who are already deeply in the red.

Read between the lines, because that is where exactly BA Cabin Crew are, unfortunately most can't see it:ugh::ugh:

[LD12986]

But BA’s market is not low cost, it will never
successfully compete in the low cost market and it
should not aspire to be a low-cost operator.


And this is because.....

[deeceethree]

And this is because..... ...... in a low-cost operator the 'troughers' in BASSA would see the end of their lifestyles, and UNITE would see a dive in subscription income? :hmm:

[CFC]

Here we again...

...... in a low-cost operator the 'troughers' in BASSA would see the end of their lifestyles, and UNITE would see a dive in subscription income?

...but of course that would'nt affect Flight Crew in your small world, would it?

[deeceethree]

CFC,

You're still not paying attention are you? It has been stated here dozens of times!

BA cabin crew are the most overmanned and, for many of the LHR senior grades, the most overpaid in Europe, if not the world! BASSA have consistently interfered in the day to day operation of the airline for decades. Consequently it is the cabin crew as a group, together with BASSA, that now have to take the pain. Owing to the utter ineptitude of BASSA, that is going to be unpleasant for the cushy lifestyle that has been enjoyed, but undeserved, by many.

Simple. :rolleyes:

[drew3325]

Anyone have any thoughts on the recent increase in monthly subs for BASSA membership? A 99p rise which may not seem alot but on the basis of it being nearly 7% one wonders how this extra "income" will be used. Perhaps there is a new "creative writer" being employed to write even more entertaining missives on their website. Perhaps extra income is required in preparation for the extra postage costs that will be incurred when the "ballot papers" are sent out. £16.39 a month not the best value for money.

Also anyone know how one gets to see how the "income" generated by all the subs paid by its members is used? Am sure it would make interesting reading.

p.s. note to self current rate of inflation 1.8%. Sub increase 7%. Recommended pay cut 2.61% bargain...........

[stormin norman]

Unite gave £1,364,175 to the Labour Party in 2008.

You might not like the current government but your paying to keep them solvent.

[wobble2plank]

Nice to see that the hierarchy of Unite can still live it up at the trade unions congress though. On their members money.

[CFC]

Deeceethre wrote:

BA cabin crew are the most overmanned and, for many of the LHR senior grades, the most overpaid in Europe, if not the world! BASSA have consistently interfered in the day to day operation of the airline for decades.

Are you saying by the above you have been with BA for decades?

[Dutchjock]

Let's say he has been in BA for decades CFC, now why dont you try to answer the actual point being made?

[beerdrinker]

I have been and I agree with Deeceethree.

[Ancient Observer]

There are 90 pages of this thread.
I've read all the postings.

I'm not sure that the thread is helping anyone. No-one from Bassa responds to serious questions, so it just frustrates contributors.

The only position we've heard from the Bassa-style CC is quite simply "what we have we hold", - end of.

Positive contributions from LGW staff, and from pilots, and from non-BA folk are by and large ignored. GG and JSL must wonder about their colleagues.

I'm now going to try to stay away, until and unless anything meaningful develops.

[deeceethree]

CFC,

You have assumed I am in BA, haven't you? In any event, anyone's time in or out of BA is largely an irrelevance - let us see if you can counter any of the reasoned arguments/points/positions here without resorting to inane, hollow BASSA-speak. Go on, have a go! I dare you! :)

[Human Factor]

...without resorting to inane, hollow BASSA-speak.

That's all they know how to do. Sadly it explains why the axe is hanging over 2000 people with the HR1 notice period ending tomorrow when more than that could have been taking VR with a nice pay off.

Idiots.

[bermudatriangle]

i heard today that enough crew have volunteered for voluntary redundancy to cover the 2000 headcount equivalent reduction.the problem is that unless new crew levels on the aircraft can be agreed,they cannot be released as there will be insufficient crew to man the aircraft.that is the reason why they have not been allowed to go already.
difficult negotiations ahead for this week.its all taking a long time to resolve,the original deadline for agreement was end of june if i remember correctly.

[Human Factor]

Which means if the crewing levels aren't agreed, they will be imposed. The deadline is tomorrow for all practical purposes. If a deal is agreed, I can see those 2000 (or more perhaps) walking with a nice VR payoff.

As previously mentioned (not that CFC appears to have read any of the thread), if no deal is agreed a deal will be imposed shortly followed by 2000 P45s going in the post with statutory redundancy. Any resulting attempt at a strike will almost certainly be prevented by legal means.

[midman]

I understand that approximately 43% of 14000 cabin crew are part time (=6000 individuals)
If there is a requirement to remove 2000 MPE from the business, and the average part timer works 66% (equal shares between 50% and 75% plus 150 at 33%), then 6000 out of the remaining 8000 must have applied for part time.

A few rough assumptions in there but is this realistic?

Can so many people from a workforce afford to go part time, leaving the equivalent of only 14% working full time?

I doubt it.

[deeceethree]

Can the company afford to have so many part-timers? 2 or more people doing 1 job are always going to cost more than 1 person doing the same job (admin, uniforms, etc). Whilst the company may be content to have some part-timers, that doesn't mean it wants a lot of them ......

[KitKat747]

I am surprised as many as 43% may be part time, that is almost 6000 part time contracts.
That is a lot more uniforms to pay for and SEP training days + the admin costs etc.

[Litebulbs]

How can you say BASSA is ineffective, when the same old people keep stating that a large proportion of BA crew are the best paid in the world? I would say that is a very effective union and until the world crash, BA still made substantial profits!

If they had listened to some of the advice on here, they would have been down on market rate years ago.

And please stop banging on about a strike being illegal. Why would it be? OK, taking BA to court over SOSR may be a struggle, but industrial action against an imposition is not.

[overstress]

I would say that is a very effective union Effective? If you're an old contract CSD or purser at LHR, maybe...

[LD12986]

Effective union or historically weak management?

[CFC]

Deeceethree answered my simple Q of whether he/she works for BA and has it been "for ages" by:

You have assumed I am in BA, haven't you? In any event, anyone's time in or out of BA is largely an irrelevance - let us see if you can counter any of the reasoned arguments/points/positions here without resorting to inane, hollow BASSA-speak. Go on, have a go! I dare you!

Deeceethree, a simple yes or no will do.

[wobble2plank]

CFC,

Whether or not they have been in BA since its inception or just joined last week makes no difference at all.

BA has had to publish detailed cost breakdowns both as a National Airline and as a private stock market listed company.

Those cost details can be seen by anyone who is interested and those, including the costings held by the CAA, show that BA Cabin Crew are far more expensive per head than any other competitive airline with similar structure.

If you search for it yourself I'm sure you can find the figures but to assist here are the CAA figures from back BEFORE the boom.

Table_1_14_Airline_Personnel_Cost_UK_and_Overseas_2003.pdf (http://www.caa.co.uk/docs/80/airline_data/2003Annual/Table_1_14_Airline_Personnel_Cost_UK_and_Overseas_2003.pdf)

oddly enough the BA line reads:

BRITISH AIRWAYS PLC (a) 3156 Male Pilots 155 Female Pilots 84.8% average expenditure per head - 4468 Male CC 9426 Female CC 27.8% average expenditure per head

and, back in 2003 before their merger:

BRITANNIA AIRWAYS 410 Male Pilots 12 Female Pilots 98.3% Average expenditure per head - 273 Male CC 1232 Female CC 17.1% Average expenditure per head

So, since then Brittania has been mergered with far cheaper CC and a change in their terms. BA flight crew were cheaper per head than Brittania in 2003 and have subsequently modified their T's & C's to reflect the change in global circumstance and BASSA have altered what exactly?

Now don't get me wrong, BASSA as a union have done well to protect what they have until now, achieved on the whole by cutting off and abandoning limbs such as Glasgow, Manchester and Gatwick and protecting Fortress Heathrow, they have fallen drastically at this hurdle by their complete unwillingness to face facts that they must change. This has been exacerbated by weak management in the past but that isn't occurring now. BASSA should have made a stab at effective negotiation BEFORE the 30th June deadline. Anything the company gives now is by BA's grace not BASSA's hard work.

[deeceethree]

CFC,

Once more, for you and anyone else struggling to grasp reality - it is irrelevant!

Concentrate, and get back to the basics of the thread. You are obviously lacking any strategy for 'defending' BASSA's corner, if all you harp on about is whether someone has been in the company 10 minutes or 10 years?:D

[LD12986]

On a related matter, I am hearing rave reviews of the LGW crews who are working on the LCY-JFK flights who are doing an excellent job and seem to be genuinely proud to be working on this service. :ok:

[Plan 10]

Hmmm, do I sense the tone changing somewhat?

Sent: Tuesday, September 29, 2009 7:49 PM
Subject: BASSA: FIVE FACTS


Five things you need to know right now.

1. There are only three days of talks currently planned; these are,
Wednesday 30th September, Thursday 1st and Friday 2nd October. No further
talks have been arranged.

2. The results of those talks, if any, good or bad will be reported
directly back to you at our next branch, which is on Monday 5th of
October, at our Kempton Park venue. You will decide any next step.

3. British Airways are still demanding GBP140 million in savings,
directly from your salary costs.

4. Behind the scenes, British Airways In-flight Customer Experience
management, are preparing to impose their plans for cost cutting on, or
around December 1st

5. As a simple reminder, and to put all of this into perspective,
this is what has been expected of other areas:

Cost saving targets within British Airways:

Management grades

No reduction in individual terms, conditions or salary costs. Savings
achieved by the offer of enhanced voluntary severance at 1.5 times annual
salary, available to all managers.

Pilots

Salary costs of GBP445m, which would increase over the next two years to
GBP458, therefore their challenge was to stay "cost neutral", saving GBP13
million. Savings required, 2.83%.

They also accepted a further saving of GBP10 million to fund voluntary
severance for 66 pilots.

Cabin crew

GBP567.9m salary costs - costs to be reduced by GBP140m from a 2000 head
count reduction. Savings required, 24.65%.

With these facts, it would appear extremely unlikely that even with the
best will in the world, we would be able to reach an agreement that you
would find acceptable.

These things are happening right now, and you need to ensure that you know
what is going to happen very shortly. BASSA is your union, we cannot
compete with British Airways in terms of communication resources, but we
have one thing they do not have, YOU.

We need YOU to spread the word today amongst your friends and colleagues;
we need to prepare to stand together for what we believe in and to protect
each other, that's how we will be at our strongest; if we do not the
consequences will be unthinkable.

Notwithstanding the obvious omissions from their list, such as productivity savings, it is heartening to here the cries for unity; similar to the cries heard when the Birmingham, Glasgow, and Manchester bases were closed, and the new-entrant salaries agreed. Those cries were deafening, and still reverberate now; what a brave and bold front BASSA put up to preserve those jobs!

Oh, hang on, I'd dipped into a parallell universe there for a moment, sorry. :ugh:

Don't think the consequences will be exactly unthinkable, maybe just working a bit harder, fixed-links and no more one-out one-back days. See, it can be thought. After all, most other airlines in the entire World, civilised or otherwise do that already.

You have been failed by your union. Abjectly, publicly and shamefully. It is writ large, if you cannot see it, then you deserve the representation you pay for.

[Meal Chucker]

British Airways’ ‘fight for survival’ is over - Times Online (http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/transport/article6856095.ece)

Willie Walsh, the chief executive of British Airways, has signalled that the immediate crisis facing the airline has receded and it is no longer in a “fight for survival”.
He added that the airline’s merger with Iberia should be completed before the end of the year. Mr Walsh has also expressed an interest in buying bmi, the former British Midland, from Lufthansa, although no formal talks have been held.
The BA boss was speaking aboard BA001, the new business-class only service launched on Tuesday, from London City airport to New York, whose operation yesterday was delayed because of an engine fault.
Mr Walsh said: “I think we have done what needed to be done to address the immediate crisis we faced. Strengthening our cash position was a critical issue and we are taking the right steps to profitability. The situation is no longer as critical.”
His bullish outlook for the talks between BA and Iberia, the Spanish flag carrier, comes despite 14 months of difficult negotiations.
Mr Walsh warned in June that BA faced a fight for survival after the carrier lost £401 million the previous year and was burning through cash reserves at about £1 million a day.
Since then, BA has raised £680 million, cut costs and launched an aggressive pricing strategy.
BA raised money from investors in July via a convertible bond in order to bolster its balance sheet. The carrier has also cut capacity so its aircraft are flying fuller and is reducing costs, eliminating 1,450 jobs since the end of the last financial year.
However, Mr Walsh played down any suggestion that BA was entering a recovery phase. He pointed out that the International Air Transport Association (IATA) recently increased its estimate of how much global airlines will lose this year to $11 billion.
“We’re not banking on a significant or quick recovery,” he said.
The fragility of BA’s recovery means that the airline will continue to seek cost savings. It began three days of talks with unions representing its 14,000 cabin crew yesterday and Mr Walsh is determined that operational changes will be made.

[Flap62]

Litebulbs
If they had listened to some of the advice on here, they would have been down on market rate years ago.

Excellent! So, tell me, what is so wrong about being paid market rate for your job in a comptetive environment? Your post has an element of pride that you admit BA cabin crew have stayed above market rate - can you please tell me how you justify that? And please don't give me the "best service, best crew in the world" argument- let's try to keep your answer on this planet.

[CFC]

Deeceethree answered my simple Q. of does he work for BA and has it been "ages" as he previously mentioned by:

Once more, for you and anyone else struggling to grasp reality - it is irrelevant!

Concentrate, and get back to the basics of the thread. You are obviously lacking any strategy for 'defending' BASSA's corner, if all you harp on about is whether someone has been in the company 10 minutes or 10 years?

The relevance of my simple Q. was because Deeceethree has made previous statements -

BA cabin crew are the most overmanned and, for many of the LHR senior grades, the most overpaid in Europe, if not the world! BASSA have consistently interfered in the day to day operation of the airline for decades. Consequently it is the cabin crew as a group, together with BASSA, that now have to take the pain. Owing to the utter ineptitude of BASSA, that is going to be unpleasant for the cushy lifestyle that has been enjoyed, but undeserved, by many.

So one can see the relevance of my simple Q. trying to determine whether he/she works for BA and how long for in order to make these statements ... or does he quote from hearsay all the time.

Yet another 'expert' making wild accusations on this site/thread just brings it all down to playground behaviour.

Deeceethree grow up.

[midman]

CFC,
I've worked for BA for over 20 years and agree with every word deeceethree says, (if that makes you happier.)
I don't think I've spoken to another pilot in years who doesn't agree with the sentiment that the balance of power has shifted to a ludicrous position in IFS/IFCE where Bassa believe they have the right to decide and veto company strategy, they can make operational decisions on the day as to whether flights may operate or not, can override Captains' legal decisions and most importantly, can refuse to take part in any form of business development that affects their terms and conditions, even in the deepest recession to hit our economy since WW2.

It's quite evident from the "Five Facts" and other recent Bassa comms that they have no intention of negotiating anything substantial; they see Willie Walsh as the first individual willing to take on their power base and emasculate their influence. The resulting personal attacks against him show that this has to be a battle to get rid of Walsh, because if they don't, they will lose all they hold so precious. They see market rate +10%, as offered by the Company, as "not worth coming to work for". (The words direct from a Bassa rep yesterday morning on the bus to T5), and will lose the status, as CSDs at LHR which they seem to think of as so important. They will no longer decide whether to get off the aircraft if 10 minutes over their industrial limit (while the pilots remain on board to try to get the operation and passengers back on plan), and they will no longer be able to say no to the handing out of hot towels.

This is what Bassa will lose if Willie stays on. Having to follow management's instructions, and working to market rate+10%, it's just not on. That's why these talks will fail.

[wiggy]

As another BA employee with 20 years + can I say: :ok:

I reckon you've summed up the whole sorry mess very well with that post.

There are a lot of top notch people in the Cabin Crew community, they need union representation, *** knows we all do with this management, but BASSA has become an absolute monster....