BA Cabin Crew Strike Threats (Merged)

[Malone]

Just mentioned on the BBC News, apparently the baggage handlers at LHR are due to strike on Tuesday as well! Anyone know anything about this?
I hope that they are getting extra staff in at the Hayes Jobcentre if all this madness does actually go ahead!
:sad:

[Malone]

Can I also add my support to all of you at Gatwick who have always tended to be realists and take the sensible route.

[jetset lady]

Dollydaydream,

I suspect BA are waiting for the outcome of the court case and to find out exactly how many crew are willing to work before they start looking at which flights will go and which will stay. If it's anything like last time, they will attempt to protect the long haul services first.

As for the salary issue, as you probably know butothers may not, in this job, you will always be able to find those earning more and those earning less, than the published amounts due to the way trips are allocated. I, for example, don't tend to bid for the longer trips, therefore I earn less than someone that does. That is my choice and I have no complaints with what I earn. Unfortunately, at BA in particular, the averages tend to be artificially high, due to massive gap between new and some of the old contract staff.

Edited to add, only saw your last post after posting, but thank you!

[Andy_S]

Just mentioned on the BBC News, apparently the baggage handlers at LHR are due to strike on Tuesday as well! Anyone know anything about this?

I understand that only one of the baggage handling companies at LHR is involved, and that consequently only a couple of airlines will be affected. Emirates, Thai, one other?

[Ancient Observer]

The problem for JSL, GG and others at lgw is PR. Like it or not - and I know you don't, 92% of an 80% turnout is - even for the NUM - a huge number in favour of a strike. Even Scargill did not get that sort of support.

Then, the "carefully released to the TV" camera shots of crew jumping in delight at "ruining granny's Christmas", and the leaking by the T & G that the Christmas date for the strike was the suggestion of the Socialist Workers Party, and Bassa's top team, means that anti-crew feelings are very high.

The PR battle has been lost, and the crew will not get it back.

All you can do as individuals is to keep the faith, keep talking to the waverers, and keep delivering a great service.
all the best
AO

[READY MESSAGE]

BBC now reporting the strike cannot go ahead....

[El Grifo]

That's Willie and the gang one step closer to the goal

[Ancient Observer]

Are we allowed to post humour here, or is it still too sensitive?
Might be best in JB, I guess.

[Psr777]

High Court grants injunction and rules strike illegal.

Unite - "a disgraceful day for democracy"

[glad rag]

You got a reference for that?

[doogle92]

BBC News - British Airways cabin crew strike illegal, court rules (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/business/8418805.stm)

[manintheback]

Oh well. Good news for all the travellers at Xmas, but is it good for BA - if as likely the strike is balloted again and goes ahead next year - whos going to be booking future flights until its all resolved? Not me. Or will the CC give up?

[Chuffer Chadley]

Good news for everybody, including the union and its members, IMHO!

Very glad for all those travelling this xmas.

[BoeingMEL]

Good news for travellers.... and hopefully for the long-term interests of company and employees alike. Great name for this union huh? Unite? :ugh:

Oh my lord... a sensible and logical judgment from the High Court! :rolleyes:

Happy Christmas everyone bm:ok:

[Psr777]

Frankly - I really don't care...

Just happy that I should be able to get home on Christmas Eve.. That is if the crew don't throw mass sickies like they did last time!

[foxmoth]

Oh my lord... a sensible and logical judgment from the High Court!

Reading the report it looks like the decision was purely a legal one because the Union cocked it up, seems they are going to reballot - so not sure how long it will be before they can go ahead and permenantly put themselves out of work:hmm:

[Misterredmist]

I am still astonished that so many CC voted in favour of ruining
so many families' Xmas and putting their own jobs in jeopardy
aswell........ madness.......

[Scumbag O'Riley]

BA have The Establishment on their side which might be what makes the difference.I hate to say I told you so....

Surprising decision, even Thatcher thought workers should be able to withdraw their labour.

Would never have gone Virgin's way.

[BAOREY]

The injunction is great news to so many people who can hopefully now travel as planned at Christmas, lets not forget though the cheers from Sandown and the utter contempt shown to the BA customers by the vast majority of CC and their union.

[k3lvc]

Maybe given the surprise 12 day duration those that vote may be a bit more careful about what exactly they're voting for/against when th next ballot occurs.

[glad rag]

Well all they have to do now is ensure that there are enough CC to man the aircraft, sort the baggage handlers dispute out and it will be back to square one again!!
I think the HC have actually done the CC a favour

GR

[jonseagull]

All in all,this whole sorry episode is reflecting very badly on Unite and BA cabin crew. I wonder what relations are like between crew and the other side of the flightdeck door.
I wouldn't be too impressed if our cabin crew were trying to take my employers to the wall.

[ciderman]

Unite have shown their cynicism and contempt for the travelling public who pay their member's wages and achieved nothing other than showing their true colours. Great news but some SLF will still vote with their feet. I hope the BA CC realise the path they have been led down.

[BusDriverLHR]

Great news for almost everyone concerned - including quite a few who probably don't even realise it.

The CC have now been given a second chance - they've witnessed both the incompetence of BASSA and the ridiculous measures they are willing to take to try and achieve their goals.

If they should again vote YES for strike action then no-one can have any sympathy for them. Hopefully they have seen the error of their ways (i.e. allowing BASSA to represent them) and will vote accordingly next time.

[jethrobee]

I am glad that this nonsense has been stopped.

If I was in the companies shoes I would sue BASSA for reputational damage, many business simply wont use BA as a first choice anymore, the damage has been done already by this episode.

[BabyBear]

If I was WW I would be hoping they continued with the illegal strike to give me an excuse to sack them and recruit new staff under sensible conditions. Rather than be thankful for what they have had over the years they would see the Company go down.

[wubalaj]

Common sense prevails. I hope BA CC have a long hard think about where to go next. Mrs Justice Cox is their saviour from those neanderthal jobs worths trying to relive the 70's ! Time to move on guys..........................

[jethrobee]

sadly I fear the damage to BA has been done even though the strike isnt going ahead.

[Andy_S]

I hate to say I told you so....Surprising decision, even Thatcher thought workers should be able to withdraw their labour. Would never have gone Virgin's way.

Surely you're not serious? As has been pointed out, the injunction was granted as a point of law. BASSA mismanaged the ballot and people who had no entitlement to vote were allowed to do so. The "establishment" have nothing to do with the issue. There's nothing to stop BASSA re-balloting, and provided they do it properly and legally next time then a strike would be valid.

[wiggy]

Scumbag......Oh boy, yet another example of the victim culture that seems prevalent amongst a significant number of BA's Cabin Crew.

We've had a several days now of Cabin Crew complaining nobody told them that they were voting for an all out strike, now they are complaining that the establishment is against them.

Todays ruling was quite straightforward - BASSA couldn't organise a strike ballot...and that's not my fault, that's not Willie Walsh's fault, it's not Gordon Brown's fault, it's BASSAs fault...live with it

[Dysag]

August 3, 1981:
"They are in violation of the law and if they do not report for work within 48 hours they have forfeited their jobs and will be terminated."

August 5, 1981: They were.

[Rainboe]

It will take a few weeks to re-ballot, then if the enthusiasm is still there, they can hold the public to ransom in a trough passenger period in January or February!
But whatever, WW must sort this problem out. The Pension deficit is pressing, the profitability is irretrievably lost, staff costs out of control. The baggage handling should be outsourced to get those nightmares off the payroll, even the LHR crewing could be outsourced. We have unskilled staff paid more than bank managers (if there are any 'bank managers' left!). The union is so backwards facing and stuck in a 70s style Stalinism, and the cabin crew have followed them because they have got their old contract staff double the 'going rate'. BA shares are going to continue to be very unexciting until the company regains a handle on costs. This is seriously a 'last chance' for the board to whip BA into shape for the future. The investors are about to lose patience.

As for the crew obeying the decision, they will. BA can be very heavy on improper absences. If the strike is off, ALL services will be ON! They will not dare malinger!

[Capot]

Jet Set Lady, you wrote

You call me patronising, then make assumptions like the above! and I apologise for the assumption. And also for grouping you with the bad guys, which clearly you are not.

Dolly Day Dream

Can I ask - have BA actually cancelled any flights yet? Just how have people 'lost' thousands of pounds? Let me explain. People do not, by and large fly because they like flying around. They fly because they need to be somewhere else, quite probably at a given time. That need does not melt away because BA CC, or some of them, decide to support a strike. So many people, especially business travellers, have had to buy alternative travel already because the risk of not being where they want to be when they want to be there is for one reason or another unacceptable.

For some, their tickets allow cancellation, but even so the alternatives are now very expensive. Those with non-refundable tickets who have bought the more expensive alternatives and must now wait and see if they will get a refund. But they are already out-of-pocket.

Re-arranging travel incurs a multitude of other expenses; changed hotel bookings, new transfers, extra nights away etc etc.

If the striking CC don't understand that, it comes as no surprise if they don't understand why people are so angry. We have got away lightly because we acted very fast to re-arrange all our BA bookings from Dec 21st for ever, but even so our additional costs - related only to flights booked within the strike period - are considerable.

Those BA customers who cannot yet get refunds and cannot afford to buy alternative travel unless they get a refund, are in the worst possible position. Not only will they probably not fly at all, if those cheering morons at the Unite meeting are anything to go by, but everything they have spent to prepare for their trip, plus their accommodation, car hire and so on, will probably never be refunded, even if their ticket payment eventually is. A lot of travel insurance policies exclude strike action, and the insurance companies will be rigorously finding ways of avoiding payment because of the huge numbers of claimants involved.

Now do you understand? I hope so.

Edit...just read the bit about how the strike is/may be illegal, so some will/may get to fly BA as planned if they have not rebooked. But the damage is done. I would not want to be working any of those flights; the passengers know that the LHR CC majority are not working from choice, and supported Unite in trying very hard to cause maximum distress, loss and hardship as a weapon to protect their position.

[paidworker]

Small Willy Walsh sips his cognac while the rest of the " experts " here agree what a great day it is for them and the industry. No wonder pilots are paying to fly aeroplanes. No balls.

[Scumbag O'Riley]

Scumbag......Oh boy, yet another example of the victim culture that seems prevalent amongst a significant number of BA's Cabin Crew.I'm not cabin crew. Are you a BA pilot?

[paull]

I would be interested to see the official reasons for this ruling. BBC reports it was because they improperly included those already set to leave the company in the ballot. In which case how many of them were there? Lets say that was 10%, then 93.5% in favour still suggests that more than 83.5/90 of the correct audience voted for a strike. With > 90% support I am surprised that the judge granted an injunction.

[JW411]

Where is Hand Solo when we need him?

[Rainboe]

Sorry, but the pay levels for an essentially 'unskilled' job have gotten seriously out of balance in BA. How can you have 3 weeks training and fall into a job that outpays pilots (on the old contract rate). The CSD, whose job BA has now made 'working' used to hide under the stairs all flight reading books and watching videos! Any wonder that when one went up to the flight deck to have the cabin log signed for 'CSDs office chair cover worn', the pilots burst out laughing! Course it was worn mate! CSD pay is more like triple Virgin chief pay. Old contract main crew rates are double. Ask yourself if this can continue given 14,000 crew?

What is facing the industry is an ordered shutdown of BA- it cannot compete with the opposition with this straightjacket around its neck. For the little that is being asked of the crew, I am amazed that they are taking it to the wall. Utter insanity, but given the stern socialist nature of the union, I smell ulterior political motives somewhere. These unionistas killed off the British shipbuilding industry and car building, and they are intentionally leading the staff down a political as well as economic road. If we let them, they will have the British airline industry too. Settlement is not what the company needs. It is complete termination of the old contract. The new contract cabin crew work hard (and comparably with the opposition). The division is breathtaking.

[call100]

Whatever the public rhetoric from BA, the ballot has concentrated minds. Too many people just live on press reports and don't really have any idea of the nuts and bolts of the dispute. (Which is why I won't comment on the reasons).
I think the Union cocked up by announcing 12 continual days of strikes. This is not good for company or union members. Whoever made that decision wants shooting. They should have just started with limited action with room to escalate if required.
That said, I take issue with those who moan about the disruption to the public over Christmas.. When is a good time to take action to protect your terms and conditions? In aviation whatever you do, whenever you do it, unfortunately the public will lose out.
It's about time the boot was firmly placed on the other foot. How wrong it was of BA to cause a situation that resulted in it's employees feeling the need to ballot.
It looks as if BA have realised they need to talk properly to the TU now, which is a good thing. So hopefully now all will be resolved properly to everyone's benefit...

[ZeBedie]

Paull, I though the same - the error of procedure would have been hard to avoid and unlikely to affect the outcome of the ballot. Sounds like a distinctly dodgey legal decision to me. But I have no sympathy for these idiot union dinosaurs.

[JOE-FBS]

Can someone here speak for the workers from a position of knowledge (I cannot)? There has to be a reason something like 90% voted to strike, the tiny proportion that has caused this technical ruling from the court is irrelevant to that proportion. I have no interest or bias either way, I just feel uneasy that everyone seems to back the management. A manager being paid something in the order of 600k a year plus bonus and one imagines with a secure pension telling people on about 30k (not bad I'll grant you) with insecure pensions that they are over paid seems wrong! For example, is the pension "black hole" a result of a company that took contribution holidays in the good times and now wants to renege on its commitments in the bad times. This seems to be the case with many pensions. However middle class we might feel, we are all wage slaves really, about three pay packets away from losing the house, this knee jerk anti-unionism feels like a long term problem for us all.

[dollydaydream]

Capot

I find your answer patronising.
I am no longer BA crew and as I said do not support the strike.
In asking the question as to how people had lost thousands I am well aware that some have, in my opinion, jumped the gun and rearranged their flights. I am sure you know that if BA had cancelled any flights then full refunds would have been due. Yes, changing the dates of any flight may incur extra hotel charges and the like that is also why I believe the media should take some responsibility for whipping up a frenzied campaign suggesting there wouldn't be a BA jet in the air for the whole 12 days!
Your decision to change your flights is, of course. your choice - who knows my company may pick up some of your business. On a personal note I will proceed with my BA flight over Christmas as booked.
Just for the record I was not one of 'the cheering morons' neither am I one of the bad guys. I enjoyed my time with BA and worked with some of the most professional people I have ever worked with, I feel a genuine sadness that these people will be included by the travelling public and the press with the misguided CC who voted for the strike.

[Juan Tugoh]

The legal finding was that the error of procedure was entirely and easily avoidable. BASSA knew about the error and willfully continued on its course of action without any care as to the legality or otherwise of the ballot. There was nothing wrong with the law or the way it was interpreted by BA, only BASSA and UNITE failed to understand the importance of conducting a legal ballot, which is a little odd for a union, particularly UNITE who should by now know how to carry out a ballot.

[XT668]

Call 100 has it right. Perhaps you should all stop and consider WW's reputation. If he wins this one, none of you are ever going to be vaguely safe again. It is incredibly arrogant to assume that the CSD Dorises managed to persuade everyone else to vote in favour as though they're really the only ones going to be affected.
If a membership has that sort of support then there is more to it than most contributors on here know. Further, a strike is called to be won, not to pussyfoot about being polite. Now ineviatbly it will be longerdrawn out causing more pain to more people.

As for savings - I do a MAN - SSH trip AND BACK in a day in a 75 / 76.
BA go one way (777, faster etc) and slip for three days. In the name of Icarus how do you expect to make money with that sort of a business plan. Be assured, since WW managed to defeat the pilots, the next group was always going to be the CC. If the cart tarts back down, he'll just move onwards.

Finally, all this cr@p about their salaries. If you earn what you signed up for, why should YOU be the sacrificial lamb who takes a cut or works for nothing? You can be fairly sure that most of us have outgoings proportional to our income - it's not just that easy to say - "Hey yes, no problem, pay me less, let me help out with Willie's bonus...." Remember, all the current pay scales and deals were agreed by BA management and once you accept the principle that a contract is only good until it's torn up, it won't be any good grumbling when your turn comes around.

I'd love to know what Aer Lingus employees would recommend!

[lsh]

This would seem to benefit all involved.
I guess it is too much to hope that, given what has happened at Globespan, they will vote more carefully if there is a next time?!
The scenes at the vote result the other day were disgusting.
If you take a "straw poll" from the posts various, it seems 90%+ of people do not support the CC anyway!

You have a job and a good one at that!
Join those lucky ones of us who have still got a job, with our frozen pay & increments, reduced allowances, reduced standard of hotels, etc etc.
It still pays the mortgage and we are heading for even darker times financially - when the next Government is formed.
lsh

[License to Fly]

anyone know how much it will cost Unite to re-ballot ?

Its an early Christmas gift from all us BA passengers ... any of BA's cabin crew that vote again for strike, need a trip to the mental hospital

[hollingworthp]

I wonder what the reballot will be voting for:

A) Accept that you get paid a HUGE sum for what you do and agree to cut costs like everyone else with a brain

B) Strike anyway, the Government will surely do a banking-style rescue of a cherished brand

C) Take the ship down with all souls and crack on with the strike - we realise there is no bailout on the cards

[jonseagull]

Small Willy Walsh sips his cognac while the rest of the " experts " here agree what a great day it is for them and the industry. No wonder pilots are paying to fly aeroplanes. No balls.

Balls are great, but you've got to be careful how, where and when you use them. ;)

[jetset lady]

As for savings - I do a MAN - SSH trip AND BACK in a day in a 75 / 76.
BA go one way (777, faster etc) and slip for three days. In the name of Icarus how do you expect to make money with that sort of a business plan. Be assured, since WW managed to defeat the pilots, the next group was always going to be the CC. If the cart tarts back down, he'll just move onwards.


For the last time, the only reason that we do not operate the SSH as a straight there and back, is because the aircraft is stuck on the ground for five hours. I don't care who you work for, no crew would be able to do that. It is a three day trip due to the lack of frequency of flights. This is a new route for us and, as of yet, still has slot and timing issues. From summer, we have been told it will become a there and back.

Once again, this route is operated from LGW, by crew that are already working to the new crew compliments, have been for three years and in the majority, had no intention of striking. Please stop using this route as an example to show how hard everyone else works, while we at BA, supposedly, swan around taking it easy. It's a complete red herring!

[Jet II]

The legal finding was that the error of procedure was entirely and easily avoidable.

It was? - if you are balloting large numbers of employees then in the timelag between sending out the ballots and counting them there are bound to be some whose service ends. The only way around that is to cease having secret ballots - not a wise move IMHO.

I see that in the Judges summation she practically admits that her judgement was political:

"She said: 'A strike of this kind over the 12 days of Christmas is fundamentally more damaging to BA and the wider public than a strike taking place at almost any other time of the year.'"

yes? and? - what does the time of year have to do with enforcing the law? :confused:

[silverknapper]

A lot of folk on here lining up to take a pop at WW. Why exactly? These financial problems aren't his fault. Fixing them is his problem. If you were in his shoes how would you tackle the current financial issues. maybe you could offer some guidance..........
I wouldn't want his job for all the tea in China. but wish him the very best of British. Worth every penny :D

[niceguy]

My dad used to call it common sense. Today it's called risk management but it amounts to the same thing. Faced with a nasty choice, the wise thing is to do the safest thing with potentialy the least destructive outcome!

With risk management forming so much of the daily avaition business you might have thought that supposedly sensible people will have have chosen the least damaging option when faced with a strike ballot, but no. Seems that common sense is actually in very short supply in B.A.

Let us hope that they make better decisions operationally than they do politically or we get get armed doors opened on the ground, hot coffee poured into passengers laps and heaven knows what else!

[XT668]

Precisely.
When do you expect anyone to strike? When it least affects your opposition? Arthur S tried that ;) A strike is a negotiating tool like anything else - it doesn't seem to work very well on unreasonable men like Willie, I'm sure that's another KPI ticked off and another hundred grand in the bonus pot.

More seriously, the whole thing is symptomatic of the UK today. We all shout for spending cuts and hard choices to be made.....but only as long as they don't affect us. When someone stands up for their rights, their CONTRACTUAL rights, the general public only perceive how it affects them, and squeal like stuck hogs.
There was no sympathy for BA pilots over Open Skies, yet they all believed they had a strong ethical and legal case, and the strike they promised would certainly have forced BA to change their minds (and saved them money too:ugh:) but the pilots were shot down with a very similar tactic.
Willie uses the same thing, (admittedly BASSA management don't seem to have thought this through very well) again, and fellow employees show zero support.

Bottom line is that the BA business model is doomed anyway, period, end-of-story, but that doesn't mean anyone should be volunteering to work for free while Walsh, the Senior Management and the Board trouser the amounts they deem a fair day's bonus!
Never mind, all the crews will have plenty of time for discussion around the pool while they rest from their horrendous single sector to Sharm!

[ska-bearbaiter]

Oh Rainboe, they're calling for you over at the 'Arstraeus A320 contracts' thread. There's a party going on over there and I would like to buy you a beer!

[Sygyzy]

Jetset lady.

Whilst SSH may not be entirely representative of BA's 'Spanish practices' LCA (Larnaca) certainly is. Under five hours donw, nightstop and five scheduled back. Nice work if you can get it.

How do Easy, Monarch and the others who go there and back get away with it. Market forces methinks, but then BA CC wouldn't know too much about that. :bored:

[unablereqnavperf]

I think its high time that BA cabin crew realise that they have been sold a complete dummy by their union. They should also realise that the incompetant buffoons running their union do not decerve their support. The kind of action that the union was pushing them into was never going to get a ounce of support from BA customers especially at this very stressfull time of year. I believe that the membership of Unite should consider legal action against their leadership for selling them this complete farce!

I have supported cabin crew as much as possible throughout my career but I'm afraid on this occasion I cannot suport what Unite were proposing. The industry is suffering from many forces against it (terrorisim, financial and climate change lunnies) the last thing it needs now is a long strike over Christmas by the best paid cabin crew in the UK with while not perfect are the best terms and conditions available for the job in thde UK.

For those that think Willie Walsh is sitting back sipping his cognac think again he is probably a little relieved that this attempt to destroy BA has failed and he can now get on with the job of trying to keep BA afloat for another few weeks. He has an almost impossible task and for the sake of all BA staff lets hope he can do it!

[Skipness One Echo]

It's a cultural thing at BASSA, mainly HEATHROW as Gatwick is a better vibe in my experience. Given that every department has been forced to face up to the real world, Cabin Crew couldn't expect to be allowed to escape cost cutting to rebalance the operation to be competitive.

There is an institution within BA that genuinely and honestly thinks they are better than everyone else and they deserve to get paid more.If enough people believe that within a culture, they'll take confrontation to the wire as BASSA have been past masters at. They forced out the last CEO who tired to take them on in Bob Ayling.

BASSA say they want to take the airline back to the good old days of excellent service, except they REFUSE to acknowledge the cost involved and that people can REALLY get better service for less elsewhere. Skytrax and pprune feedback suggests BA aren't really that great and they are seen to be arrogant and up themselves.

Hence they've been found out and their little bubble of fantasy, re-inforced by the BASSA propaganda machine, an effective one let's be honest, just smacked full tilt into the real world and is now on P3 of the Daily Mail being given out on flights.... BA can't afford to pay cabin crew at that rate as they need the money to save the company, pension fund and renew and aging fleet of B747-400s. If they don't do all three it's game over.

The fact that forward bookings must be drying up, as let's be honest, there's enough risk in my life without betting a three figure sum on a flight that may not go..... As to business customers, do you really think the competition is sitting idly by? They can scent weakness and smell blood. Do you really think people will be flocking back this summer? If not what's the survival plan for the winter?

[Rusland 17]

I am sure you know that if BA had cancelled any flights then full refunds would have been due.What good is a refund if you've been planning a family holiday all year? If you've booked and paid for hotels and car hire, taken days off work? What if you're supposed to be flying away on honeymoon or attending your daughter's wedding?

Promising a refund if a flight is cancelled is almost worthless.

[dollydaydream]

I agree but in saying that I was addressing a particular point Capot had made regarding business travel.
However, it appears the wedding will be attended, the honeymoon will take place, hotel rooms will be slept in and hire cars will be driven - I refer once again to the phrase 'jumping the gun'.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

BASSA? Unite? BA?

As a 'retired' J-Class pax who travels on holiday regularly, I really don't care ... once I've burned my remaining 'BA Miles' I shall fly with a different airline. "The customer is always right" and will, inevitably and with no realistic option in my case [LHR-IAD], become a Virgin customer.

Congratulations to all concerned. Idiots.

[oops - @ JetSet Lady ... LGW/JER is absolutely superb, it's the long-haul LHR-IAD duckies I take issue with. Fantastic service, Ma'am. Thank you, as I declare on all questionnaires and at the door.

[Mr Angry from Purley]

XT668 / Sygyzy
In defence of Jetset Lady (i've already had this discussion with her before the strike). Charter Airlines go round trip to SSH/LXR and to an extent LCA based on times that suit the crew, i.e. day time at times best for reporting.
BA times are driven by slots a lot of the time and market demand for business travellers. i.e. you can go round trip to ATH but BA want to leave ATH at 0600 so it makes it difficult sometime. There is always the case that many Charter airlines also slip crews in these far flung destinations. Comparing them to the likes of Easy and Monarch is easy and i'm sure given half the chance their Cabin Crew would prefer to slip than do a round trip.
Again in defence of BA CC there was a pretty poor article in the Mail today saying BA C only work an average of 20 hours a week, and 900 in a year. It was of course talking flying hours and this is driven by the working time directive. If your doing 900 hours on long haul your working hard for sure.

On the anti CC bit i'm sure if the CC who voted against knew the Union was going to call a 12 day of Xmas strike they would have not voted but that's what their Union is paid to decide :\ Hopefully common sense has prevailed but BA is still going to loose a lot of money as i've just made half dozen changes away fom BA today and going on other Airlines so to an extent some damage has been done

[Basil]

Mr Angry from Purley, pretty much the same view as you:

I do not believe that BA CC voted knowing that a 12 day strike would be held immediately.
The threat of action leading up to the ballot and the on/off strike with more to come in January has done enormous harm to the airline. I do really fear that Willie will let BA go to the wall and then arise as BA2010. New contracts all round, no support for the pensions - very attractive.

XT668, Used to do Eilat round trip in BA 757 - well Caledonian: same thing for the pilots.

[sky9]

You know, Willie Walsh and Bassa deserve each other. They both view confrontation as negotiation.
I suspect that the HC did them both a BIG favour.

[merlinxx]

When BEA Airtours (then BA Airtours) started, we worked to the BEA CC Industrial Document (bettered CAP371). It worked, CC & company made money. BALPA PLC & the BASSA LC were all in the game. we flew, we made, money, no fly, no money.

Tis about time that the 'Hounslow Bus Garage' CC got the real world in their sights, lets face it, they still think they are working for 'Britain's Only Airborne Circus'. T'ain't Imperial Airways any more:ugh:

I rest my case.

PS I was there once:{ Not CC though:E

[iwalkedaway]

I walked away from BA, in one respect, when they simply priced themselves out of contention against their rivals. But I can't deny feeling guilty ever since due to not supporting what was once a supreme airline and - when it really meant something internationally - the respected British national flag carrier.

One can only speak as one knows, or finds. It's a long time since I have encountered the prototype snotty BA CC of old. The vast majority encountered in recent years have been as good as any airline's CC, and absolutely better than most.

But as glorified teabag squeezers can one expect much intellectual rigour and savee from them? Absolutely not. Demonstrably so in the way so many opted for a quiet life, laid back and voted for "industrial action" without a clue either precisely what it was, nor what dimensions such action might assume once decided by a maniacally self-exciting union, led by self-important posturing DHs.

CC contacts tell of their genuine horror at hearing the union announce TWELVE consecutive days of strike action, totally disproportionate to a vast number of the rank and file's expectations at the time they were balloted. It seems for many more that the vociferously hostile media and public reaction to the CC's vote and Unite's loony strike announcement has shocked them to the core. If you live amongst a working group buoyed up and blinded by its own sense of combined mistreatment and entitlement, you will hear precious little counter-argument (aka common sense). This evening many CC are surely shocked to discover the awful reality - they ARE a pampered and cossetted group who have been living it up on borrowed time.
And that time has just run out.

I hope BA can sue Unite - and especially BASSA - for the grievous bodily brand damage and lost earnings they have brainlessly and vindictively inflicted upon their fellow staff members in other divisions of what is still, intrinsically, one of the world's great airlines.

iwalkedaway (but against this background, never regretted it)

[beamender99]

Quote:
Originally Posted by Juan Tugoh http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/buttons/viewpost.gif (http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/399268-ba-strike-invalid-high-court-ruling-2.html#post5386550)
The legal finding was that the error of procedure was entirely and easily avoidable


It was? - if you are balloting large numbers of employees then in the timelag between sending out the ballots and counting them there are bound to be some whose service ends. The only way around that is to cease having secret ballots - not a wise move IMHO.

From what I have seen on the UK news progammes re the court case :-
The union made no attempt to warn anyone about NOT voting if they were no longer in the company.

It was also stated that due to the union screw up the CC were vulnerable to instant dismissal re breach of contract.
So it maybe that BA going to court saved the CC from an unintended outcome.

[Ex Cargo Clown]

From a legal perspective it is a horrendous decison.

Seperation of powers.......

I wonder......

[jetset lady]

Sygyzy/XT668,

My charter crew friend has just picked up a 9 day Mombassa. Whilst she is supping her cocktails, round the pool, I will work two bullet Bermudas and have two days off. Do I begrudge her that? God no! I hope she has a fabulous trip. It's all swings and roundabouts, no matter what airline you work for. Can we please drop the subject now, as it's detracting from the real issues at hand?

Jsl

P.S. Mr Angry from Purley, thank you for trying! :)

[Capot]

Dolly DD

Please understand that when a business is faced with a probability of more than about 5% that a lot of flights it has booked may be cancelled, with consequent contractual breaches potentially costing hundreds of thousands of pounds, it is a matter of simple risk management to eliminate that risk by, as you put it, "jumping the gun".

Even some leisure or VFR passengers travelling for an important family event could well feel that the risk of missing that event by waiting to see what might happen was too high, and that they must "jump the gun".

Until today, the probability of massive disruption was much higher than the probability that the strike would be called off. If it were up to the union, the strike would still be going ahead.

As things are now, a strike is still threatened at some undetermined date in the next few months when the union has sorted out its ballot procedures. Its members may well be less supportive now, but the risk is still there. In these circumstances, booking and paying in advance for any flight on BA more than a few days ahead is an act of madness. There does not have to be a stoppage; just the threat is enough to put BA into the bankruptcy the union appears to be seeking.

[John R81]

Glad for all travelling this Christmas that the strike is off.

In future these outdated tactics will not affect me. As I posted (much) earlier - here's one Gold Card business class traveller who has become ABBA - anything but BA!

[fincastle84]

Good to see you fighting your corner over here. Fly safely over Christmas & if you have time have one at the Swizzle Inn on me!

[fincastle84]

Well I'm delighted that WW has won round 1 against the dinosaurs. I shall enjoy my champagne on the Upper Deck all the more on the way to CPT on Sunday. :)

I will also continue to support this great BRITISH airline. :ok:

[Sygyzy]

Moving on from the minutiae.

No-one likes to see their take home pay reduced, or worse-ask Globespan, but sometimes market forces must prevail. The business plan has to reflect what's going on in the industry-not what used to go on. To this end there has to be a carrot, even if it's just the small carrot of having a job at the end of it.

Colleagues at a highly regarded large far eastern carrier were asked to take first a 7% and then a whopping 16% salary cut at the time of 911 and then SARS. You didn't have to accept, there were contracts in force after all. But if you declined to sign how would all that sit when your own contract was up for renewal in a few months or at most 3 years. (The carrot). That airline returned to profitability, restored the wage but made it dependent on that profitability and still pay annual bonuses that Europeans can only dream of. Their crews work hard, have no safety net in hard times and yet enjoy an enviable reputation worldwide. OK so you may argue that their cost base is way down on BA's since they're based in the far east. But they sell tickets online worldwide and that is surely the nub of all of this.

To compete your business plan/cost base has to be somehow competitive with the rest.

If one section of your workforce's cost base is so offscale as to be cancerous the you have to tackle it head on-and even then you may not survive. It seems that until WW came along no CEO was really willing to grapple with this monster, and so the cancer grew.

Not all pills come sugar coated.

S

[jetset lady]

Sygyzy,

I agree with you wholeheartedly, which is why I have been against this strike from the start. Ironically, BA have never asked for a pay cut. BASSA offered one, which BA turned down. Unfortunately, that seems to have been forgotten by many.

Maybe the fact that we work at a base that has seen so many airlines disappear makes us more aware of the realities of this recession. Admittedly, Globespan weren't based at LGW, but their aircraft were still regular visitors. Or maybe it is because so many of us have come from other airlines. I don't know. I just know that I, no doubt along with our passengers, just want to see the end of this constant destructive cycle, once and for all.

On that note, I'm boring myself now, so must be boring everyone else. I wish all those travelling over the Christmas period, a safe and enjoyable trip and Merry Christmas. Being a child at heart, I'm off to play in the snow! :)

Jsl

[Ex Cargo Clown]

If one section of your workforce's cost base is so offscale as to be cancerous the you have to tackle it head on

That describes the management of BA quite adequately.

[ExXB]

I'm very glad my transatlantic trip isn't going to be cancelled (unless the snow closes Heathrow again), I feel very let down by British Airways.

Despite having all the contact information on my bookings I never heard once from BA about my options. Even when I contacted the Executive Club, they had no information and had no idea when they would have any information.

I was on the verge of spending $4000 on AC tickets, and would have had the verdict gone the other way, because I was convinced that BA wasn't going to do anything to assist me.

Go to Manage Your Booking and change your flight ... Ya right, nothing available for 17 days.

I was gold, now silver and will burn my last BA miles on this trip. But in future I think I will go with Star. Nothing spectacular, but I don't think they will leave me in a lurch.

[chrisbl]

The continual threats to continue with strike action just makes the demise of BA more inevitable as customers chsoe alternative carriers. Short term actions become long term habits.

Never travel with BA at holiday times as BA staff tend to have industrial action then to maximise the impact.

Going to the US - use an american carrier, they are never allowed to go completely bust - they slip into Chapter 11 and are revived.

[tomkins]

ExXB
unfortunatley strikes can and will happen in other airlines.Star Alliance ie Air France et al are just as militant.Hope for you're sake it is a wise decision .

[13Alpha]

Star Alliance ie Air France


A minor point: Air France has nothing to do with the Star Alliance.

Our Carriers (skyteam.com) (http://www.skyteam.com/about/carriers/index.html)

Member Airlines - Star Alliance (http://www.staralliance.com/en/about/airlines/)

13Alpha

[Jarvy]

I am against strike action of any sort, noone ever wins. I fear the result of the next ballot will be the same as many people believe that Willie Walsh is to blame for everything. So best case for striking CC is that WW gets his P45 (unlikely), then what. Another person in charge who still has to save alot of money same as before. Unless they think the union can run an airline any better (not going on todays result).
Face up to the real world or there will be no BA.
We still have 2 bookings for 2010 so I hope there still is a BA.

[clivewatson]

I do not work for BA, and neither do I know much about the so called "negotiations" that have taken place related to salaries/working practices. However, it is patently obvious to me that the Unite union appears to be run by a group who are knowingly leading their lemmings to the cliff face.

If I don't accept my working terms and conditions, or think I'm being worked too hard for the money offered, I simply look for another job that suits my finances and time off requirements better.

Right now I could do with an increased salary, and sure I can always do with a bit more time off....but in this economic climate I am struggling to find anyone who will pay me more for less. That being the case I have decided to stay exactly where I am right now....knowing that I am FAR better off than those who have all just been laid off.

Which bit of the above does NOT make sense to anyone from BA who would actually agree to a 12 day strike and potentially jeopardise the .future of a company that is already bleeding losses?

If you lose this battle - you will for SURE lose the war. I'm not sure what your next job title will be, Lemmings or Muppets, you choose!

[xyzzy]

I'm slightly surprised BA saw the injunction through: to an extent, I think they blinked. Had the strike gone ahead BA would have enjoyed massive public support, and had they wanted to play the hardest of ball could have simply shut down the airline on the first day of the strike and waited for the unions to rip themselves to pieces (in effect, a lock out). That they didn't want to try this line implies that they don't have the money or nerve for a full-scale battle.

On the other hand, the unions blinked too, perhaps having realised the enormity of what they'd let themselves in for. They could appeal the ruling, which they don't seem to want to, and this judgement gives them the moral fire in their bellies of ordering the strike without actually having to see it through.

If I were Walsh, though, I'd be hoping that some cabin crew are foolish enough to stage a mass sickie. Because then I can sack them on the spot, replace them, and take some hardcore out of the re-ballot. I'd probably lose a few tribunals six months down the line, but it'd be worth it. I don't know either if he has the nerve or the cabin crew the excessive bravery to go down this route, but it would make for tense viewing for other trade unions.

[Basil]

JSL,
My charter crew friend has just picked up a 9 day Mombassa.
Bally heck! The longest we got there in Cally was 7 days. Long trip, techstop Athens but loadsa time on site - had enough after five days there though.
Bora Bora, Mambo Village Disco etc. - maxed out.

One of our UK MPs approached me at check in asking to be permitted on our flight with no ticket. She and her partner (now husband) had placed their passports, tickets and valuables in a car which they then parked in a Kenyan market. :rolleyes: It's a worry! When she later said that she had to get back for a division I said if I'd known that she'd still be in Mombassa :)

[CargoOne]

I hope WW will sack them anyway, they deserved it

[draughtsman99]

Those of you rejoicing in the HC decision might like to read this very 'informed' comment from another forum:-

What I'd like to know is, why can't the Captain, Co-pilot and flight engineer help out and push the trolleys up and down serving tea and coffee on a long haul flight ?

These aircraft are state of the art fly by wire and operate on auto-pilot for the majority of the time in the air. Let's be fair, if the engine blows, the flight engineer ain't going to grab his tool box and walk out on the wing.This is the level of informed? comment the BA staff are up against.

I have no love of BA and after a few bad trips with them will never use them again but this dispute is not of the union or CC making.
How would you feel if your 'terms and conditions' are altered when you have based your life, mortgage and family on the conditions you signed up for 10 years ago?

This reminds me of the Thatcher era when peoples lives were disrupted to please the 'Square Mile' with no thought to the disruption it might cause 20 years on. IE, the breakdown of the banking system because of Thatchers 'deregulation'!

[Basil]

What I'd like to know is, why can't the Captain, Co-pilot and flight engineer help out and push the trolleys up and down serving tea and coffee on a long haul flight ?
:}:):}
OK, as most peepl no, we don't carry a FE these days.
When I was a first officer on the B747-400 I went back to fix broken lavatories (messy), IFE, electric seats (my nice manager said I was 'proactive' - never heard the term before). I am, amongst other things, an ex marine engineer so that's what one does.
Whether I could handle an angry (possibly with good reason from pre boarding irritations) passenger is another matter. I have always preferred to leave that to the professionals until called to 'read the riot act' which only happened once and, with hindsight which is wonderful, we could have avoided that.

I'd just love to put your source in an 'automatic' aeroplane of his (surely not a 'her' with that attitude) choice and say "OK here we are at 35,000 feet inbound to DXB, gin clear day, totally undemanding, you land it."
OTOH he can have Kai Tak 13, 200/25G35 2000 8/600 :}

[sirwa69]

In the pub the other night some woman was ranting on about BA.
She said that as the travel manager for a big bank she will from now on be booking her bankers with any other airline than BA. I asked he if her decisions were final and she said no only advisory, I then asked her how many air miles her bankers had with BA, at this point she shoved her tail between her legs and slunk away :bored:

[Dysag]

Travel managers are supposed to get the best deal for their company: negotiated fares, override commissions etc.

If the *ankers are allowed the final word, the "travel manager" is not earning his/her keep.

[ExXB]

Yes strikes happen and could very well happen to Star or Skyteam carriers at any time. That wasn't my moan. My moan was that IMHO BA didn't do enough to tend to their customers, let alone their 'premium' customers.

Again, IMHO, they held off announcing their intentions - which would have allowed their valuable customers to make other arrangements. In hindsight everything worked out - but what did they really intend on doing. Announce day by day what the cancellations were going to be for tomorrow? When alternatives are few and expensive.

Yes I know and understand that by keeping us better informed would have cost them money - but they were not thinking of us were they?

I'll repeat what I said "I feel very let down by British Airways"

[Andy_S]

How would you feel if your 'terms and conditions' are altered when you have based your life, mortgage and family on the conditions you signed up for 10 years ago?

The answer is I wouldn't be happy,but if the alternative was losing my job because my employer was heading towards insolvency then in the current employment climate I would try and reach some agreement with my employer. Which is what every other department in BA has done.

Have you made any attempt to understand this dispute? Putting aside the fact that it's not been proven in law that BA have altered the cabin crews terms and conditions (the issue is going to court next year) how will the CC's lives, mortgages and families be affected?? Are they being asked to take a pay cut? No. Are they being asked to work longer hours? No. Are there any involuntary redundancies? No. So why the outrage? You do understand what changes BA are proposing.......don't you?

As for the anti-Thatcherite rant, if you really believe that the current banking crisis is her fault 20 years after she left office, then you really are deluded.

[Shack37]

One of the two joint UNITE union leaders has admitted that a 12 day strike was maybe "a bit over the top". Some BA CC have been quoted as saying they were not aware they were voting for a 12 day strike. A number of those who voted were not elegible to do so therefore will not vote in any future ballot.
In view of the above and the lack of public sympathy for the strike is it not possible (probable even) that the re-ballot result could be very different due to many UNITE CC members having second thoughts?

[Malone]

It doesn't really surprise me that BASSA / Unite couldn't hold a valid ballot. I left Unite over a year ago and still receive all sorts of junk from them about members' free life insurance etc. I wrote back but still get this c**p, now I just return it.
Maybe they are in breach of the data protection act?
:ugh:

[PAXboy]

Andy_SAs for the anti-Thatcherite rant, if you really believe that the current banking crisis is her fault 20 years after she left office, then you really are deluded.Off Topic.
Someone deregulated the City of London in 1986. Not the sole cause but a big one. As with most politicians, by the time the birds come home to roost they are retired. A bit like CEOs really ...

[Andy_S]

Andy_SOff Topic.
Someone deregulated the City of London in 1986. Not the sole cause but a big one. As with most politicians, by the time the birds come home to roost they are retired. A bit like CEOs really ...

I accept that. But the current incumbents have had plenty of time to put things right. Instead, they tinkered with the system, handing regulation to the FSA, a creation of a certain Mr G. Brown. The same Mr G. Brown who waxed lyrical about our banking industry, who gave Sir Fred Goodwin a knighthood and who put him in charge of a number of government run banking task forces.

So IMO the current administration have a great deal of culpability. But unfortunately some people will never see that; in their eyes Thatcher is 100% responsible for everything bad that's ever happened or ever will happen. I just don't find that a very rational point of view.

Sorry to go off topic.....

[Mr Optimistic]

'How would you feel if your 'terms and conditions' are altered when you have based your life, mortgage and family on the conditions you signed up for 10 years ago?'

Title says it all (includes myself). So you are special and deserve a guarantee ? Never heard that people are made redundant ? Change has to be addressed, like it or not, and some change is inevitable.

[Danny2]

For those of you interested, below is the judgement made in the High Court yesterday:



British Airways Plc v Unite the Union

Queen's Bench Division



17 December 2009




Case Digest



Summary: Interim injunctions; Industrial action; Industrial action against airlines over Christmas period; Non-compliance with statutory requirements for ballots; Balance of convenience

Abstract: The applicant airline (BA) applied for an interim injunction to restrain the respondent trade union (Unite) from proceeding with industrial action based on the result of a ballot.
BA had embarked on a cost-cutting and efficiency exercise and had sought to reduce its cabin crew headcount. Litigation ensued, but in advance of the trial Unite called for a 12-day strike over the Christmas period.
Notice of intention to ballot cabin crew for the strike, the notice of the results and notice of industrial action was provided to BA. BA claimed that Unite had not complied with the requirements for a ballot under the Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 s.227 , s226A and s.234A .

According to BA, Unite included in the balloting constituency a significant number of volunteers for redundancy who were known by it to be leaving BA's employment by the relevant date; in its notice of ballot Unite failed to provide accurate figures with regard to the total numbers of employees that it reasonably believed would be entitled to vote in the ballot; and in its notice of industrial action it had failed to provide accurate figures with regard to those employees who might be induced to take part in the strike. Unite relied on s.232(b) of the Act, claiming that any failure to comply with statutory requirements was accidental.

Held:

(1) There were breaches of technical statutory requirements by Unite. Unite could not rely on the defence under s.232(b) of the Act, and nor could it say that it had taken such steps as were reasonably practicable for the purposes of s.227, s226A and s.234A.
Unite was in possession of information concerning employees who had volunteered for redundancy. In the light of that information it was aware, or ought to have been aware, that the figures provided to BA included those who opted for voluntary redundancy and thus included Unite's members who were not entitled to vote. It was practicable and reasonable to enquire as to which members were leaving BA's employment.
Unite had never issued instructions to members about not voting if they were leaving BA's employment by the relevant date, despite having had opportunities to do so.
Further, there was insufficient evidence that any inaccuracy in the information provided was due to intransigency on BA's part. Evidence showed that Unite was clearly on notice that its figures were inaccurate and that the balloting process was flawed.

(2) The balance of convenience lay in favour of granting the injunction sought by BA. Damages were not an adequate remedy for BA and the a strike over the 12 days of Christmas was fundamentally more damaging to BA and the wider public than a strike taking place at almost any other time of the year.

Application granted.

[Scumbag O'Riley]

One has a lot of sympathy for any workers here who want to strike if faced with the possibility of redundancies. Only the employer knows who is going to be made redundant. If the union advises members who have applied for redundancy not to vote, but the employer keeps them on, the union is also in technical breach as it has not balloted members it is inducing to strike. If that was the case, in front of this judge BA would be expected to win the same injunction, especially over Christmas, when the judge appears to say laws have different importance.

At no stage does it appear the judge considered the undisputed fact that over 50% of the members who will be employees on 22nd December voted in a secret ballot to strike. This fundamental right to withdraw labour has been ignored in favour of technical breaches (disputed) which would not have affected the final result of a canvasing of the wishes of the workers.

BALPA will be one of the next unions, imo, to take militant action in BA, and should take note. They will also probably be striking for the same reasons the cabin crew strike, an attack on terms and conditions which are completely out of whack with reality.

This just prolongs the inevitable though and, IMO, demonstrates that the powers that be will keep a brain dead BA alive and on life support as long as they can. While BA moves from crisis to crisis we could have had new airline(s) getting going and providing a decent service from LHR, and who knows, the regions too.

[Andy_S]

Only the employer knows who is going to be made redundant. If the union advises members who have applied for redundancy not to vote, but the employer keeps them on, the union is also in technical breach as it has not balloted members it is inducing to strike.

Once again, you appear not to have understood. Did you actually read Danny's post, above? BASSA / UNITE were given details of cabin crew who had accepted voluntary redundancy and were leaving the company at the end of November. One of the reasons the judgement went in BA's favour was that the union had not made any attempt to disuade those ex-employees from voting, despite knowing who they were. (Indeed, the Chair of Bassa actually encouraged them to vote, even though they shouldn't have been balloted). To quote from the judgement, "Unite was in possession of information concerning employees who had volunteered for redundancy. In the light of that information it was aware, or ought to have been aware, that the figures provided to BA included those who opted for voluntary redundancy and thus included Unite's members who were not entitled to vote............Unite had never issued instructions to members about not voting if they were leaving BA's employment by the relevant date, despite having had opportunities to do so."

Why is that so difficult to understand?

I would have sympathy with anyone who faces involuntary redundancy. But no-one does in this case. Of course, if the unions persist down this self destructive course then that may change.

[PAXboy]

ScumbagThis just prolongs the inevitable though and, IMO, demonstrates that the powers that be will keep a brain dead BA alive and on life support as long as they can. While BA moves from crisis to crisis we could have had new airline(s) getting going and providing a decent service from LHR, and who knows, the regions.I agree - but that is what happens in 99% of the occasions, both in commerce and government and charities and voluntary organisations. (i.e. where humans are involved!)

BA is nearing the end of it's natural life span (90 years as they celebrated this year) but the problem is that very few companies / organisations reach 100. There are just too many humans with too much history involved and the previous factors that spurred their growth, now weigh them down. Since BA failed to make a significant merger (AA thwarted by govts) they are destined to be a small player and exist in name only.

If the govts of the world wanted airlines to be strong into the future, employ a reasonable number of people and not have too many flights (= green) then they should immediately support the implementation of the new global airlines called Oneworld, Star Alliance, Sky Team and so on.

Won't happen of course and BA will just have to continue managing decline whilst pretending otherwise. The CC issue is only one of the steps on the road and by no means the critical one.

[Seat62K]

Don't forget the failed merger aspirations in relation to United, US Air and KLM......

[Earl]

BA will never collapse, the UK government would stop it long before it came to this.
If they let this go into something like such would be a really bad embarrassment for the UK.
Politics rules here.
Bet someone has pen ready to write the check if or when things get this bad.
The union maybe would have had more public support if they would have elected for in industrial action after the holidays, too many customers that would not end up agreeing with travel plans interrupted during the holidays.
Just my view.

[warkman]

"BA will never collapse, the UK government would stop it long before it came to this.
If they let this go into something like such would be a really bad embarrassment for the UK.
Politics rules here people."

Living in the past there.

Did the government Stop Rover going bust?
Did they stop the massive job losses at corus?
Did they stop Globespan going bust or any of the other airlines?
Did the belgium Government stop Sabena going bust?
did the government stop all the other buisnesses in this country going bust?

Besides the fact that the EU will not allow government intervention (unless its thier own personal money in their bank accounts of course) the political will from the two main political parties (you can't get a fag paper between thier views these days) is not there to save a private industry

[Earl]

Wow Sabena warkman?
You go back a long way.
Hope they BA work it out with public support.
Doing this during Christmas makes more enemies than friends.
In this business you have to choose the battles correctly and with proper timing.
Maybe they chose this time for the most severe impact.
But they ended up pissing off the traveling public.
A later date maybe would have gotten better results and contract issues.
Just my view.
BTW I Think the people that wanted to strike had conditions that needed to be addressed.
But I see the public side also and during Christmas is not a good time to do this, as most depend on getting home, do it later.
Otherwise B/A will be known as the Grinch That Sole Christmas.
Get it together.

[bealine]

If the government stopped BA from going under, I think the "Bearded Wonder" might have something to say - as indeed would Michael O'Leary (mind you, he always has something to say!)

The most likely scenario I can see is, just like Sabena (SN Brussels) and Swissair (Swiss), the government would let BA go under and then resurrect something from the fallout - BA Lite perhaps!

I am also pretty sure that former union troublemakers would not be offered positions with the new airline (which is exactly what happened with SN and Swiss!)

[mercurydancer]

For me, long before the srike proposal I voted with my credit card. BA may make pots of money with business class and good for them. I cant afford business class and therefore use economy. In this thread there have been some comments from gold /exec/ but very few from economy wallahs like me. BA is an awful airline to fly economy with. Combined with Heathrow its worse than sticking pins in your eyes and listening to Bjork. Unfortunately I have little choice than to fly from Heathrow but I prefer Aeroflot.

If Walsh and Unite want to engage in willy-waving (no pun intended) then let them get on with it. I actively avoid BA anyway so them going to the wall wont concern me in the slightest.

I'm surprised that Untie (pun intended) have managed to pursue a strike action on very dodgy legal grounds. They should know better.

As for the comments about the government bailing BA out - they wont, as they dont have any money to do so. Another big rescue act is simply not possible.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

For me, long before the strike proposal I voted with my credit card. BA may make pots of money with business class and good for them. I cant afford business class and therefore use economy. In this thread there have been some comments from gold /exec/ but very few from economy wallahs like me.

Greetings - from another website ;)

I could guess that Economy pax know what to expect - cramped seating, moderate food, possibly some IFE if it's working. Their primary expectation is, of course, that the airline conveys them safely from A to B.

Business pax pay substantially more for the privilege of decent seating. The food and IFE isn't that much better. And, from my recent experiences in Long-haul, the quality of service isn't much better either.

As with you and your destination[s], I have no choice but to fly from LHR. And the only airlines serving my destination are BA, VS ... and CO and United. And I'm expected to pay an arm and a leg to BA for poor service and the risk of my travel plans being disrupted by striking CC?

I guess I'll get used Branson's red/purple interior colour scheme :)

[knowitall]

"BA will never collapse"

Administration (law) - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Administration_%28law%29#Pre-pack_administration)


depends what you mean by "collapse"

"Politics rules here."

Indeed however if the tories win the next election having Gordons browns best mate in one of unite's top jobs and supplying 15% of labours funding isn't going to help much

[manintheback]

Somehow I dont think flatpack admin will work for BA. Might be ok when a restaurant goes bust or a football club bites the dust - but a FTSE quoted company needing global suppliers, CAA licensing, issues over who actually owns Heathrow slots. Aint gonna happen

BA has an incurable disease called 'Legacy'. It wont be around in existing form in 2 years.

As a financier was quoted yesterday, along the lines of

'BA is a massive pension deficit with a few old aircraft attached to it'

[Mr Optimistic]

Both the FT and The Economist (how upmarket am I) had pieces on BA's position. Reckons the 747 fleet is on average only 5 years away from retirement which adds to financing woes.

[bealine]

Both the FT and The Economist (how upmarket am I) had pieces on BA's position. Reckons the 747 fleet is on average only 5 years away from retirement which adds to financing woes.

That is a bit of a red herring. There are Airbus A380 aircraft on order to replace the 747's. The A380's can carry almost twice the passengers for half the cost!

There are also Boeing Dreamliners on order and re-jigging the equipment used on routes according to demand is already being planned!

There is a bit of a capital issue, but BA has been putting money aside for that - providing BASSA and the management don't have a long, drawn-out, bitter dispute!

I hope not!

[manintheback]

There are Airbus A380 aircraft on order to replace the 747's.

BA claimed these aircraft would start flying in 2010 to S Africa, Singapore, Hong Kong and the USA in their colours.

Aint going to happen, not in 2010, and probably never.

[mercurydancer]

Tango Tango Bravo

Greetings too!

Yes safety is the main concern whenever I fly. I dont see loco airlines being substandard in safety. I dont see any concerns with BA flight safety. I do see Aeroflot doing some dodgy stuff with safety but Russia is Russia.

The problem I have with BA is in stark difference to Virgin. With Virgin they welcome even an economy fare whereas BA appear to do their damndest to let you know that unless you travel business class you are going to be treated pretty poorly. Its a percptive difference for sure but along with the nightmare that LHR is, it means that I wont use BA unless I have to. Its got that bad that I will source flights via Amsterdam rather than face BA and LHR.

[wiggy]

BA claimed these aircraft would start flying in 2010 to S Africa, Singapore, Hong Kong and the USA in their colours.


It might be a bit academic in the circumstances but as far as I'm aware the first planned delivery date for the BA A380's has never been '10, it's always been 2012, and there has yet to be any announcement as to which route these aircraft will be deployed on.

[bealine]

... as far as I'm aware the first planned delivery date for the BA A380's has never been '10, it's always been 2012, and there has yet to be any announcement as to which route these aircraft will be deployed on.

Correct. There were rumours that delivery had been put back because of the recession, but we are being told to expect delivery of the first A380's in 2012 and further A380's and Boeing Dreamliners up to 2016.

There have been no announcements regarding the routes on which they are to be deployed, but the Bangkok.Sydney Singapore/Sydney run is widely speculated owing to the fact that those flights are rammed full for about 360 days of the year! Other long haul routes where we fly twice (or more) a day may also be targets for a once daily A380 service, freeing up a valuable slot or two for new routes and allowing us to grow. (That's Bealine's viewpoint based reading loads of stuff on the A380 and for what purpose they have been designed and how the concept has been sold to airline customers!)

[manintheback]

last item off topic


"as far as I'm aware the first planned delivery date for the BA A380's has never been '10, it's always been 2012, and there has yet to be any announcement as to which route these aircraft will be deployed on."

BA issued a press release - widely reported and easy to google - in September 2007 on 2010 receipt of first A380s and expected routes -maybe the PR department got a bit carried away or was it a Virgin spoiler? I seem to recall BA telling the world that IFE would be available in all seats long-haul to compete with Virgin - probably about 5 times over 10 years before it actually happened.

[bealine]

The press release didn't give any delivery date - the aviation press speculated 2010 based on Airbus' ability to deliver.

As we all know, the delivery of the first Airbus slipped and slipped so the press speculation was a bit wide of the mark!


British Airways to buy 12 Airbus A380 aircraft for long haul fleet
27 September 2007

http://www.airbus.com/store/mm_repository/images/120x120_feature/att00010663/media_object_image_120x120_pr_a380_ba.jpg British Airways will buy 12 Airbus A380 aircraft as part of the airlines’ long term fleet modernisation. The announcement marks the first time British Airways has selected to introduce Airbus aircraft for the company’s long haul fleet. The decision vindicates Airbus’ product strategy. The A380 is a key part of the solution for sustainable growth and eco efficiency in air transportation.

The aircraft will be powered by Rolls-Royce engines.

“The Airbus A380 will provide a great solution for our high density markets and get the most out of scarce London Heathrow slots. We said that environmental considerations would feature highly in our choice and our decision to buy these aircraft is consistent with this”, said Willie Walsh, British Airways Chief Executive.

“British Airways’ decision is another breakthrough for our flagship Airbus A380. After an intensive year-long competitive evaluation British Airways’ choice is proof our product is the right aircraft to tackle growth, airport capacity constraints as well as environmental concerns. We are delighted British Airways will be flying Airbus aircraft for the first time on their long haul routes”, said Tom Enders, Airbus CEO.

Being greener, cleaner, quieter and smarter, the A380 is already setting new standards for transport and the environment. The aircraft is the most fuel efficient aircraft flying today. The combination of extra passenger capacity without increasing the number of flights, excellent environmental performance and lower operating costs is an ideal solution for the airports and the airlines that serve them.

For passengers, the A380 offers wider, more comfortable seats in all classes and the quietest cabins in the sky. Its unique double-deck wide body architecture also gives airlines flexibility to economically offer improved comfort standards without reducing fleet capacity. To current standards for larger premium class products, the A380 can typically carry 525 passengers in three classes in unprecedented comfort on flights of over 8000 nm (15 000km).

British Airways first became an Airbus operator in 1988, when it began flying A320s. The airline added the A319s to its fleet in 1999 and the A321 in 2004. British Airways currently operate a total of 68 A320 family aircraft.

[logicandsin]

This will probably be a once only posting for me, but i feel that i have to say something on here.

FIRST OF ALL i am a passenger and one that is pleased to say i enjoy the quality of service i receive from BA CabinCrew. as a disabled passenger i know i put extra work on all staff from check-in to leaving the plane, but if it was not for you guys up in the air i feel that everything else would be kind of just by the way. you do a fantastic job and i depend on that.

what i don't want to see is the loss of that enthusiam. i know the likelihood of strike action over the past months has put immense pressure on you all but i would like to see that dispensed with, not what i consider to a valued airline.

as a passenger, yes some of us have a choice who we fly with others don't. i fall into the latter with my upcoming holiday plans. just to let you know i am travelling with NCL (Norwegian Cruise Lines) on a european cruise (Med) which is costing over £4000. the threat of a strike jeopodises that holiday. i am like many others and cannot stand to loose that amount of money through the actions of what i have been reading on here to be a misguided group (BASSA).

surely any strike action would result in BA having to compensate NCL for failing to provide a service under their partnership, so not only would BA lose customers but also good business partners. I mean a cruise company like NCL must surely fly thousands of passengers on BA flights.

so loss of customers, loss of business partnerships, loss of confidence = loss of revenue leading to loss of wages leading to loss of staff leading to LOSS OF AIRLINE

i do not want to see the loss of BA but if an airline is making a loss every minute it operates surely the best action a union can take is NOT strike action

[Jed Clampett]

A question if I may. If the BA Cabin Crew go on strike in March will it affect the entire BA operation or primarily flights out of Heathrow only. The reason I ask is because I am booked on BA from Gatwick to Venice and return in early March. Thanks.

[kaikohe76]

The problem surely is that, the BA management as a whole plus some, not all of the Staff in all departments, still think they are God's gift to aviation, they are not!!!!