British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk V

[Meal Chucker]

I'm rostered 21 days. Crew can do 900 block hrs a year

An employer must ensure that crew do not work more than 2,000 hours in any 12 month period, of which total flying time must not exceed 900 hours. This is not a BA limit, it is a legal limit, the only BA must do is ensure that you do not exceed 900hrs in the preceding 12 months and that's it.

75% crew should logically do 75% of that which would be 675 hrs

So you're suggesting that BA reduce your legal limit pro-rata??

Surely it is your decision to work part-time, good luck to BA if they can roster you up to 900 hours flying in 75% of full time.

[52049er]

MissM - your 75% complaint is a great example of the muddleheadedness that has got BASSA into their fix.

You are contracted to work for BA for 75% of a full time contract. As you say thats 21 days out of 28.

The CAA does not allow flying staff to be in the air for more than 900 hours a year.

The two are completely unrelated.

However, BASSA spends its time & money constantly mixing up these entirely disparate legal/industrial entities - door cover, crewing levels, FTL's etc etc - to ensure crew are frightened enough to get the sort of ballot returns we saw in Dec.

Our vast majority of great crew deserve better.

[TruBlu123]

A good post and factually correct in what for many is a very complex subject. If BA finds itself broke then the PPF would have to examine in some detail both pension schemes ie APS & NAPS to determine liabilities. NAPS is the fund that is liable to provide a major headache for the Pensions Regulator if the PPF has to come to its rescue. In fact it is likely that a major crisis would ensue as the PPF would not be able to meet its obligations going forward such is the scale of the NAPS funding requirement. This would be worrying for existing NAPS pensioners and might result in some benefits reduction. But for those existing employees who are NAPS members thrown on the dole it would be disaster. Is that what the hot heads in BASSA really want to see. Wake up all of you who claim not to care about BA's future some 20,000 plus fellow employees have a stake in this pension fund and thus the viability of the airline.

[iwalkedaway]

52049er - from the perspective of a BA customer, well said. The airline's vast majority of great crew really do deserve far better than the waspish/grievance-riddled/vengeful/effeminate/entitlement-obsessed/crypto-communist/just-plain-thick BASSA hardcore... If this hardcore so detest the company which provides their employment, why don't they seek work in more congenial circumstances elsewhere? That's right. Because nobody else offers such good pay and so many attractive perks. Proper men and strong women who felt such grievance would vote with their feet - not a ballot paper. They would not continue to enjoy the benefits of employment under existing terms while seeking so hard to pull the entire edifice down upon everyone who works for it - the majority of whom would fight for their company, its brand and its future - not fight so selfishly (and with such stupidity) to either get their own way, or destroy it.

[MissM]

Why? Surely that's why you were recruited and why you joined?
How much less time in the bunk are you getting?

I do mind helping out in another cabin every now and then but not when it's becoming a habit because of the company's imposition. I don't like to work in Club and because of my seniority I can avoid it like the plague.

Why I was recruited and why I joined BA? I don't know why I of all those applicants was recruited. There must have been something BA liked. Maybe my prominent pink eye shadow or my ability to show good teamwork skills. My reason for joining BA was because I couldn't be bothered to do anything else. It would be nice to travel and get paid to do it I thought.

How much less time in the bunk are we getting? Touché, midman!

Is this your rationale for IA? The company have to pay for the service you provide, and they've decided they can only afford a certain level of service. Or would you take a pay cut to pay for an improved customer experience? No, didn't think so.

Whether it's rationale for IA is an individual opinion. Imposition is rationale for IA and included in imposition is both safety and service issues. It has been covered before.

Sorry, not logical. 900 hours is a stated limit for a 12 month period, no matter how many days you go to work. You can do 900 hours in 6 months and then have the rest of the year off - totally legal.

675 hours is well within that limit. But I'm sure you knew that.

Who suggested you would be limited to 75% of 900 hours?

I know that 900 hours is for a 12 month period and that 675 hours is well within that limit. But, what I meant was that despite my 75% contract I'm way above that limit. Nobody suggested I would be limited to 75% but no doubt that BA is working part-time crew a lot harder than full-time crew yet paying them part-time salary.

Good, as long as we're all agreed this dispute has nothing to do with New Fleet.http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/wink2.gif

Naturally. Was there any doubt you mean?
gl

It's still all about power. Past management have swung the lead and given BASSA too much power. Now they want to take it away and, predictably, BASSA don't like it.

This could turn out to be very messy indeed as it can be seen from certain postings that there are some very entrenched attitudes within our cc.

I won't deny that BASSA doesn't want to lose its power over what it has achieved power of.

How would you feel if somebody was trying to take your power away from you?

So you're suggesting that BA reduce your legal limit pro-rata??

Surely it is your decision to work part-time, good luck to BA if they can roster you up to 900 hours flying in 75% of full time.

Did I every say BA was trying to roster me, or any other part-time crew for that matter, to 900 hrs?

Firstly, kudos to you for keeping going. Lots of the other cabin crew who've been on here have not fought on for as long as you have so well done for that. You clearly believe in your cause and whatever others may think, your tenacity deserves applause even if I don't agree with everything you say. However, you said

Thanks for your comment. You don't need to agree to everything, or anything, I say. Everyone's entitled to their own opinion.

I have never said otherwise about not helping out in other cabins and very few would sit down before everything's completed. Working a bit harder is no problem but when you need to help out in other cabins and it's becoming a habit because of what BA has done, it's a problem.

This monthly travel payment is probably only temporary. I don't trust management for a second about them wanting to protect our income when, or if, NewFleet is started. After that they might realise it's economical and both EF and WW are nothing but a burden to them and then it's time for slaughter.

[Glamgirl]

MissM, now that you're back, any chance you could respond to my post to you earlier please?


MissM,
So basically your only safety concern about reduced crewing levels is covering doors 5 during safety demo?
That means that crewing levels on the 777 is perfectly fine as it is now (same as LGW), right? The only thing that needs changing then is for someone to cover doors 5, or as I've said before, CAA are happy with the change during demo, so why fret so much?
Is there, currently, any crew member on board the 747 who doesn't have a demo position? They could easily be covering doors 5 if it was really necessary.


As for one of your latest posts...


I don't mind helping out in another cabin every now and then but not when it's becoming a habit because of the company's imposition. I don't like to work in Club and because of my seniority I can avoid it like the plague.
Why I was recruited and why I joined BA? I don't know why I of all those applicants was recruited. There must have been something BA liked. Maybe my prominent pink eye shadow or my ability to show good teamwork skills. My reason for joining BA was because I couldn't be bothered to do anything else. It would be nice to travel and get paid to do it I thought.


I'm baffled as to why you actually stay as cc. Honestly. You've just put yourself in such a bad light, where you come across as lazy (don't want to help in other cabins) and complacent. You claim to have good teamwork skills, but by avoiding helping your colleagues in Club, you don't work as a team. For your own sake, please think before you post. Read it beforehand as a customer/colleague. I'm not attacking you, by the way, just giving you some constructive feedback.

Gg

[JOSHUA]

Not sure if this has been covered elsewhere in this long thread, but why are BASSA on their campaign literature, using the image of the six US marines erecting the American flag on Iwo Jima (replaced with a BASSA flag). Three of those marines were killed during that same battle, rather a sick use of the image IMHO...

[MissM]

Glamgirl

Sorry, I missed your previous post!

Crewing level on 777 is also an issue when you think about 10 crew on a 3 class as an example. 2 crew looking after a very long WT cabin during 1st break!

Number 9 on 747 doesn't have a demo position but needs to do the PAs and stay at doors 4 because when 5 and 10 starts securing the cabin from the back. 4 and 8 would already be at doors 3 except on High-J when 4 would be half way down the cabin between doors 3 and 4.

I'm not being mean but I can't be the least bothered in which light I put myself in. I'm not lazy for not wanting to help out in other cabins because I do occassionally (I evn took my DF trolley into Club on my last trip!) but when it's becoming a habit because BA has decided to take down crewing levels from 1 to 2 crew I do mind.

Why I stay as CC? Many reasons!

[Wobbler]

Miss M

You say you are prepared to bring the company down. How will that help you or the other 40,000 people BA employ? Are you merely doing it as a matter of principle because BA 'imposed' new crewing levels - as no sensible agreement was come to? I may be making wild assumptions here, but I take it that you accept that the airline industry in general and BA in particular are going through some of the worst trading conditions ever experienced and savings need to be made through all departments, otherwise BA will go out of business. I suspect if you were to ask the vast majority of cabin crew whether they would like to lose large sums of money out of their pay, or work just a little harder when they are at work - they would choose the latter. I cannot think of a more painless solution than the one BA has now imposed - can you? When BASSA suggested a paycut to BA had they asked the crew beforehand if that was their preferred way to make the savings?

The problem BA crew have now is that the vast majority of other employees see BA's imposed solution as reasonable - in that there is no loss of income (unlike most others in the company) - and the downside is minimal eg 14 crew on a jumbo rather than 15. There is also absolutely no support from the public either - I witnessed a very aggressive passenger verbally abusing a crew member as he disembarked the aircraft the other day. Another crew member told me how she was filling her car up at the petrol station (pay at pump) and the cashier made the effort to get up, go outside and tell her that she was not welcome at the filling station.

By your actions before Christmas (and if there is another ballot you will only make things worse) BA cabin crew have made themselves unemployable anywhere else. If you are prepared to bring BA down where exactly do you expect yourself and the rest of your colleagues to get another job. Having been there - life out of work is pretty grim and you can bet your bottom dollar that anyones CV with BA Cabin Crew on will immediately find its way into the bin.

Please explain how it could possibly be in your interest to bring BA down.

[overstress]

MissM

I'm glad we're agreed that it's about power. No-one is likely to take power from me, as you ask, as it's all laid down in the JPM.

What we need to get to in BA is a situation where the Captain decides what happens with the operation, not the BASSA reps.

Your postings do not cast you in a good light and you sound like you have difficulties with teamwork, but you say you do not care.

These attitudes may lead you into conflict with others, just as BASSA itself is about to have the rug pulled from under its feet.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

@ MissM ...
I don't like to work in Club and because of my seniority I can avoid it like the plague.
My goodness, are we J-class pax so much trouble?
Or is it simply that you object to helping in another cabin?
Or that after [was it 12 years?] you are far too important to help the Team?

You really are starting to confuse me now.

Still there will be no problem for you serving in J, or WT+ or anywhere soon. ;)

[midman]

I think we've managed to extract enough answers from the typical Bassa mindset to demonstrate the problems that BA has with its cabin crew union.

I think most impartial observers will now agree that it's quite amazing that the Board of BA has maintained such a patient approach to these negotiations, now nearly a year old, in the face of such self-centred, introspective and victim-cultured narcissism.

The attitude that the hardcore bassa members have of being superior to other companies' cabin crew, even their own colleagues at Gatwick, justifying salaries and terms and conditions way out on a limb in excess of the industry norm, yet backed by a rigid dogma that only they are the virtuous ones, working so hard as life-saving angels yet treated in a way far below the status they should be accorded.

There are cabin crew out there who don't think like this, who take a reasoned and considered approach to the company's plight, yet are left voiceless and unrepresented due to the bullying nature of the powerful Bassa reps. That voice needs to be heard, and Bassa has to listen - those people are it members too. All those cabin crew that read this thread who don't post but just browse, please mention the pprune website to other cabin crew in passing, it's the only place where the issues are debated properly and where the counter argument is tolerated.

If people don't see the true reason for this dispute, the surely we'll be dragged into a situation where people one day soon wake up without a job, career or income, and say "How the hell did that just happen?"

I've been to war and I've seen the damage people are prepared to inflict on others in the cause of supporting their tribe, despite the overwhelming wrongness of the cause, particularly when led by a strong-willed leadership, intolerant of adverse criticism and when carried along on a wave of compliant, cultish, unthinking followers.

I see the same sad flaws in human nature in this dispute. The problem is, negotiation rarely has an effect, normality only returns with the abject defeat of the mad dogma.

[Tiramisu]

I will repeat myself again which I'm sorry for BUT the fact remains that we have been taught year after year that we must never leave doors unattended. That's the issue with doors 5.



Miss M,
I am only correcting you, it's not a criticism. As long as there is a crew member in the vicinity of a pair of days, it's acceptable. Please feel free to telephone any SEP Instuctor in Cranebank and they will confirm the same.

[overstress]

we all know where the big money is and its not handing out tea and coffee

I thought CSD's took part in the service now? ;)

[Tiramisu]

Posted by VV
So another day on this thread is made up of posts from people who are not cabin crew going on and on about how we should do this and that to save our jobs when we all know where the big money is and its not handing out tea and coffee. Let BASSA take care of our needs and thats why we are in a union to protect us from Villie and Billys secret plans vee have vays of making you verk


TOXIC as usual!
What a surprise!

[Glamgirl]

MissM,

It really is a shame that you don't care. You were hired by BA due to being a caring person, unless you faked it really well at the interview. We are all hired because we are caring people who like working with other people and providing customer service. Basically, you're paid to care, and therefore you should.

In regards to the 777 3-class with 10 crew: At LGW, a crew member comes from Club to WT during 1st breaks. This means the rear galley is covered whilst the other two are doing juice rounds/toilet checks/cabin patrol. It works because we work as a team... If it was a safety/security issue, it would've been changed by now, considering how long we've been operating with these crew levels.

I know you keep repeating yourself in regards to doors 5. It has been pointed out by several posters here as to why it's acceptable to leave doors 5 during demo. If you still have concerns about it, why don't you send an email to CAA? Then you can get the definite answer from the regulators.

Gg

[Tiramisu]

I thought CSD's took part in the service now?


Bly me, I've just realised who VV is!
Thanks overstress!

[MissM]

Wobbler

I don't doubt for a second that other employees in BA see this imposition as reasonable and usually because they have really no idea what they are talking about. It would be the same if I said that we only need one pilot because aircraft are so modern these days that they can take off and land on their own. Why do we need so many CSA when there are self service kiosks at the airport? Why do we need so many managers because they don't care a bit and are nothing but a bunch of attendance clerks?

Of course passengers are upset when crew threaten to strike. People rely to fly all around the year and no time would be a good time for a strike because there would be very little support as people would need to get wherever they're travelling to.

Did BASSA consult its members before suggesting a pay cut? No, you know that's a rhetorical question and you don't need me to answer it for you.

This imposition is worth £40 million and BA has only done this because it's apparently non-contractual. Otherwise they'd probably done more. BA wants at least another £100 million. Where do you think they will get those savings from? This ballot was not, and will not be, about New Fleet. We can sort that out. If that was it maybe it would be more bearable to deal with but BA wants a lot more from IFCE. This is ONLY the beginning and it's sad that some can't seem to understand that. Once this imposition is over they will be coming back for me. We all know what BA thinks of its cabin crew. We are overpaid and expensive and our management does a very good giving us the feeling that we are a nothing but a burden. I did an IT course earlier this year and those people did a very good job pointing out how cheap LGW is and how things would be better if both EF and WW were as good and cheap as them or Emirates.

I won't deny recession. I won't deny BA is having a tough time. But, times will get better and BA will ride out the storm.

To bring BA down would of course not benefit anyone but I would rather see the company go bust than letting WW (and BF) get their wish come through with what they are trying to do. And, that's not only the imposition.

[MissM]

overstress

I don't have any problems with teamwork. I don't care about what people, neither through here or in reality. I have far better things to think about.

I'm not against a change in our agreements which would give our Captain more freedom to decide about the operation. As I have pointed out about our disruption agreement I hate having 2 local nights. That could easily be changed. But, I don't agree that BASSA should lose all control because that means pretty much that BA could do anything to us.

[MissM]

My goodness, are we J-class pax so much trouble?
Or is it simply that you object to helping in another cabin?
Or that after [was it 12 years?] you are far too important to help the Team?

You really are starting to confuse me now.

Still there will be no problem for you serving in J, or WT+ or anywhere soon. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/wink2.gif

No, you're not much trouble. Working in WT is more down to earth and I like the atmosphere and you do get to do your own trolley most of the time. Another good thing on the 747 is when are you number 5 or 10 and sit at the back the take off is much more powerful and I like to keep an eye on the winglet. Go figure...

Far too important to help the team after 14 yrs? No, not that either.

[Slickster]

Let BASSA take care of our needs and thats why we are in a union to protect us from Villie and Billys secret plans vee have vays of making you verk.

Yes, haven't BASSA done well lately? Introducing a moronic strike ballot over "the 12 days of Christmas" (as if even their own members would find that funny), losing 2 court cases, managing 3 hours of negotiations with BA in 9 months, stomping out of meetings, outright lying to their members; the list goes on.

"Vee have ways of making you verk." Is that your real problem? Finally someone has asked you to work for a living - shock horror! What's with the German accent BTW, are you a mate of Max Mosely, or have you run out of WW2 ideas?

Not sure if this has been covered elsewhere in this long thread, but why are BASSA on their campaign literature, using the image of the six US marines erecting the American flag on Iwo Jima (replaced with a BASSA flag). Three of those marines were killed during that same battle, rather a sick use of the image IMHO...

Yes JOSHUA, it has been covered, and watching the News every day, having a brother who's about to go out to Afghanistan, flying a clapped out helicopter, and earning less than some of Wonkers ilk, it really gets my goat.

Get real, BASSA numpties. There are people coming home in coffins every day, earning a fraction of what you earn. Airlines are going bust everywhere. And you are going on strike, because someone asked you to work a bit harder?:ugh:

You are truly pathetic, and for sure, Tony Woodley, Len Mcklusky, and the rest of their cronies will still be in a job (both on well over 100K), after you've fulfilled their political agenda, which gets them elected, and brings down BA, just as happened to pretty much every other British industry. I'll see you at the Dole queue. I'll be the one being done for assault.

[Tagron]

Miss M

The question you need to address is the one put to you by Wobbler.

Please explain how it could possibly be in your interest to bring BA down.

All this discussion about the detail of cabin service pales into insignificance compared with this big issue. Even some of your own colleagues don't agree with you on cabin service. So please let's stay with the main topic, which is the reason why so many people are following and contributing to this thread.

Can I suggest to other contributors that we lay off the service level discussions, maybe start a new thread if you feel that would be worthwhile, but we continue to press Miss M and other apologists for BASSA how they justify a policy that has immense consequences for so many uninvolved people, and which to an outsider appears totally barking mad.

And I also suggest we ignore the increasingly tedious and childish postings of
Watersidewonker which waste our time and contribute nothing.

So Miss M back to the main question. All you have said in reply so far is:

To bring BA down would of course not benefit anyone but I would rather see the company go bust than letting WW (and BF) get their wish come through with what they are trying to do.
And, that's not only the imposition.

Explain your reasoning please and how you would justify your actions to the tens of thousands of people who would suffer.

[Slickster]

Actually, I think it's chinos, checked shirt (with a jumper draped over the shoulders), and boat shoes.

I won't actually be in the Dole office, of course. I've got the proceeds of my Georgian Surrey mansion to get through first, so won't qualify. I'll enjoy passing by though. Not to mention the Ferrari, and Yacht (why else would I need boat shoes?).

[overstress]

Please someone tell me that BASSA have invented a bot which repeats the same old mantra...

Tiramasu, my humour was aimed at wonker, no offence to hard-working onside crew such as yourself :)

I'm still trying to get to grips with your logic, MissM, what good is bankrupting a company out of spite?

Also: It would be the same if I said that we only need one pilot because aircraft are so modern these days that they can take off and land on their own

The CAA mandate how many pilots and cabin crew we have, not BASSA.

You say BA will ride out the storm, that is exactly BASSA's stance, stick our heads in the sand and hope it all goes away.

[Tiramisu]

overstress,
No offence taken at all. :)
You've probably not realised it but you've just given me a clue!
Thanks.;)

[Slickster]

BASSA's stance, stick our heads in the sand and hope it all goes away.

It would have been funny to see them at Iwo Jima, in that case.

Am trying very hard not to swear. :ugh:

[Tiramisu]

-and if our struggle and our LEGITIMATE industrial action brings down the company - we are all screwed - so answer me this - what have WE the Cabin Crew, got to lose? Yeah that's nothing!

A Lurker,
EVERYTHING!
I can't believe you of all people is saying this!
VOTE NO AND RESIGN from BASSA as I have!
Please, please save BA!

[interlog]

And it is of course BA's legal right to change employee's Terms and Conditions providing the sufficient contractual notice has been given.

There is a choice... share the responsibility of doing a little extra work with no pay increase therefore aiding the Company still trading or standing up for YOUR principals and bringing the Company down resulting in ALL staff not involved in this dispute joining the already long dole queue.

Now would you - militant staff - want that latter burden on YOUR shoulder?

[HiFlyer14]

What on earth has happened to these people - I'm afraid that I'm not even sure that I can refer to some cc that post on here as colleagues.

When I joined, many moons ago now, we were recruited because we were kind, caring, compassionate, would put customers and colleagues first, go the extra mile, etc.

But now in what must surely be just a bad dream, I find myself in the middle of this cesspit of destructive, selfish, lazy, unkind, and immoral group of people.

I am absolutely stunned by the assertions of these "cabin crew" on this thread. When, pray tell, did they become so self-centred and how, dear God, do we ever get it back on track?

They think New Fleet is a threat to their jobs, but can't for the life of them see that by voting for a strike they risk the threat of a New Contract or worse, bankruptcy. :mad:

What is risible (if that's possible in such a dangerous position) is that every person that I flew with inbetween the strike announcement and the injunction said they had voted yes, but they would be coming to work because they didn't intend to ruin people's plans. So don't worry, MissM, WW etc. you'll be on the picket line alone. You have many accomplices willing to put the x in the box that BASSA tells them to, but very few willing to strike. Good luck - you are soooo gonna need it.

FFS Get your heads out of the sand. New Fleet is going to be the least of our troubles in a couple of months time.

I am BA cabin crew and the above represents my own viewpoint and not that of BA.

[interlog]

A Lurker,

Two points:

1. Without customers there is no business. So you look after them

2. Nobody is indispensable (sp?). Yes you need crew on board. But unfortunately for you (and fortunately for the customer) there are lines and lines of people more than happy to do your job.

[interlog]

You quite clearly have no understanding of how to operate a successful online business - you automate as many processes as possible - you then buy an iPhone and no matter where you are in the world you can operate your business - why on earth would I need staff? They are such a pain in the arse aren't they?

Quite. But in the event that you do need staff (eg on airplanes) you do have a choice who your employ. And if those staff your have employed are a pain in the arse you just get rid. Either by dismissal (possibly expensive) or just change their Ts and Cs.

[henkybaby]

Hey guys!

You are all still at it? Wow. Strange suggestion for 2010: put this discussion to bed and lets all go on with our lives.

I will make it my resolution. That and buy that iPhone. They can be bought simlock free here in Aussie.

Best wishes for '10. That we may all have a job!

Regards,
Henk

[wiggy]

Sorry,a bit late on the Hamster wheel tonight..MissM, FWIW

" It would be the same if I said that we only need one pilot because aircraft are so modern these days that they can take off and land on their own"

You could say that but it's not true...have you been on a Flight Deck and talked to the pilots about operating an aircraft recently?

[SlideBustle]

OMG! My honest opinion, (it's harsh but oh well!) all of my colleagues who are prepared to strike until this company goes bust - YOU DESERVE TO BE SACKED!!! How dare you, because of your selfish greed rather thousands of people crew and other departments out of a job and an airline I and many people who are proud to work go bust, YOU may have nothing to lose (or so you think!) but I and the majority of my colleagues would!!

That attitude is seriously appalling! Spare a thought of the staff at other airlines gone bust - and other companies from other industries. Please, get a LARGE dose of reality before it's too late!!

ALSO A lurker, sould like to stick up for Tiramisu his/her posts have been constructive, articluate and sensible. He/she has not slaughtered his/her collegues on here, just has stated his/her opinion about what this thread is about - the negotiations, discussions and our ''Union''.

[Tiramisu]

Slidebustle,
They really are serious about striking, it's so sad.
Either way BASSA will loose. If UNITE wins the court case in February and Willie Walsh has to re-instate the old crewing levels, New Crew will have to be employed on New Fleet. If BA win, they'll still be employing New Crew on to New Fleet. Why can't they see that. It's best to negotiate a sensible and reasonable solution with BA for all of us before it's too late.

I'm BA Cabin Crew and the above are my views and not those of my employer's.

[SlideBustle]

A Lurker, just read your post calling us a ''second rate airline'' - Get real please!! Plus also don't you think pax who may read that may think oh God won't fly BA as they are second rate.
OK, the product has changed, in some areas not for the better. After abit of research, other full service carriers have too. Virgin for example on JFK/EWR/BOS etc flights no longer serve a afternoon tea before landing in Economy/Premium - guess what they get??? A cookie or cereal bar!! We still serve sandwiches no? Granted we no longer have deli boxes on longhaul flights under 10 hours but at least pax still get a sandwich!
SAS airlines on shorthaul flights, along with bmi, Aer Lingus have BOB down the back. We have complimentary bar. OK, so birdseed and a cookie might not be a product I am particularly ''proud'' of serving, I do not think we are second rate. On longer flights pax still get a sandiwich and Band 4 hot meal.
By no means is our product perfect!!!! We still in some areas are infrerior. But if you compare to other airlines we are probably superior. American carriers are infrerior from what I have seen. OK Singapore airlines et al may actually be the most innovative but does it make us the worst.
IF we make the savings now, BA can get back into profit and invest!! How fab is that!! They have a new First seat in CRC which looks rather nice and a big improvement - however they have to make savings to get into profit first! So if you were so concerned about service then you would be looking to save costs so we can move forward.
Have you read the investors day presentation earlier this year? They stated they want to improve WT and WTP but obviously they can only do that if we get into profit. They had some artists impressions and it looked rather impressive!
Some of these cutbacks are not great, and there are areas of our catering/product that can be improved (please put pretzels back on in CE!!!) but savings need to be made to invest. Plus, we still offer certain services that are superior, it's just the whole market has changed, other airlines have made changes aswell! Having a great attitude to your work can be enough to win customers, something some BASSA hardliners find a hard grasp to ''no we can't do hot towels in WTP as BASSA says we need a 16th crew member''
Give me strength!

Anyway this ballot isn't about our product!

[Tiramisu]

A Lurker,
Apology accepted, thanks.
Happy New Year to you.

[Tiramisu]

Slidebustle,
Excellent and very sensible post.
Off to bed and a very Happy New Year to you too.:)

[SlideBustle]

Yes, I suppose that A lurker is right, let's not turn us into the opposite, that is one great thing about this forum... Both sides can debate in anoymosity. I disagree with BASSA and am passionate about my opinions and beliefs, but just debate the reason why you think the way you do and do accept why you feel your reasons.

I am passionate about my opinion, hence why I posted my anger filled post earlier. I do truly despair at these people who want to strike and will do so until the airline shuts! What???

[Glamgirl]

I personally don't feel there's any bullying on this thread. There are various opinions, some which seem more "right" than others.

Everyone is welcome to debate here, but it would be a lot easier to have a sensible debate if people could stick to facts and not rhetoric.

Name-calling won't get anyone far, although it's frustrating to read some posts.

What it all boils down to, is that most people seem to understand that as a company, BA need to cut costs to be able to survive. Yes, we have different opinions as to how this should go about.

I do feel that there are people who work for BA who shouldn't be. They might not enjoy it anymore, might not feel valued or a whole bunch of other reasons. I've always lived by the rule that if you wake up each morning and think "oh, :mad:, I've got to go to work today", then it's time to move on. Not for anyone else but yourself. You're the person who lives your life, and you're the person that can make you happy. When one isn't happy with work/life/home/relationships/etc, one tends to send out vibes where people can feel it too.

For the people who are happy in their job, at the moment, all you (we) can do, is to do it to the best of our abilities. Go the extra mile, enjoy yourself, have a giggle, smile and strive to be the best. I know I sound hopeful saying this, but maybe, just maybe, it will "rub off" on others. I have met plenty of people at work who inspired me to do better, whether at work or in my private life.

Gg

[SlideBustle]

Anyway... moving on... guys on the other side how do you think BA should cut costs??? Do you want crew numbers put back on....... but get rid of CAT payments? Or how about put the 16th crew member on the 747 and you can have hours of breaks and bunk rest.... just get rid of your box payments??

Seriously, this union's politics is so detrimental to us all and you are all like lambs to the slaughter. I have friends voting Yes... they are not particularly militant just they have bought into the ''BA will shaft us and we will be on 30% less pay'' rethoric from BASSA. Sadly... But, we have no time for it, solutions and negotiations need to be made AND FAST!

The Union have missed oppurtunities.... The Fixed Monthly payment could have been negotiated to have been reasonable and most importantly contractual and regularly reviews - even better incorporated into our basics to protect current crew who don't want to be on New Fleet. A ratio of work to be transferred over could have been negotiated to ensure an equal amount of BOX 3,4 trips, stateside trips, shorthaul 3 day 8 sectors and shorthaul ''light refreshment'' trips go over to New Fleet to ensure a fair distribution of work. Plus, an agreement that New Fleet will only grow based on when there is a shortage of crew and growth - NOT routes moving to New Fleet first then crew being put on standby.

Did that happen? NO don't be silly - BASSA is our union!! They saw New Fleet as a threat. It could be a threat, but all of the above is what Bill considered to take that threat away - so we current crew are protected. The conditions on New Fleet would probably still be better than many airlines for any newbies to the airline and any current crew who wanst to go over for personal reasons for promotion or part trime etc can.... Although with our union just like the crew on the LCY-JFK route, and the Pursers on WW working up as CSDs would probably be considered ''scabs''.

New Fleet could even go away altogether, BA offered a proposal... sure on EF and WW we would make sacrafices and new crew and current crew going for promotion would have to be on new T&Cs (the union didn't mind that but didn't want to change anything on their own fleets) Unite's own counter proposal DID NOT save enough end of! Most of it was temporary and some of it was very little. Alot of it disadvantaged many of us, particularly Main Crew!! But oh yeah, doesn't really affect most of the reps does it?

So.... guys like I've said before.... you constantly say that you are willing to change but it must be negotiated. So which would you be able to negotiate. As you seem to say this but hate any form of change!!

[SlideBustle]

Wow! Glamgirl thumbs up! You are true - happiness breeds happiness!
However, likewise negativity breeds negativity!

[SlideBustle]

YouTube - George Galloway speaks to anti-trade union man (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HAWCvtPcU-4)

Anyone else seen this?? This is WHY lots of the hardliners are saying George Galloway is a ''hero'' - don't make me laugh, seriously!!

To be fair on George, he is obviously thinking of us and has empathy with cabin crew, we deserve to be treated well etc etc... he obviously has that attitude, but evidently he does not know that our Union won't react to any change in a recession. That is the difference. And the other guy has a valid point regarding unions bringing down companies and running them - it needs to stop. BA does not want to make us Ryanair, just work us harder and new recruits on market rate plus 10% (us current crew we keep our pay how fair is that!!)

Unfortunately they think everyone is so on our side now he has said this. Has George Galloway ever had credibility, especially with that ''purring event'' on Celebrity Big Brother!!!

[Desertia]

It's ironic how A Lurker and others talk about how bad the airline is without ever considering their role in it. A Lurker, you in particular come across as someone who uses BA as an easy source of income to support your businesses.

Virtually ever person I have spoken to in the last three months (and I'm in Asia at the moment) doesn't fly BA any more.

The reason in EVERY case?

"The cabin crew treat you like you're an inconvenience" or words to that effect.

Whether our BASSA colleagues like to hear the truth or not, it's about time they started realising just how little BA can afford to put up with their crap any more, and what a millstone they are around the neck of the company.

I feel desperately sorry for those on here that still take pride in their work and want to help the airline stay afloat.

I can only hope that if that witless union decide to ballot again that people realise from the last time that they are being led like lambs to the slaughter and vote no.

Otherwise all I can see is that there will be many feather spitting unemployed old BASSA slubberdegullions, and some very sad, and badly misled other cabin crew signing on for benefits - with a CV that employers wouldn't touch with a bargepole, even if they didn't vote for the stupid Christmas strike.

In the vain hope that CC start to see how badly they have been represented by the BASSA Stasi, I wish you all a very peaceful and Happy New Year.

[mary meagher]

Hey, girls, and boys -

Should I recommend BA to my son who is nervous of flying anyhow since 9/11, and needs to come to the UK to see his father before the old man passes on, (they give him 3 months). ( Oh, we've been divorced for 20 years, so that's why I'm not too upset - but now under the circumstances on friendly terms again).

He wants to fly direct from Philadelphia to Heathrow. And he doesn't trust French built aircraft.

I told him that BA aircrew were tops. But I also mentioned that CC had been threatening to go on strike. Is it still on or not? should he travel BA or not?

[Human Factor]

It's still all about power. Past management have swung the lead and given BASSA too much power. Now they want to take it away and, predictably, BASSA don't like it.

This could turn out to be very messy indeed as it can be seen from certain postings that there are some very entrenched attitudes within our cc.

I won't deny that BASSA doesn't want to lose its power over what it has achieved power of.

How would you feel if somebody was trying to take your power away from you?

The difference is that flight crew power is enshrined in law (the Air Navigation Order), which means that is not possible unless the law is changed. Cabin crew have never had the legal power which belongs to the Captain. Cabin crew "power" (empire building by an ex-board member) is a BA-ism which should have been nipped in the bud years ago to prevent exactly what is happening now.

Alternatively, maybe we did have it taken away (incorrectly - the law hasn't changed) and steps are being taken to get it back.:E

[wiggy]

"slubberdegullions"..:ooh::ooh:

I thought they were something out of a Harry Potter story, but apparently not...:ok:

Anyhow, great word - must try to fit it into one of my PA's :)............

Have a good New Year.

[cessnapete]

Just read an interim report on the KLM codeshare AMS- DTW hi-jack incident.
It shows the cost base BA is competing with in the longhaul market, and shows up the futility of the BASSA argument in Court that loss of a crewmember or two, somehow affects safety.
A330 aircraft, business/economy layout, 270 pax 8 cabin crew. Coped with the situation very well, although pax had the hi-jacker 'done and dusted' before the cabin crew were involved.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

@ Mary, Post #891 ... sorry you got ignored in the fracas!!

Should I recommend BA to my son who is nervous of flying anyhow since 9/11 ...
He wants to fly direct from Philadelphia to Heathrow. And he doesn't trust French built aircraft.
I told him that BA aircrew were tops. But I also mentioned that CC had been threatening to go on strike. Is it still on or not? should he travel BA or not?
1. Airbus is not French, only parts of it. And it is possibly the most successful modern airliner.
2. BA cockpit crew are, I believe, about as good as you get.
3. Some BA cabin crew are hell-bent on causing disruption to the travelling public. Your pre-booked flight may, or may not, happen.
4. US Airways appears to be your other direct option from PHL, and they use Airbus 330 on that route.
5. US Airways customer reviews here ... US Airways Reviews and US Airways Passenger opinions about US Airways product and US Airways service standards (http://www.airlinequality.com/Forum/us_air.htm)

6. Have you considered sailing with Cunard? ;)

[stormin norman]

I think there referring to getting 350 people out of a burning 747, safely with half the passengers carrying duty free, hand baggage and laptops.

If you look at the Manchester Airtours 737 aborted take-off ,fire and subsequent evacuation you'll see just what well trained cabin crew can do for you in a bad situation-on that tragic day they were worth every penny.

[wobble2plank]

To bring BA down would of course not benefit anyone but I would rather see the company go bust than letting WW (and BF) get their wish come through with what they are trying to do. And, that's not only the imposition.

This sums the hive mentality up quite nicely thanks. WatersideWonker seems to believe that nobody on this thread except CC of their mindset should post anything as none of us know/understand the hardship of working in the cabin. Except of course the full responsibility for what goes on in the cabin is, at the ultimate end of the day, the Captains.

But, as I have said many, many times before, when the above quoted rhetoric comes out then this dispute, in all it's nitty gritty, becomes mine.

I will support the company to keep BA and loyal BA customers flying through any petty BASSA dispute. Not because I disagree with the crews concerns about where their T's & C's might be going but because I abhor the actions and direction taken by BASSA in supposed support of their membership.

Judging by the forums on ESS there are a vast amount of my Corduroy trouser wearing brigade who agree.

Change is required. BA cannot continue to function as an airline without cost cutting. Pilots have taken their rationalisation 5 years ago. Ground staff agreed new working contracts with the move to T5. Checkin staff agreed the same with the move to T5.

The fiasco of the opening of T5 has been financially recouped by a reduction in the rent attributed to T5 from BAA as they were the root cause.

Fuel hedging was never meant to be a profit making exercise, it is there to smooth out the peaks AND TROUGHS of the fuel price to allow better profit forecasting.

Price fixing 'probably' (as we will never rightly know) brought in more in excess profit than the fines incurred for its occurrence. Why did BA capitulate so quickly? Also, sorry VV but it happened outside of Willie Walshs tenure.

Where do we save money now then? The company has done its best to engage BASSA but BASSA don't want it. They are spoiling for a fight and now they have got one.

Goodbye BASSA, 2010 will be so much more pleasant without them!

[anotherthing]

A Lurker
...yet I cannot sit here and see our airline destroyed by Willie Walsh and his proposals...They are not destroying the airline, they are trying to take measures to ensure it remains viable.

The only ones who are in danger of destroying the airline are BASSA. Or is that what you meant by the quote? You don't want WW to destroy the airline because you want to do it yourself?

Get a grip and understand basic economics. I seriously doubt you have 2 successful businesses outside BA...

a) You understanding of overheads and costs is abysmal

b) Why would you still work for BA - a job and company you obviously despise - if you were so successful?

The sheer bloody mindedness of some people on here is astounding - the lack of grasp on reality is frightening. The selfish attitude some (by no means all) CC on here would make me wonder if they would even step up to the mark in an aircraft emergency if their life was also at risk, or if they would cut and run.

[wobble2plank]

Anotherthing,

It is because it is easy to take a militant, antagonistic stance and agree to the destruction of an employer when you do so from a position of financial security.

50% with two successful (not travel businesses advertised on Second Life perchance? Guess we will never know :rolleyes: ) internet businesses? Just how important are the lives of all your junior colleagues who have nothing to fall back on?

Great support, with 'friends' like these in the Union who needs enemies.

'Sod you Jack, I'm alright' springs to mind.

:ugh:

[LD12986]

On the comments made earlier about the state of the BA product, look at some of the cheapest WT sale fares currently on offer (and these include Gordon's chunk of APD!):

New York: £299 return
Boston/Philadelphia/Washington: £309 return
Dubai: £325 return

When you offer fares at these prices, something has to give and WT remains an extremely good value product.

Also, could some of the changes to catering have been avoided if productivity improvements had been agreed 12 months ago?

[circuitbreaker13]

I would never think it would help CC posting on this forum that they would give in if the company would be in serious trouble over this dispute, so I wouldn't take these threats here too serious!

I would like to thank MissM since my view towards my collegues in the cabin is somewhat milder and I'm impressed with her calmness of trying to explain her point of view, eventhough we would never fully agree at least I would stil be able to look her straight in the eyes and not be upset!

I can see it must be a big thing to see your working conditions changed in a big way.

But please understand also it's not WW making this up by himself!

Our shareholders would like to get some of their money back (And we should be thankfull they still have some confidence) and they are the ones that will sent off WW if they don't agree with his point of view!

It's in my opinion the customers that chose for cheaper service based on the growing numbers of lowcost competition!

Again I have to repeat myself: "For all cabincrew nationwide it would be good if the unions would try to get a foothold at the doorstep of these competing airlines and this will benefit our company indirectly and the industry as a whole!

Once more, excuse my spelling as English is not my native language and I'm to lazy to download the spellingcheck!

[Hot Wings]

I see from the New Year's honours list that A Lurker has been Knighted - to go with all his/her other awards and medals - probably got a VC in BKK as well!

[keel beam]

Slide Bustle

this union's politics is so detrimental to us all

Absolutely!

Also take into consideration that Unite is an amalgum of unions, not least AMICUS, TGWU, B A S S A .....

So members of TGWU and AMICUS in BA are being SCREWED by their own mother union whilst it tries to prop up the T&C of BASSA.

Am I annoyed... no, I am F:mad:g livid.

[Dawdler]

Where goes JAL could BA be? Large losses and debt + Pension fund hole?

[anotherthing]

Don't be silly, BA are untouchable...

[wobble2plank]

MissM

As I have pointed out, I don't care whether I come through as selfish, complacent or any other appropiate adjective. I'm anything but lazy because if you cared to read what I have written you would see that I don't mind helping out every now and then but when it's becoming a habit I do mind.

Its called productivity. Pilots agreed (odd word that, it comes from when a Union is prepared to NEGOTIATE with the company instead of attacking it) to increase productivity to allow the voluntary redundancies. I believe almost 1000 cabin crew took VR thus requiring the imposition, as BASSA couldn't negotiate its way out of an open paper bag, of increased productivity from fewer CC members.

Your mindset of 'I rule my little world and the rest of you can take a running jump if you think I'm going to help you' is symptomatic of the current plight BASSA find itself in.

Good luck in finding another job that pays as well for so little work and allows you the luxury of bidding for part time at 75%, a position that requires the company to employ 5 people instead of 4 to get the work donw and thus incurring, for each four 75% employees, extra NI contributions, extra training costs and extra uniform costs, all to keep you in the lifestyle to which you've become accustomed.

Remember, the customer comes first. The company MUST reorganise to survive into the future, the pain must be taken now and then services tweaked to provide the customer with a better service in the future.

IF BA goes down, and it very well could, like Brasilia and Alitalia, they will, probably, restart with a new AOC, new contracts and the ability to hire only those whom they wish to retain. As almost ALL OTHER DEPARTMENTS have agreed cost savings and are delivering, I wonder where the axe would fall? Bear in mind that flight crew are currently well under the bar of average earning for comparable airlines within Europe, quite a long way under in fact. Just look at Lufthansa, Air France, Iberia and KLM for starters.

Just something to ponder on.

[MissM]

Tagron

It probably sounds extremely selfish to say that I would rather see the company go bankrupt instead of letting WW and BF having their way through. And, by all means it's selfish to think that way. Maybe it's bitterness towards the management for wanting to change the way we work or for trying to destroy our union once and for all. Because that's exactly what's happening.

If you don't work for BA it will be very difficult to understand the mentality in the company. People wonder why we are suspicious? Management has constantly lied to us and given promises which they haven't kept. Everything they say should be taken with a pinch of salt and never trust them because sooner or later when you least expect it they will mess around with you big time.

Every other department has agreed to changes in their agreements. Congratulations. They are now blaiming us for being perverse for not wanting to come to an agreement. BA and UNITE have been in negotiations for almost a year and I won't deny that both parties are extremely far apart as to how achieve savings of around £150 million pounds. What is happening at the moment in the world is something which won't last forever. Recessions come. Recessions go. I don't agree with everything which UNITE has suggested. All savings to be paid back in 2 years time is one of them. A new disruption agreement being worth £60 million pounds solely is another one.

BASSA is not flawless. BA is not flawless either. BA wants to get back its control of the airline which BASSA has had for decades. It's understandable they are fighting against it, isn't it? I don't want BA to get all control either because I don't trust them for a second and they would probably shaft us. They already do every now and then to see if they can get away with it. Call me suspicious.

How do you think it feels when WW is constantly repeating how much we cost and comparing us to Virgin Atlantic? He makes us feel nothing as a burden to the company. I don't think morale in this company has been as low as ever since WW took over the post as CEO. Some will say that he was brought to the position only to destroy BASSA and obviously at any cost. He was even willing to risk a strike!

Why am I prepared to bring the company down? If you look at what WW and BF want to do in a long term perspective to cabin crew. The ballot was about imposition which is only a small part of our savings. It's not avoidable to discuss NewFleet which makes up the majority of the savings. It will be destructive and those who choose not to transfer and accept a new contract will have their career come to and end. Like it or not. WW has had this up his sleeve for two years and it has caused a lot stress. He said he would be willing to discuss this with UNITE. Why would he not go ahead with something which he has has planned for years? That's suspicious. If that's the game he wants to play and get rid of us expensive crew through this destructive system, and this will sound really awful, I would rather see the company capsize.

[Jockster]

How about - 90 day notice to all existing cabin crew followed by re-interview to affirm their suitability for their 'new' role. Successful applicants get 7 days to accept a new 'New Fleet' contract or gone in 90 days. Acceptance of new contract waives their right to take part in the ensuing strike by old contract crew as not relevant to new T&Cs.

Unsuccesful applicants (they already know who they are) also gone in 90 days. Crank up the recruitment for hiring laid off experienced crew from other airlines and job done - All new fleet contracts to be rolling twelve months to give the company the ability to get rid of those in the future who get 'turned' by the dark side as demonstrated by a few on this forum and nearly ALL on the CC forum.

Pension - Solved
BASSA - Solved
Future costs - Solved
Chain of Command / CRM issues - Solved
Crew Flexibilty / Disruption - Solved

Never been a better time - poor results, public support , City support - Can't see a downside, Can you?? I expect an announcement first week of January.

[MissM]

HiFlyer14

I don't think we would be very lonely on the picket line. Around 10 000 votes said otherwise. It doesn't really mean anything because surely some would back out and haven't got the guts but don't think that crew wouldn't be willing to strike because they would. Have you asked your colleagues why they voted yes if they had no intention to strike?

This is a question to you, SlideBustle and Tiramisu

You are all very against BASSA and some of you probably have resigned or thinking of doing so. Are you still accepting all those different allowances and payments (i.e. CAT, LDP, MSH unless they've changed terms) which you have on EF? Because if you are maybe you should remind yourselves about who have actually negotiated these for you... You don't agree with what the union is doing but you are accepting things they have negotiated for you?

[pvmw]

MissM said:-
BA wants to get back its control of the airline which BASSA has had for decades............

....and therein lies the crux of the problem. MissM thinks that BASSA should run BA, and the rest of the world think that is the purpose and responsibility of BA management.

This affair will not be over until BASSA have been completely emasculated. The solution, as proposed above, is 90 day's notice to all CC, and a recruitment drive amongst the many hundreds who would give their eye teeth to work for BA.

I find it almost beyond comprehension when I see the selfish, small-minded and pure greed of some posters (MissM included). You have terms and conditions far in excess of almost any other group of workers, yet you just whinge interminably about how hard you are done by.

Get real, or quit the job you hate so much and let someone more deserving have it.

[Dawdler]

Quote Miss M:
Recessions come. Recessions go.......I would rather see the company capsize.

Many companies are seriously damaged during recession, some cease to exist at all. Carried to it's (il)logical conclusion, it seems that your determination to preserve your current status will be at the cost of jobs of other employees (not just in BA) who rely on the business that BA creates. Not counting your own of course.

[anotherthing]

BASSA is not flawless. BA is not flawless either. BA wants to get back its control of the airline which BASSA has had for decades...It's understandable they are fighting against it, isn't it?What, are you serious? BA is a company - BASSA are a union.

BASSA has no right of 'control' of the company.

BASSA is there to protect it's members in the best way it can. That means negotiation; it certainly does not mean running BA to insolvency.

BASSA is not there to tell BA how it should run the company.
It is not there to have control of part of BA.

That is not the remit of any union.

You need to get real and understand what part a union has to play. It seems like you have swallowed BASSA leadership's rhetoric hook, line and sinker.


Every other department has agreed to changes in their agreements. Congratulations. They are now blaiming us for being perverse for not wanting to come to an agreement.
How about coming in touch with reality?

How do you think it feels when WW is constantly repeating how much we cost and comparing us to Virgin Atlantic? He makes us feel nothing as a burden to the company.I notice you don't deny it though... maybe he is trying to get you to realise that you are still going to be better off than others, even if you do deign to help your company out.

Why am I prepared to bring the company down? If you look at what WW and BF want to do in a long term perspective to cabin crew. So what he is proposing is worse than having no job? :ugh:

He said he would be willing to discuss this with UNITE. Why would he not go ahead with something which he has has planned for years? That's suspicious. Another small minded conspiracy theory... BASSA are very good at convincing people.

[wobble2plank]

BA wants to get back its control of the airline which BASSA has had for decades...It's understandable they are fighting against it, isn't it?

Made me chuckle.

BASSA has a right to represent the views and concerns of its membership nothing more. They are neither in a position or qualified to do anything else. It does not have any rights to dictate to the board, the CEO or the management as to how to run the company.

BASSA have become power crazy.

Get rid of BASSA. End of story.

[TorC]

This is a question to you, SlideBustle and Tiramisu

You are all very against BASSA and some of you probably have resigned or thinking of doing so. Are you still accepting all those different allowances and payments (i.e. CAT, LDP, MSH unless they've changed terms) which you have on EF? Because if you are maybe you should remind yourselves about who have actually negotiated these for you... You don't agree with what the union is doing but you are accepting things they have negotiated for you?

MissM

Although I'm sure SlideBustle and Tiramisu are more than capable of replying for themselves, I'll just add my 2p's worth here .....

Your statement is not wrong.

However, since BA will not negotiate individual contracts with each and every one of us, those of us either disagreeing with, or not being members of either bassa or cc89, have no choice but to accept all the conditions, regardless of who thought of them.

Of course, the day might dawn when so many have left bassa/cc89 that they no longer represent the majority of crew, and could therefore be out of the loop entirely. That'd be my New Years wish anyway.

[7Heroes]

I would hazzard a guess that the majority of part time cc (on 33%,50% or 75%) have partners who work.To them BA is not the main salary and thus they wouldn`t give a stuff if the airline went bust.My next door neighbour is a long haul purser (part time) and if she gets a trip she doesn`t like she just doesn`t do it.They have no thought for the people they inconcience whether colleagues or passengers.As she says she just does the job to get away from her kids ,sit on the beach and get paid to do it . She must hate the job as she is always complaining about the passengers.
This is the mentality that BA has to deal with.A shocking sickness record(still) especially amongst part time crew.Whether this boil can ever be lanced I don`t know but now has to be the opportunity.
I have just read the above post after submitting mine and confirms what I thought.These people just don`t care.And their animosity and loathing towards pilots is unbelievable.

[Human Factor]

Pilots on the other hand, not so easy to find another role where a non-professional, non university educated person could earn the amount you do for doing so bloody little. Over paid, over pampered, over opinionated silly little boys club.

As previously discussed, we'd be employed fairly swiftly with BA2 on market rate terms and conditions which are not dissimilar to what we are currently on. As a BA Airbus Captain, I currently earn broadly the same as an Easyjet Airbus Captain.

Have a think what you would earn as cabin crew with BA2 and then ask yourself who is over opinionated.

HF

PS: Degree educated professional who is out-earned by his wife.;)

[Keirhardie]

ah but human factor i have no intention of joining the race to the bottom...If you earn the same as an easyjet pilot then that is quite simply the self-knowledge that you as a non-professional, don't deserve much more!) OR damm poor trade unionism.

I love my job, certainly don't do it for the money (don't need the money!;) ) I enjoy other crew members, i enjoy flying, i enjoy foreign shopping, and i enjoy helping our passengers have a good start to their holiday.

I however know my worth. Even if you guys don't. :ok:

[MissM]

pvmw

....and therein lies the crux of the problem. MissM thinks that BASSA should run BA, and the rest of the world think that is the purpose and responsibility of BA management.

I don't think BASSA should run BA but they should have an influence in our operation and conditions. As somebody mentioned a union is there for its members and to make sure they are treated fairly and work under good conditions.

You have terms and conditions far in excess of almost any other group of workers, yet you just whinge interminably about how hard you are done by.

Terms and conditions which I, and everyone else, were recruited to work along. Our union has fought very hard for these and once you start giving any of them up you won't get them back. Simple logics.

Dawdler

Many companies are seriously damaged during recession, some cease to exist at all. Carried to it's (il)logical conclusion, it seems that your determination to preserve your current status will be at the cost of jobs of other employees (not just in BA) who rely on the business that BA creates. Not counting your own of course.

BASSA is willing to negotiate and they have been for almost a year!

As I said a couple of days I would want BA and BASSA to come to an agreement today if possible. Do you think any of us find this dispute amusing?

[MissM]

anotherthing

BA is a company whilst BASSA is a union. Thank you for clearing this out!

BASSA has a right of control of its members which are the cabin crew who operate on BA's aircraft. They are there to protect us and make sure that we are working under good conditions. This is what they are doing!

What do you mean by BASSA telling BA how to run the company? Are you referring to not letting an aircraft leave LHR with one crew down before speaking to BASSA and getting approval?

To clear one thing out. I have NOT swallowed BASSA's leadership or been convinced by them about what WW might do to this airline. I am capable of thinking for myself. As I have said I don't always agree with what BASSA does and our ballot on behalf of UNITE was a huge disappointment as well humiliation.

Another small minded conspiracy theory? BASSA has NOT convinced me about this. As I said I can think for myself and I don't think for a second that WW is willing to back down from his idea about creating NewFleet to achieve these savings. Not after years of planning. If somebody would think that he is would have to be somebody very naive.

[MissM]

wobble2plank

Made me chuckle.

I'm glad it made you chuckle. Maybe you needed it.

BASSA has a right to represent the views and concerns of its membership nothing more. They are neither in a position or qualified to do anything else. It does not have any rights to dictate to the board, the CEO or the management as to how to run the company.

I don't disagree with you that the purpose of a union is to represent its members and make sure that they are fairly treated and work under good conditions. And, isn't this what BASSA is doing? Again, I don't always agree with BASSA. As I said they are not flawless. Nobody or nothing is.

BASSA have become power crazy.

Maybe they have!

[MissM]

TorC


Although I'm sure SlideBustle and Tiramisu are more than capable of replying for themselves, I'll just add my 2p's worth here .....

Your statement is not wrong.

However, since BA will not negotiate individual contracts with each and every one of us, those of us either disagreeing with, or not being members of either bassa or cc89, have no choice but to accept all the conditions, regardless of who thought of them.

Of course, the day might dawn when so many have left bassa/cc89 that they no longer represent the majority of crew, and could therefore be out of the loop entirely. That'd be my New Years wish anyway.


Unfortunately they won't but it would be interesting to see how many of those anti-BASSA people would actually back down from our pay structure system and make their own deal or whether it's fine to accept it and yet moan about the union.

You say that so many have left BASSA and Amicus. How many have left?

[wobble2plank]

Keirhardie=Troll

Not even worth wasting the time typing an answer.

:zzz:

[MissM]

7Heroes

This is the mentality that BA has to deal with.A shocking sickness record(still) especially amongst part time crew.Whether this boil can ever be lanced I don`t know but now has to be the opportunity.

A shocking sickness record amonst part-time crew? How do you know this? Have you got any proof to support this?

In case you didn't know we have a system namely EG300 which would pick up any pattern which could indicate that you go sick for specific trips or times of the year.

And their animosity and loathing towards pilots is unbelievable.


Animosity and loathing towards pilots? Maybe you should develop that!

[Two-Tone-Blue]

Dear MissM, you swing between quite reasonable and quite militant by the day/hour. I'm glad you have re-stated your views on BASSA at 17:48 {Post 897, now I can see it again!].

As I said a couple of days I would want BA and BASSA to come to an agreement today if possible. Do you think any of us find this dispute amusing?

From what we have read on here, the answer would seem to be YES. Some posters [apparently claiming to be BA CC, since my status as a J-class pax has been challenged] seem positively overjoyed with the prospect of disrupting passengers and damaging [fatally or otherwise] BA.

With such extremes of views, it would seem inevitable that Mr Walsh will impose the "Reagan Option" and start from scratch. At which point all LHR CC will be infinitely worse off. I really don't think you all deserve that.

[wobble2plank]

Loathing towards pilots? And you think pilots have nothing against cabin crew?

Personally nope, I have no animosity towards CC at all.

I do have a lot of trouble with an overbearing Union who disrupts the company operations at every conceivable opportunity and who refuses to acknowledge that we no longer operate in the 1980's and have to accept change to operate in the now.

And, isn't this what BASSA is doing? Again, I don't always agree with BASSA.

BASSA stonewalled the negotiations by refusing to discuss anything apart from the possibility of CR. Not even productivity enhancements to avoid CR. Is that really the point of a Union? Did BASSA ever poll its membership to establish what the membership wanted? Nope, they just ploughed on with what the likes of Lizanne Maloney wanted.

Public opinion is dead set against this one. The fact that BASSA cried fould about leaking crew wages to the press when in reality the details came from the CAA sums up how much thought BASSA put into their actions.

If killing BASSA gets rid of over opinionated idiots like Keirhardy then at least that will do our industry a favour. :ok:

[TorC]

TorC



Unfortunately they won't but it would be interesting to see how many of those anti-BASSA people would actually back down from our pay structure system and make their own deal or whether it's fine to accept it and yet moan about the union.

You say that so many have left BASSA and Amicus. How many have left?

As interesting as it may turn out to be, it isn't the situation at present. No individual, group, or organisation is beyond critisism, especially an organisation that collects hefty membership fees in exchange for somewhat dubious "representation".

I did not say that so many have left BASSA and Amicus. I have no knowledge of how many may have done so.

[Keirhardie]

wobble2plank that is the answer i would expect from someone who does not have the vocabulary, nous, or ability to argue a point...silly little man.:rolleyes: and how very odd, you call me over opinonated. I have made 4 postings on this matter to your some 1000 odd..

[glad rag]

Yep trolling like the best of them.............................:suspect:

[Two-Tone-Blue]

It will get worse when the pubs kick out. ;)

Happy New Year, btw.
Well, happy-ish, of course, for some people.

[SlideBustle]

Keirhardie - disgusting post, even though you ''like to give pax the best start to their holiday'' - do you think striking gives a great start to a pax holiday. :ugh: No I don't think so either, anyway it sounds as if you have been sent from the other ''forums'' to troll won't waste too much time!

MissM - I accept the allowances because I have no other choice. Do I enjoy the allowances? Of course I do, thank you BASSA for negotiating them in the past! You have missed the point there. I have said on here I would consider hourly pay etc etc... new variable pay for New Fleet/Contract. I have also said that I would accept the Fixed Monthly Travel Payment to replace my CATs (personally I think CATs are something that could be sacraficed) long day payments etc... Something the union will not accept. They don;t mind the new contract for new recruits oh of course not as long as BA don't touch their pay or threaten themselves a la New Fleet. Ironically they are being short sighted as if BA push through with New Fleet but BASSA have not accepted to FMTP then you may be right to worry about your Boxes etc. Bill has said the payment is not for the company but is actually an OPTIONAL payment should you feel worried you may be missing out on your boxes and make your pay more consistent. You still get your meal payments, therefore the longer the trip, the more meal payments you achieve (in general - it's not a perfect system when on SH you may be 5 minutes off a meal payment and the same length of duty day that reports slightly later gets 2 payments!)

What we have to realise is that we are first off not indispensable. Also, let's say New Fleet starts up within the next year or 2 on pretty much identical T&Cs to LGW fleet... only difference would be the routes. You would probably be safe to assume some LGW crew would transfer over to enjoy the wider choice of routes, they would have nothing to lose as T&Cs would be pretty much the same (may even be better who knows!!) you would probably get some LHR and LGW crew who would accept the ''carrots'' of promotion as you call it. I would!

EF and WW would still exist, however if the union had negotiated properly, accepting some big changes, then current crew would be protected with a payment, it could even be incorporated in your basic or be made contractual. Also the union may have agreed to a list of routes to go over first... Hopefully a good mix of high earning and low earning to ensure old fleets are not having all the good trips starving. What will you lose??? HOWEVER if BA lose patience and issue 90 days notice (perfectly legal!) and we are all put on a New Fleet type contract, what will you lose?? Equally IF this strike causes BA to go bust (BA is certainly not in a really strong untouchable position!) then what will you lose?? It is tough out there and not particularly the easiest climate to find a new job easily!

Please strikers, THINK. You may not have much to lose, particularly if you have 2 successful internet business or a lovely home with fab partner in LA to fall back on, and just use BA to fund a rather lovely lifestyle (as it is - for you longhaulers where else could you be in LA one week, New York the next??) If you were out of a job, it may actually not be a loss to you, ''oh well no more shopping in New York and getting paid for it for me'' but for a LARGE proportion, no, majority of us it will be a huge loss!! If it came to it I would even rather be on New Fleet than be out of a job. Although I would rather not be on NF as main crew, it would probably be better than being out of a job. It is NOT easy finding a new job in a recession... there are many other unemployed ex crew who have passion for the job and would love to the job for less!! SO before you go on about ''Willie's'' regime, please get a sense of perspective and WAKE UP, before it is too late.

EDITED TO ADD. Happy New Year to everyone!!! Hope 2010 can be a year for a new lease of life into our workforce and some common sense! The optimist in me says ''let 2010 be the year BA grows and recovers to be at a better place for the future - start New First lol!!'' Very corny I know!!

[wobble2plank]

wobble2plank that is the answer i would expect from someone who does not have the vocabulary, nous, or ability to argue a point...silly little man. and how very odd, you call me over opinonated. I have made 4 postings on this matter to your some 1000 odd..

Succinctly put and beautifully phrased. :ugh:

Please inform those on CF or the BASSA forum that you have managed, in your 4 posts, to cover topics and arguments that have been covered in full months ago.

Just as an aside, I have 2 degrees neither of which has anything to do with flying, both of which, whilst academically more tricky than an ATPL, were of no more use in getting jobs than proof that I had completed further education.

To start a law degree requires no previous qualifications. To become a Lawyer requires a law degree.

To start an ATPL course requires no previous qualifications. To become a commercial pilot requires an ATPL.

Your point is?

To everyone else have a great New Year.

From the 'little man'. :}

[TruBlu123]

I see you claim to be located in Auld Reekie (EDI). Well Gardyloo to you for if you succeed in your aims you will be well and truly covered in it and deservedly so!

[German Boy]

To BA crew:You have no idea how lucky you are and I cant believe you're risking your company and job just because you have to work with one less crew onboard.. it just amazes me..I did 11 months on BA worldwide and let me tell you that I have never had such a good life and you're so fortunate and it's shame you just cant realize that! It's not that hard work and there was not any problem to do it when someone went sick in London and you had to leave without that crew.. but, still you'd get the payment for it. Maybe that's the difference.. I don't know..I came from Qatar Airways as cabin senior (like purser) to BA and if you think work is hard at BA maybe you should go down there.. let me tell you.. we had no unions to protect us.. nothing! It was a take it or leave it mentality and even our CEO and crew manager said if we dont like it we just have to leave because there'll be thousands of people waiting to take our job. We weren't that valuable to them..We did shorthaul and longhaul together and many times even with minimum rest between flights! We could do a night flight from Singapore to Doha, minimum rest and then do a four sector day intra-gulf which was sometimes over 12 hours long! On that four sector day sometimes we didnt even get off the aircraft.. and.. we only got paid for the flight hours! No meal allowance either as we got food on the plane..Go sick because you dont like a trip? If you do that at QR they will sack you just like that.. even if you are new or if you have worked there for 10 years.. they dont care. There's always people waiting to take your job.Crew rest? We never got that.. I once did a Dhaka which was delayed and turned out to be 16 hours.. no overtime pay, nothing. We got paid for the flight hours which was like 7 hours or so.. back to Doha and minimum rest before flight to Casablanca..Working one down? At QR.. if they couldnt find any standby crew flight would leave anyway as long as legal.. once I did a 30 minute flight to Bahrain on a full A320 with 4 crew!! 6 was standard.. Full service needed to be done or we'd be in trouble..Okay, maybe you cant compare BA to QR but the point is that you are so fortunate to work for them. You have some of the best t&c in the industry.. you even get crew rest on a flight to Cairo and sometimes over an hour to New York.What's the problem with your CSD working in the cabin? CSD at QR does it.. EK does it.. I think many airlines in Europe do it! I had a very good time at BA but I think the problem is that many crew are so comfortable in their jobs and always had the union to go to.. so many senior crew who do the same position over and over.. I remember a guy who'd been doing the same position for over 10 years.. and, on 767 no 5 was always the last position to go because it was hard work in Club, doing PA, looking after flight crew and all.. crew on 767 who'd been flying for a very long time and would always avoid it! It was also the same on 747 and 777.. always same positions which would get left last and most of the time the toughest ones..So I think working with one crew member less is not the end of the world.. even less to strike about.. many people would love to do your job even with less t&c and I'm one of them and still waiting for BA to call and ask me to come back. And I will take it and many of us ex-temps will!

[SlideBustle]

Can I just ask. Does anyone know if the unions are in talks with BA at the moment or are they just going to waste 2 months balloting then announcing strike action??? When the injunction was announced the Unions and BA started talking again. If they are not talking I will hazard a guess that it is the unions stubborness refusing!

[winstonsmith]

AFAIK - UNITE is not in talks with the company as BA has decided not to communicate with them!

Lizanne Malone makes me sick - also those of you who are trudging behind her backside trusting every little word that comes out of her - crew over at CF treating her like a queen - can't you realise she made a huge mistake in the ballot and yet you have placed your future in her hands?

Lizanne Malone - I know that you are reading this - when will you realise it's over and maybe it's time to admit to yourself that you have failed? Do BA and its crew a favour - pack your bag - hand in your resignation - and for god sake leave!

[TorC]

1) What is the connection between:
A) Southampton FCs Official Historian
B) £75,000 per annum

2) Jane lives near a very busy airport and spends £1Million per day flying
all over the world in expensive, but ageing jet planes. She has £2Billion
in her piggy bank but owes John £3.7Billion, which he wants on his 65th
birthday.

How long (to the nearest month) until Jane can no longer afford her
glamorous jet-set lifestyle?

3) Refering to Question 2: Jane has asked her friends to help her find
some ways of saving money. But her friends have refused to help and
have stopped talking to her. Should Jane:
A) get new friends
B) tell her friends not to worry, she only made it all up for a laugh

4) Liza N McAlone is afflicted with SIS: Self Importance Syndrome. She
tells lies to people, some of whom used to work with her. Her boss
found out and warned her that she should not have told those lies. But
she didn't want to hear what her boss was saying. Her boss asked
a Judge to decide if Liza was right or wrong. The Judge said that
Liza was wrong. Liza threw a big party (which even made the
newspaper front pages) and said that she had achieved a huge victory.

What IS wrong with Liza?

5) If X people take Y minutes to complete task Z, how much longer will it
take X-1 people to complete the same task?

6) If the answer was "NO", who was asking the question to who?

7) A secret poll has revealed that a growing number of people are
worried by onions, and their effect on air travellers. What can be done
to minimise the effect of onions, and is there an organic alternative to
them?

8) An Irishman and a Spaniard walked into a bar. The Spaniard said
"ouch". What did the Irishman say?

With all best wishes for a BASSAless New Year :ok:

TorC

[Glamgirl]

TorC,

The best quiz I've ever seen! Well done to you - you put a big smile on my face :ok::ok:

:D:D:D:D:D:D

[TorC]

Thanks GG

Just wish I could post it onto CF ..... would be good to end their year with a BANG :E

[5711N0205W]

Keir Hardie

Choice of pseudonym could suggest troll, and professional agitator, troublemaker :ugh:

Keir Hardie - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keir_Hardie)

[winstonsmith]

This is the intelligence - or stupidness - of two LHR crew - I overheard them today at CRC when they were discussing the IFCE's savings - One of them suggested that LGW should be closed.

People never stop to amaze - do they?

[A4]

As a totally unconnected outsider - but in the business - I find this debate fascinating.

There seems to be a lot of talk about reducing T&C's but, correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't this only apply to new joiners? Existing staff will NOT receive less £ each month but will have to work a bit harder, with the required crew reduction coming through from voluntary redundancies?

Some of the views on here are astonishing. Let me think - keep my current pay or have no job...... in a recession...... with airlines going bust every few weeks...... with our core customers (North Atlantic Financiers) not flying and likely to be leaving the UK in droves due to bonus tax...... the company losing £1.5m per day :eek: Tough decision guys :rolleyes:

I feel sorry for the sane, powerless innocents caught up in the possible consequences of this.

I have to confess to a morbid fascination in waiting to see how this plays out. It's like a good thriller - just unfortunately this is deadly serious.

Happy New Year to most of you and :ugh: to the others.

A4

[TorC]

This is the intelligence - or stupidness - of two LHR crew - I overheard them today at CRC when they were discussing the IFCE's savings - One of them suggested that LGW should be closed.

People never stop to amaze - do they?

HELP ..... I have to work with these people! :mad:

[TorC]

Thank you, A4

You've summed it all up nicely.

It really is as simple as that ..... but the die-hards and uninformed just refuse to see it. Unfortunately, they risk EVERYTHING, for ALL OF US. It's very sad, and likely to get sadder in the coming weeks.

I can't claim sanity, can just about recall innocence. As to being powerless ..... watch this space ......

HNY

TorC

As a totally unconnected outsider - but in the business - I find this debate fascinating.

There seems to be a lot of talk about reducing T&C's but, correct me if I'm wrong, doesn't this only apply to new joiners? Existing staff will NOT receive less £ each month but will have to work a bit harder, with the required crew reduction coming through from voluntary redundancies?

Some of the views on here are astonishing. Let me think - keep my current pay or have no job...... in a recession...... with airlines going bust every few weeks...... with our core customers (North Atlantic Financiers) not flying and likely to be leaving the UK in droves due to bonus tax...... the company losing £1.5m per day :eek: Tough decision guys :rolleyes:

I feel sorry for the sane, powerless innocents caught up in the possible consequences of this.

I have to confess to a morbid fascination in waiting to see how this plays out. It's like a good thriller - just unfortunately this is deadly serious.

Happy New Year to most of you and :ugh: to the others.

A4

[Tiramisu]

TorC,
Genius!
Just the best quiz I've read! Wouldn't it be great to post that on CF and BASSA forum!
Happy New Year to you and we've got to stop this monster called BASSA before it destroys us and our livelihoods. I'll drink to that tonight!
Happy New Year to all our customers and everyone who posts here. Here's hoping to a 2010 without BASSA but with a New Union!

I'm BA Cabin Crew and the above represent my views and not those of my employer's.

[Glamgirl]

This is the intelligence - or stupidness - of two LHR crew - I overheard them today at CRC when they were discussing the IFCE's savings - One of them suggested that LGW should be closed.



This just proves the point of how little clue these people have. Especially considering that LGW LH is the only part of the business making money at the moment (and that's been the case for quite a few months now).

Good to see that the "we really do care about you LGW guys" cries were as heartfelt as I suspected. :rolleyes:

:ugh::ugh::ugh:

Gg

[Tiramisu]

Posted by Keirhardie

Quite frankly after reading every single post in this matter. I very very much hope that there is an even larger majority yes vote in the next ballot, and that the crew strike to the max. If that brings BA down. So be it. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

If that were to happen (and it won't), I will be only too delighted to see an awful lot of pilots lose their jobs and terms and conditions etc. I will be doing a jig of happiness. As a 33% crew member with a very loaded partner, oh how i will laugh.

At near to minimum wage as the new terms would make crew, IF THEY SETTLED, they could all walk into another equal job if ba goes under. Therefore having nothing to lose by striking. Pilots on the other hand, not so easy to find another role where a non-professional, non university educated person could earn the amount you do for doing so bloody little. Over paid, over pampered, over opinionated silly little boys club.

Not one of you pilots or poor excuse for crew has shown any knowledge whatsoever of trade unionism. A bunch of cry baby clowns.

So here's to the downfall of WW and poor leadership. OR the death of BA,


Another sick and vey toxic post ! I hope I don't ever have the misfortune fly with this indidvidual! This is precisely the sort of person who brings BA and BA Cabin Crew into disrepute.

I'm BA Cabin Crew and the above represent my views and not those of my employer's.

[SlideBustle]

TorC that is hilarious! :D Imagine posting that on CF or BASSA!!! Imagine their faces!

Winstonsmith - that is the mentality of the diehard BASSA 100% clan - stuff LGW!! Doesn't matter that SFG crew will be out of a job as long as they are untouched with their agreements which are well above market rate!! Just as they did when SFG was introduced and from what I understand all the other bases - as long as LHR is untouched.

Oh and they use campaigns for LGW to get them to vote Yes! Such as ''you will never be able to transfer to LHR anymore'' and ''You agreed to the changes at LGW, you must vote Yes to protect LHR though so you have an option to transfer to LHR on current t&c's in the future'' It is actually hilarious - using poor excuses to win votes! I hope most of my colleagues who work a few miles away on the M25 actually see through this!!

[winstonsmith]

No - it's sickening - and this is what BASSA has done to every single other crew base all over UK to protect LHR - I don't doubt for a second that they would sacrify LGW - and after that LHR EF - to save LHR WW.

[L337]

WW has been planning and waiting patiently for this strike. BA has the cash reserves to fight BASSA and the striking cabin crew into the ground.

A strike will not drive BA into bankruptcy.

For BASSA read NUM.

[RoyHudd]

HNY you BA die-hards. I have just booked 2 business class tickets for myself in January, routing via ZRH, where I would have ordinarily booked BA. As a pilot with another company, I have good experience of the business, and cannot now risk my own money on a volatile operation like BA. I feel sorry for all those against industrial action, pilots included, but am no longer willing to travel with you.

I wonder how many others feel the same way.

[Marty-Party]

Sorry I'm absolutely sick of this. I know it's thread creep but can someone post my reply on the BASSA forum wrt pilots.

In the US, a pilot's ATP licence is regarded as a degree. In the UK, the amount of tuition time to get a CPL exccedds that for a degree (i.e. no holidays, no "reading" weeks etc). An Air Transport pilot used to be regarded at the same level as Doctors, Accountants, Architects etc but neve rat the same level as Cabin Crew, Firemen, Ambulance Drivers etc. There is a huge difference so please could all the cabin crew get over it. Just because we work in the same environment does not mean we should be rewarded the same.

I spend a lot of time encouraging CC to join us on the flight desk for departure, and what do they do? Run in just before we enter the runway for takeoff. Similarly, for a landing they turn up around 5000' when being vectored onto the ILS when all the preparation is complete.

Neither of the above can give any idea of what pilots do and so CC have no right to suggest that we do nothing. If you want to know what we do then come into the flight when the briefing is explaining MSAs, diversions, fuel calculations etc. Ask to watch a sim detail with multiple failures and the prospect of imminent death!

CC most of you have no idea what pilots do so stop discussing it as if you do. On occasion we position in the cabin and see your job - also I was CC so I know exactly what your job entails. It has no comparison.

It's like comparing a receptioninst with an accountant. I know it sounds harsh but that is the reality from someone who has done both jobs.

Anyway back to the real topic which is about cabin crew Ts & Cs (not related to pilots, catering, accounts, travel agents or many other professions who operate in the same industry).

[ExSp33db1rd]

Keirhardie - what a sick individual, I'm sorry to even admit that I even took that short amount of my time to react. Goodbye.

Marty-Party - Good points, also ask what other professions demand, with the force of law, that their members effectively sit their Final Exams every 6 months throughout their entire career ? Doctors ? Lawyers ? Architects ? Name one.

Cabin Crew also have their Annual SEP's and checks to pass, how many idiots do you have to deal with in every day life who don't know their own jobs - and can't be sacked !!

Crew, both pilots and cabin crew, are criticised by the public for the time they apparently spend at home. No one sees you reporting for service at 02.00 to keep the travelling public moving around the World.

I was often 'envied' for the time off I 'enjoyed' - which in good times might equate to about the same time at home as away, averaged over a long period. I asked my neighbour what time he went to work ? About 8.00 a.m - and what time did he get home ? around 6.00 pm Christ ! that isn't even half a day ! and he only did it for 5 days then got 2 complete days off ! He was ' at home' a minimum of 4 1/2 days out of every week - how much time to you get 'at home ' ? Work it out.

If the C.C. or in the past, the Public, see you sat on the flight deck in an atmosphere of apparent calm and inactivity - they should be VERY grateful, if they walk in and see you performing like a one-armed paperhanger - which to the ignorant is a measure of productivity - then they should be VERY afraid, 'cos things have gone badly wrong, and only YOU can save them with your professionalism. Ask the pax. on the BA 38, or the ones that, sadly, got their feet a bit damp in the Hudson River.

Best of luck.

[Desertia]

It probably sounds extremely selfish to say that I would rather see the company go bankrupt instead of letting WW and BF having their way through.

Actually no, MissM. To anyone with even half of a brain cell it sounds retarded.

[wiggy]

In the US, pilots APTL licence is regarded as a degree. In the UK, the amount of tuition time to get a CPL exccedds that for a degree (i.e. no holidays, no "reading" weekes etc). Am Air Transport pilot used to be regarded at the same level as Doctors, Accountants, Architects etc but neverat the same level as Cabin Crew, Firemen, Ambulance Drivers etc. There is a huge difference so please could all the cabin crew get over it

Yes it's interesting to see the old, so old " you lot are just Grammar School boys/Girls" attitude has surfaced - can we put it to bed right now? Firstly whether you have a Degree or not is irrelevant to BA, as far as I'm aware BA doesn't demand degrees from either it's pilots or Cabin Crew.

Secondly those who still feel the need to push the "I'm Cabin crew and I have a Degree" line might be surprised at the percentage of pilots in BA who have got first degrees. As an example probably around 50% of the ex-Forces "dinosaurs" recruited by BA in the late 80's and early 90's have a degree...and many of them earned them in the days before the University system was diluted by reforms of the last 10 -20 years.

[overstress]

If you can't win the argument with facts, just attack your opponents credentials and claim that they are not 'qualified' to discuss the subject, I suppose. :yuk:

[Two-Tone-Blue]

A non-contentious [I hope] question. Amidst all of this, do I understand that BASSA will be balloting again for IA in about 6 weeks? i.e. mid-Feb?

On that assumption, is there any indication of when IA might be called? Might it be Easter, to maximise damage to BA and the paying pax? Easter is 4 Apr this year, I believe.

I'm being selfish, as I'm already ticketed with BA outbound from UK in late Apr. It's not too late to change my plans at this stage.

[overstress]

Two-tone: nothing is certain in life, is it? I would say, on balance, that you are perfectly 'safe' with your booking.

If by some remote possibility there is a strike called for that period there is an extremely good chance your flight will depart anyway, as most crew will turn up for work as normal.

Good luck!

[Albert Salmon]

BASSA has a right of control of its members

This declaration merely confirms what I had thought since the beginning of this dispute: that members of BASSA are forced to forfeit their natural abilities of reasoning and logic on enrollment.

After all, Nanny knows what's best for BASSA.

To paraphrase Karl Marx:

Workers of World Traveller, Unite!
You have nothing to lose but your jobs, your homes, and your lives!

[deeceethree]

Two-Tone-Blue,

Rumour has it that ballots may be dispatched around 6 January. 4 weeks for balloting, plus at least a week notice to BA would put potential industrial action past the court hearing in early Feb. It seems that this time, BASSA/Unite are not at all sure of their ground - they don't really wish to strike until the outcome of the court case is known.

If the trip is important to you, I would book elsewhere.

[Meal Chucker]

Ballots being re-issued on the 18th


We would like to announce that the Branch Meeting of the 4th of Jan which was postponed has now been rescheduled provisionally for the 18th January 11am. Venue is also to be confirmed.
This should tie-in with the dispatch of new ballot papers.
Work is on going at present on the data base to make it as watertight as humanely possible, although BA are refusing reps time off to comply.
Confirmation will come next week once we have spoken to the various venues available, but please pencil this date into your diaries.
A Happy New Year to all!

[wobble2plank]

although BA are refusing reps time off to comply.

Shame, BA are demanding that people work for their wage instead of organising another ill thought out attempt to bring the company down. How downright hideous of the despicable BA management!

:ugh:

Happy New Year everyone!

Be interesting to see how much the damages claim will be after BA shred BASSA in the February court case. My bid starts at £110 million!

[TopBunk]

Work is on going at present on the data base to make it as watertight as humanely possible

A Freudian slip possibly:hmm:

Maybe they are looking for a humane way to put BASSA down like the rabid animal they have become and put them out of our misery. Let's hope:rolleyes:

[wiggy]

****, you beat me to it.......

Another example of BASSA's attention to detail. Never mind, I'm sure someone at BASSA HQ ran it through a spell checker...the computer says "yes" so it must be correct and you and I must be wrong:ugh:

[HiFlyer14]

Miss M - congratulations! You are a full and indoctrinated member of the BASSA cult, able to recite the BASSA mantras at ease. Unfortunately, the ability to repeat what I can see in the BASSA literature affords you no credibility in my book, I simply see you as yet another sheep, albeit with the ability to use correct punctuation and grammar.

As for your question:

This is a question to you, SlideBustle and Tiramisu

You are all very against BASSA and some of you probably have resigned or thinking of doing so. Are you still accepting all those different allowances and payments (i.e. CAT, LDP, MSH unless they've changed terms) which you have on EF? Because if you are maybe you should remind yourselves about who have actually negotiated these for you... You don't agree with what the union is doing but you are accepting things they have negotiated for you?


It simply shows that you have little grasp of the way this works. We have no option other than to take the good AND the bad. So if BA had accepted the ludicrous 2.61% pay CUT the Union offered - we would have had to lump it. Equally, and more worryingly, if BA decide to issue the 90 day notice - we too will probably have to lump it, even though we have voted no and won't strike. But fortunately we have an employer that actually SURVEYED each and every one of us to find out what we wanted, unlike the UNION who made a grossly erroneous offer on our behalf, without consultation. Believe me, if I could go to BF today and negotiate a Fixed Monthly Payment on behalf of myself and the other non-cult members, I would.

So you see it cuts both ways, abit like imposition. Remember when 2 years ago, BA IMPOSED a profit reward, even though they had not achieved the 10% margin? Don't remember you being so vocal then about IMPOSITON Miss M.

If you think 10000 people will strike, you seriously underestimate our community - don't you talk to the people you work with? Remember 1997 when sickness prevailed and only a handful actually took IA? The only difference this time is you will get sacked. Can't quite see GPs across the country feeling any sympathy and issuing sicknotes now, can you? :rolleyes: Keep swallowing the cult material, MissM - it will lead you to self-destruction, that is what happens in all cults.

Anyway, just wanted to say Happy New Year to all those BA employees that do work hard, will help out in other cabins/departments etc., and that will do everything possible to get our company back on track in 2010.

To the rest of you, good riddance.

I am a BA cabin crew member and the above represents my own view and not that of BA.

[overstress]

A curious attitude, wonker. I suspect you may have more time to spend at your mansion if BASSA continue down the road to self-ruin. Although I reckon they have passed the point of no return now.

PS: Are you a CSD, by any chance?

[Semper Amictus]

Ah, VV !
The voice of reason.

It really is going to have to be a very long wall for you to line all the lumpenproletariat up against, isn't it ?

Bucket of water handy ? Those m/g barrels get hot so quickly.

Mind how you go.

[TorC]

Gosh, this whole thing is being discussed in some rather surprising places, Southampton FC being one of them:

BA = British Leyland of the skies - Saints Web (http://www.saintsweb.co.uk/forum/showthread.php?t=18653)

The author of posts #49 & #104, Fitzhugh Fella, will be familiar to bassa members.

[Meal Chucker]

BASSA has a right of control of its members

Bassa has NO right to control its members, Bassa is supposed to represent the majority view of it members and that's it.

That statement is exactly the sort of drivel I would expect from a power crazed megalomaniac, such as Watersidewonker.

MissM could you be Miss Malone??

[overstress]

So BASSA (Duncan) are getting no sympathy there (Saints forum) either.

[Looking Up]

Ladies and gentlemen of both the cabin and flight crew, could I please crave your indulgence? From the postings here it looks like your airline is failing from within.

You have just a limited period to get your stuff together.

Can you please settle your differences? A couple of of well-humoured meetings between all parties should settle it.

LU

[TorC]

So BASSA (Duncan) are getting no sympathy there (Saints forum) either.

None whatsoever! His outrage at being couriered a suspension letter made me chuckle :)

[Tiramisu]

Can you please settle your differences? A couple of of well-humoured meetings between all parties should settle it.


Looking Up,
Most of us have excellent relationships with our Flight Crew colleagues. After 26 years of flying, I still maintain the respect and admiration for the job they do. It's only the BASSA militants who with their obnoxious posts here try and create an unnecessary divide.

My apologies to my Flight Crew colleagues on behalf of those of us who don't share their unfortunate views and behaviour.

I'm BA Cabin Crew and the above are my views and not those of my employer's.

[Dairyground]

Has anyone been bold enough to copy it to the BASSA forum or CF, and if so, how long did it last before being moderated off?

Would anyone feel able to make a few hard copies of this, and of other posts that contain well-reasoned arguments or plausible negotiation positions and quietly leave them around the CRC or even the BASSA offices?

[MissM]

SlideBustle

Please strikers, THINK. You may not have much to lose, particularly if you have 2 successful internet business or a lovely home with fab partner in LA to fall back on, and just use BA to fund a rather lovely lifestyle
What stops you from setting up your own IT business or getting a lovely home with a partner in LA?

It is NOT easy finding a new job in a recession... No, it's not but recession will be over. Even NIESR reported last year that the recession in UK is over! Whether that's true or not I don't know but the point is that things will get better.

[MissM]

Desertia

Actually no, MissM. To anyone with even half of a brain cell it sounds retarded.

I appreciate your honesty. Thanks!

[wobble2plank]

Even NIESR reported last year that the recession in UK is over!

Blinding! I am sure event the Government will be pleased with that as the UK has posted negative growth again last quarter making it both the longest recession in post war history and one of the slowest countries to emerge from recession due to our over indulgence in personal debt and reliance on the banking industry.

But don't let minor little niggly facts get in the way of a good BASSA story.

Even when the recession is over there is no guarantee that yields will return to their previous levels. This financial crash has taught a lot of people the abject stupidity of loading themselves up with debt in the 'have now, pay later' world of the last decade.

Frugality and cost cutting are two things we will see for at least the next decade as the Government, which ever may be in power, tries to claw back the horrendous financial mistakes of the current incumbents.

But hey, I'm sure BA and their premium passengers will still love you enough in the future after yet more pointless IA to hose you down with lateness credits, disturbed rest, disruption allowances etc. etc. etc.

Welcome to the real world.

[MissM]

HiFlyer14

I'm not after your credibility. And, you see me a sheep? Spare me those comments, please. As for the questions raised as to whether you accept those allowances was a rhetorical question but more of a question of your opinion of them and whom who has negotiated them for you. I know perfectly well BA doesn't do individual contracts. But, who knows? Maybe you should email BF and tell him about your idea. He might even appreciate it because he seems to love ideas and feedback from his crew.

Don't I talk to people I work with? All the time. I never said 10000 crew would be striking or standing at the picket line. The majority of those striking crew probably would have gone sick because that's the easiest way. Sure. Maybe crew would have gone back to work in fear if BA had started sacking crew for not turning up for duty.

Is BASSA a cult? Do you honestly think over 10000 people have been mislead by their union?

[MissM]

Dairyground

Has anyone been bold enough to copy it to the BASSA forum or CF, and if so, how long did it last before being moderated off?

Bold enough? I can't actually understand what the problem is. Some seem so tempted to write at CrewForum, why not do it? What are you afraid of? What do you think they will do? Make your name public so that other crew can hang you? Name and shame you? What might happen is a wild debate and I'm sure you have nothing against that.

None of the moderators, except the owner of course, have access to your personal details. BASSA, on the other hand, is a different story.

[A4]

.... Do you honestly think over 10000 people have been mislead by their union?.....

As an unconnected outsider..... yes! It appears they have been completely mislead. I simply do not believe that such a significant majority would have voted yes IF THEY KNEW that the "12 days of Christmas" would be announced in the same sentance as the ballot result. I nearly spat my teeth out when I was watching that live on Sky.

If in the subsequent ballot it's the same result...... words fail me. Either totally delusional with no concept of the real world or totally selfish beyond belief because they have other incomes to fall back on and would rather the company fail and sod everyone else (tens of thousands.....)

WW is out to destroy the Union - he's got to otherwise BA will die a slow death - simples. I predict either defeat for the union in the ballot or BA will go the 90 day route - why prolong the inevitable.

Game over either way.

A4

[Two-Tone-Blue]

My thanks to overstress and deeceethree for replies to my #935 ... hmmmm, mixed messages!


Court Hearing, BASSA ballot, whatever ... let's say late Feb is "decision time".
At that point, by some hypotheses posted here, Mr Walsh puts all LHR CC on 90 days' notice - retirement date in late May.
Between those two dates, can we assume that the militant LHR crews will all go sick [which they reportedly do if assigned flight duties don't suit them].
Flight scheduling chaos ensues, to the detriment of the paying pax who keep the wounded whale of BA afloat.

So ... Does BA potentially have enough CC to continue to operate out of LHR in Mar/Apr/May? Or is BA effectively dead already?

[Meal Chucker]

Is BASSA a cult? Do you honestly think over 10000 people have been mislead by their union?

I'm honestly hard pushed to think of any occasion when Bassa has mislead us.

The legal injunction received by British Airways was obtained by exploiting a legal loophole by a
judge who was willing to allow, what is in essence a technicality, to push the balance of the law even further
towards an employer that without conscience, was willing to use it.

We lost because Lalalady and her team of kitchen fitters actively encouraged leaving/retiring crew to vote.

A High Court Judge has today ruled that BA crew have a legitimate claim against British Airways for
breach of contract.
The evidence put forward in favour of the cabin crew has won them the right to a have their case heard in full on
1st Feb 2010.

Lalalady and her team of kitchen fitters FAILED to get an injunction stopping British Airways imposing non-contractual changes on crew without agreement, a full hearing was always going to follow.

Your union worked hard in offering proposals on your behalf for a package of savings to help
address the company’s objectives. Although this was difficult, we believe our suggestions were fair and reasonable
and completely proportionate to those achieved elsewhere within British Airways.
British Airways chose to reject these proposals, even though they included a temporary pay cut. We can only
conclude therefore that its unwillingness to work with your union signals a determination to also force through
future wider structural changes without consent.


Bassa valued our 'very generous' offer at £175M, an offer that was temporary and was to be paid back after two
years. This offer was valued at just over £50M by PWC.

In negotiations, BA have been merely going through the motions, looking for justification for their determination to impose changes without agreement.

It has been widely accepted that Lalalady and her team of kitchen fitters refused to negotiate, refused to see the BA's books, refused to negotiate with CC89.

[overstress]

2-Tone, there are so many false assumptions in your posting that I hardly know where to begin...

I don't think BA is filing for pre-pack administration on the basis of your bullet points...

The court hearing is 1 Feb where I expect BASSA will lose and also have any future strike declared illegal. The ballot, if issued, will clash with the court hearing so I don't know what BASSA are thinking there. Too many kitchens to fit in March?

Crews may vote for a strike but will report for work or be sacked. So no, BA is not 'effectively dead'.

Keep on talking us down, though (are you hoping to pick up some cheap shares, like me? :E )

[Two-Tone-Blue]

@ overstress - Court hearing date noted in my diary ;)

Ooops - edits noted!! I'm floating thoughts, not cogent opinions. Much of this 'debate' touches on areas where I have nil relevant expertise - I just give BA money to fly me.

It's nice to hear an optimist there; I hope you're right for the sake of the thousands of staff and millions on pax. I still wouldn't touch the shares, though!

[overstress]

Two-tone, see edit above, we posted simultaneously.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

Mine amended as well!! ;)

So - they report to work or get sacked? Nobody "throwing a sickie"? Ninety days notice or instant dismissal?

I refer the Hon Gent to the point I made earlier ... are there enough staff to cover the striking/sick CC? How fast could BA recruit/train/roster replacement CC?

[MissM]

Two-Tone-Blue

Between those two dates, can we assume that the militant LHR crews will all go sick [which they reportedly do if assigned flight duties don't suit them].

Can I ask what you base this on?

[sussex2]

And Virgin has been in existence how many years compared to be BA? of course the latter will be paid more, they have been there longer and put in the time, some for 40 years.

[overstress]

This has all been covered before in the previous threads. However, BA will be on the look-out for 'pattern sickness' - go sick on the day of a strike and you had better have a genuine reason!

As to numbers, BA will establish how many intend to work (it will be a high %age) and crew the flights accordingly.

BA can switch crew reporting for a flight to another flight at a moment's notice anyway.

Where were you flying to?

[Two-Tone-Blue]

Hi, MissM. Pessimism? It's been noted on this thread that CC tend to go sick when they don't fancy a sector. I'd be delighted if that was wrong.

[deeceethree]

How fast could BA recruit/train/roster replacement CC?There are a notable number of cabin crew, who were on temporary contracts, fairly recently let go by BA, who could be re-employed pretty quickly. There are also others, waiting in the wings, having been placed in a holding pool but told (so far) that there are currently no jobs available. What exact numbers are involved in these 2 groups, I couldn't say.

Then you have the Virgin/BMI/Flyglobespan cabin crew (300?) all made redundant in recent months. From scratch it doesn't take much time (2 weeks-ish) to train cabin crew though you might have a further wait if any additional security clearnces are sought. In any event, I think BA could get at least 500 cabin crew up and running in a few weeks, with a substantial number of them having already being qualified by BA or other airlines.

It's been noted on this thread that CC tend to go sick when they don't fancy a sectorThat is fact. It is a common ploy, openly heard being discussed amongst cabin crew talking on the bus, around a hotel pool, or even in the crew report centre. Seriously work-shy, some of them.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

Thanks, people. I'm adequately informed on that aspect. Grateful for the inputs.

@ overstress ... next one is LHR-IAD

[MissM]

Two-Tone-Blue

Pessimism? No, not at all but it would be interesting to know where you got that from! Did you get it from that person who says sickness is rocket high and particulary amongst part-time crew who can't be bothered to do certain trips?

deeceethree

It might be openly discussed but it doesn't necessary have to be the truth. One thing you should learn is that many crew say things without really meaning it. This doesn't mean it doesn't happen because it does but usually those "bragging" about it don't do it.

[jethrobee]

I really wish everyone would go back to the table and start to talk through solutions, as it is it looks like the next strike dates are bound to be Easter time, which will again be wonderful for BA's profile.

Why are LHR CC so against working the same conditions as LGW CC? I am a lowly SLF, who normally chooses BA, I've held my exec club card for 10 years, I have also in recent years held a Gold Virgin and Gold Air France.

I think its great that CC feel so passionate about customer service that they are willing to bring the company down because they dont feel it can be met with a lower crew compliment. I have also flown long haul routes out of LGW in Club World and found the service to be at least as good if not better than that of some of the ex-LHR flights I have taken.

My biggest issue with LGW is security screening is so slow compared to LHR.

One further thought, it has always been my view that the morning I wake up and don't want to go to work, or hate my employer that I move on. I am simply amazed at the attitude of some of the staff here and how much they hate the company that employs them. If you dont like working there go find another job.... its not rocket science. There are people here who are passionate about the company and delivering excellence, I have met many of them on flights I have taken with BA.

[LD12986]

One further thought, it has always been my view that the morning I wake up and don't want to go to work, or hate my employer that I move on. I am simply amazed at the attitude of some of the staff here and how much they hate the company that employs them. If you dont like working there go find another job.... its not rocket science.

And here is the rub. There are many old-contract senior CC that simply would not be able to get a job in another airline/service industry for comparable T&Cs as they have with BA. They would be competing against people who are younger, more eager, and cheaper.

A complete career change is also naturally difficult for anyone who has been in a particular industry for a long period of time, not least one such as aviation which is very different to 9-5 work.

[ottergirl]

Hi, MissM. Pessimism? It's been noted on this thread that CC tend to go sick when they don't fancy a sector. I'd be delighted if that was wrong.


Be delighted then:) We actually have quite a stringent sickness management policy which would and does put paid to that kind of attitude. In common with other departments, two periods of sickness in the same six month period will put you through quite heavy performance management with ongoing monitoring. It may have been true once but not in 2009/2010!

[HiFlyer14]

One thing you should learn is that many crew say things without really meaning it. This doesn't mean it doesn't happen because it does but usually those "bragging" about it don't do it.


MissM: Really? Do you mean like putting an X in the Yes box and then coming into work anyway? Surely not!

:ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh::ugh:

[peterlondon]

i just returned from a trip that i booked with another airline because i was unsure about christmas strikes with ba,it was a great service.but i would like to fly ba again, and am about to book two trips for feb and march, it is very off putting to read that crew are planning another strike and that is likely to make me book with ryanair and turkish airlines once more, the food is better on turkish, and ryanair have as nice crew as BA and get you there ontime, but at the end of the day i would like to have a british airways flight ,and support our flag carrier.i really do appreciate comments from slidebustle and glamgirl who are concerned about getting passengers to their destinations after a pleasant flying experience, but after watching an ad for british airways on television tonight i found myself thinking "who would book with them? some of the heathrow crew seem to hate the passengers,(according to the internet, and it may be a vocal minority) but you never know if you will get to your destination with the constant threat of heathrow staff striking over having to work under the same conditions as gatwick staff. so...finally, if you want to keep your jobs with BA, PLEASE STOP THREATENING TO GO ON STRIKE. I dont have an inbuilt resentment of crew, and would be very happy to continue to fly with BA, i work as a prison officer and consider myself far more at risk than some of the crew who post on here, i have had a broken nose and knives waved at me, and probably get paid much less than an old contract heathrow purser. so please, think on, you have a good job and a nice life style and are driving away customers who previously had faith in the ba brand, customers, who, no disrespect work ,as hard, or harder than you,id like to support BA, dont vote to strike again and hit out at customers like me who save our very hard earned cash for a few trips a year. i know there are plenty of helpful and dedicated BA staff, when i board a plane now i am thinking which of these wants to bring company down?

[Foxy Loxy]

I find this all really quite bewildering.

The economy as a whole is in a dreadful state. I am lucky enough to have a relatively "secure" aviation job, but I know others are not. I am willing, if needs be, to take a short-term knock to my pay/Ts&Cs to have a long-term future where I am.

Surely, in times such as these, everyone should pull together, take the lean for now and keep their heads above water? When things improve, negotiate for a bit more then. Rather that than digging your heels in the sand now, to be dragged straight to the back of the dole queue?

Those voting to strike: Maybe you are the fortunate ones who have a higher-earning spouse than yourselves. Have you even considered your colleauges who depend upon their BA salary to keep a roof over their heads and food on the table for themselves (and perhaps their families)?

Just be pragmatic.

[MissM]

HiFlyer14

MissM: Really? Do you mean like putting an X in the Yes box and then coming into work anyway? Surely not!

We were discussing about going sick for certain trips! Don't try to twist this into something else.

[overstress]

MissM, I think HiFlyer was implying that certain BA crew can be on the flaky side ("If I'm there, I'm there") and there is a strong likelihood that a individual's yes vote will not be followed by strike action...

[Desertia]

Is BASSA a cult? Do you honestly think over 10000 people have been mislead by their union?

Let's see, here's one example (from the UNITEBA Website):

"Earlier this year, Unite tabled changes amounting to 140 million in savings for the business..... these were dismissed out of hand by BA's management".

We all know these two statements are lies.

Would you not call this misleading?

Source: http://uniteba.com/ESW/Files/BA_cabin_crew_imposition.pdf

[Tiramisu]

Posted by Miss M
This is a question to you, SlideBustle and Tiramisu

You are all very against BASSA and some of you probably have resigned or thinking of doing so. Are you still accepting all those different allowances and payments (i.e. CAT, LDP, MSH unless they've changed terms) which you have on EF? Because if you are maybe you should remind yourselves about who have actually negotiated these for you... You don't agree with what the union is doing but you are accepting things they have negotiated for you?


Miss M,
May I draw you attention to the number of pages on this thread, 300 plus! That's the reason I voted No to Strike action and resigned from BASSA, Failure To Negotiate Terms and Conditions for 14,000 crew and that includes me.
As for accepting CAT payments, long day payments etc, may I remind you who my employer is and who pays my salary?
Have a guess please, it's not BASSA!
It's BRITISH AIRWAYS!
That's where my loyalty lies, Miss M.
So to answer your question, I'm extremely happy to accept all that my employer British Airways pay me.

[sussex2]

Time to switch off Galley FM?

[henkybaby]

How good to still see the same people going round and round in the same circles. That is dedication for ya! :ok:

I understand the next ballot will be announced on January 18th meaning that the call for a strike will fall close to the court hearing that will decide if there is any reason to strike. The irony.

No matter what the result and/or turnout is this time, the BASSA actions have achieved what they said they were out to prevent. For those who forgot, here is a quick reminder from the Unite site:

inevitably damage customer service and hit the brand, possibly leaving it beyond repair.

What they wanted to prevent has now become their threat. Trivial, at best.

Remember how you sometimes get into a fight with your partner and after a while you have forgotten what the fight was actually about but now it is all about being mad?

[Tiramisu]

Hi Henk,
I take it you're still in OZ?
Yep, still going round in circles trying to stop some of the die hard BASSA miltants not to drag us down with them. I wish it was Trivial, it's mass suicide I'm afraid.

[Meal Chucker]

Hey Heckybaby

Hope you're enjoying your vacation!

Bassa have announced that the ballot papers are now to be sent out on Jan 15th.

I understand the next ballot will be announced on January 18th meaning that the call for a strike will fall close to the court hearing that will decide if there is any reason to strike. The irony.


Unfortunately I fear that Bassa will push for strike action regardless of the outcome of the court hearing.

The court hearing is to decide if British Airways could impose what it believes are non-contractual changes on crew without agreement.

The Ballot is due to the fact that British Airways have imposed changes, regardless of what the changes are.

[henkybaby]

Ola! Yes, still in Oz. Lovely weather and so on.

Regarding the merit of the strike: if the judge rules that the changes made by BA are not contractual (that is what the court case is about) than a strike against those changes based on the current ballot proposition (that the changes are contractual and therefor BASSA should have been involved) is again illegal.

Maybe BASSA should switch (or get) legal aid?

[TOM100]

Sorry this is a bit long.......

I find this situation terribly sad for all involved in BA and those people who rely on BA for their livelihoods too (handling agents, caterers, cleaners etc etc). It is also really sad for the likes of Tiramisu, Hiflyer, Slidebustle etc who are genuinely worried about themselves, you can hear it in their posts.

I think BASSA are playing a very, very serious and very dangerous game of poker, and having tried to think through the various consequences, I can see absolutely no upside for them (and by inference their members), other than some temporarily inflated egos. Whatever the outcome, I think they have been tactically outmanouevered and made some serious errors of judgement. So:-

1. BASSA win the court case on Feb 1. As has been said:-

Willie either recruits a la new fleet to backfill the VR people and adds a degree of complexity to the business (rostering, payroll etc) - not desirable, complexity costs, but doable. When NF gets to critical mass start moving 'expensive' routes across to them.

Willie recruits new entrants onto existing Ts&Cs - not going to happen imo, he would have achieved nothing with all this upset.

Willie issues all crew with 90 days notice to terminate existing contracts, all existing crew onto new contracts, new entrants onto new fleet, no complexity as earlier - controversial in short term, but attractive. Perfectly legal, so presumably BASSA cannot threaten IA over this (not sure legally if this assumption is correct).

So BASSA will almost certainly just hasten the arrival of new fleet. Great job BASSA.

2. BA win the court case on Feb1:-

BASSA lose confidence of membership and suffer humiliation.

BA sue Unite/BASSA for damages running into millions - will this kill BASSA (and possibly Unite) ?

Where then for BASSA ?

Period of instability - Willie pushes through more change (some that could have been negotiated away), BASSA in disarray.

BASSA will have totally wrecked the opportunity for a negotiated settlement and members will pay the price. Great job BASSA.


Whatever scenario, now that brand damage has been done, forward bookings affected etc. The only way BA will regain public confidence (and bookings) is if the company can assure them that this will not happen again. The board will want Willie to numb the power of BASSA for good to achieve this confidence, even if this means that at the end of the process he is a token sacrificial lamb - he will have achieved what many others have failed to do and (assuming BA survive) will have put BA on a massively strong long term financial footing.

I cannot see, from a logical business perspective, how BA can leave BASSA unchecked ??? They are past the point of no return at this stage imo. Investors are demanding this reform.

The timing of this dispute also (I think) sucks for Unite and I think presents a real dliemma for them (not that BASSA will care). Unite bankroll the labour party and want to see them in power or at the very least limit the size of a Conservative majority. It is very much in Unite's interest to see this and they spend millions and millions to achieve that. Conservatives have introduced, in the past, legislation to curb TU power.

BA (as we just saw) along with the BBC are the most reported/press covered organisations in the country. We have seen that BASSA have pretty much zero public support with their dispute, esp with their terrible, ill conceived 12 days of Christmas message. Any dispute/potential dispute will get blanket press coverage.

This potential dispute will be just on the brink (or depending on when/if it is called and how long it lasts) could be bang in the middle of a general election campaign. P*ssed off travellers disrupted = p*ssed off voters. P*ssed off public who have lost jobs/unsympathetic to BASSA = p*ssed off voters. Guess who is supporting this - Labour's biggest donor ! Can see Messrs Brown and Mandelson's grubby hands involvement if it got to this ??

Dying Labour governments associated with industrial unrest.

Unite potentially shooting themselves in the foot on a much wider political scale.

Whatever way you look at it, all plays to BA and Willie's team.

BASSA really have pressed the nuclear button and they seriously need to eat some humble pie and try to get back to meaningful negotiation, I think they are in a really perilous position. If they don't, I can't see any way that there are any positives in this for them (and members) whatever happens.

Those who say the recession will end, yes it will. Remember though unemployment is a lag indicator and wont peak until later this year. So discretionary travel spend will still be under pressure for some time. Financial services wont ever (imo) go back to how it was and travel spend will thus be reduced.

We have yet to see the impact of higher tax rates and bankers bonuses being curbed - this may again see a reduction in travel spend. BA have a long way to go to ride out this storm - they can't go on losing 1 million pounds a day indefinitely. If it's not Willie, the next CEO needs to tackle it - you can't compete in a hugely competitive market with uncompetitive costs and poor producivity - it's the law of economics ! They have gone after everything else in the company......

Those who say the government will not allow BA to go under, I think you are wrong. Unlike the banking sector, there would be no systemic risk to the financial system (like the banks) if BA were not around. Parts of the organisation would be attractive to other organisations or re-born mkII.
Also, there could very well be a Conservative government in power at the time and they were going to let Northern Rock go bust !

Even though the government did bail Northern Rock, look what happened. They slashed jobs (000's), carved the business up, closed bits down etc, in order to restore an acceptable level of profitability to re-pay the taxpayer and make it attractive to a suitor......we demanded it. They would do the same with BA if and it is a big if they even stepped in - so they would need to make same changes.

BASSA, you only have 1 choice, negotiate for your life and quickly, you cannot win this battle.

Which is the lesser of two evils, the above scenarios, or 1/2 crew members less. negotiate clever, like scope agreements, ways of working in the future etc etc to try and reduce the future risk of impositions (or at least lessen the likelihood) and attempt to water down the impact of new fleet. BASSA can then genuinely claim to have achieved something, the alternative is to follow their current route/sleepwalk to oblivion.

[Tiramisu]

Regarding the merit of the strike: if the judge rules that the changes made by BA are not contractual (that is what the court case is about) than a strike against those changes based on the current ballot proposition (that the changes are contractual and therefor BASSA should have been involved) is again illegal.


Henkbabes,
Got it in one and my thoughts exactly. However, BASSA don't seem to and and never will.:ugh:

[Meal Chucker]

Regarding the merit of the strike: if the judge rules that the changes made by BA are not contractual (that is what the court case is about) than a strike against those changes based on the current ballot proposition (that the changes are contractual and therefor BASSA should have been involved) is again illegal.

The ballot for strike action is not about what actual changes have been made, whether contractual or not, it is about the imposition of changes.

So even if the changes are judged to be non-contractual Bassa will ballot regardless because changes have been made without their agreement. (as I understand it!!)

[Tiramisu]

So even if the changes are judged to be non-contractual Bassa will ballot regardless because changes have been made without their agreement. (as I understand it!!)


Meal Chucker,
So regardless, BASSA will lead the rest of the crew community to the dole queue then will they?
Could you please tell me where in writing does it state that BA cannot make any changes to crew complements without BASSA's express permission or agreement?
I'm a CSD and I do not have it anywhere in my contract that states that.

(PS,No offence meant to you personally, Meal Chucker)

[HiFlyer14]

Tom - you have hit the nail on the head.

As I've said before, I don't understand why UNITE are balloting because:

If BA win the court case - they can't strike.
If UNITE win the court case - they can't strike.

So all this re-ballot will achieve is to alienate us even more, cost us more money, and LOSE CUSTOMERS. You are right - there is a growing group of us that are EXTREMELY CONCERNED about our livelihoods. As I said in an earlier post - If I could go to BA and negotiate a Fixed Monthly Payment I would.

But how do we make the rest of the 14000 cabin crew understand? Many of them don't read ANY of the literature. Some believe that because they belong to the Union, they have to do what the Union wants. You only have to look at the postings of some of the militants on here. While some may come across as intelligent and articulate, they fail to grasp the basic concept that our jobs are under more threat from strike action than from New Fleet. Some of the basics of all this that cabin crew fail to grasp are just incomprehensible to the rest of us. And, regrettably there are many, many like that out there.

If we try and speak out, we are bullied. We cannot put our message on CrewForum - you have to enter your full name and staff number to join, and then if you print something they don't like, not only will you get hounded on the forum, they will ban you. Don't say they won't MissM - they already have!

The message needs to get out there that UNITE has seriously misrepresented us. UNITE are risking our jobs every day they move forward towards another strike. They have so far ACHIEVED NOTHING. Yet they have proved incompetent - the Chairwoman herself LalaLady was illegally encouraging people who had left the company to vote. How can anyone be sure that they are not doing other illegal activities? Why is Lalalady still in power? She has personally brought the entire cabin crew community into disrepute - we cannot even walk outside with our uniforms on without the public looking at us in disgust. Yet still she carries on her devious, underhand and immoral work from her protected pad in Lalaland.

She should resign and hang her in shame. But she hasn't even got the gumption to do that. Well, if she's earning in the region of 75K from Unite to support her Hollywood lifestyle - why would she? The term "illusions of grandeur" has never been so apt.

And, that, dear readers, is what we are up against. This bullying, arrogant, incompetent Union led by a woman who knows no morals, is dragging our company down around us. But many cabin crew are sticking their fingers in their ears saying "BASSA 100%".

I could cry.

I am BA cabin crew, and the above represents my own view, and not that of BA.

[TOM100]

I do though, like many others have suggested, doubt the resolve of crew to actually strike. I don't doubt their resolve to put an X in the yes box.

Look at 1997. Benign economic conditions, low interest rates, falling unemployment. BA posted record profits in 1996, record profit share with employees. easyJet barely two years old and small, Ryanair, still provinical Irish airline flying some clapped out 737-200's across the Irish Sea. BA still charging a few hundred quid to fly to GLA etc etc Arguably, inconceivable at the time that BA would fold, lots of job opportunities and economy buoyant, fuel prices low (relatively). Cabin crew still bottled it - a few hundred striking and the rest going sick or reporting for work !!

Compare with today, no sign of end of recession effects on BA, FR and EZY bigger than BA by some, open skies, rising unemployment, BA is perilous financial state, little job opportunities. New sickness policy (EG300), and a management with cojones and determination. Lots of companies wouldn't touch ex BA cabin crew with a barge pole because of all this. How many will strike this time ???

Also, I wonder in the run up to the injunction when management were ascertaining who was prepared to work, would strike, would do overtime etc etc if it gave any insight to them into the resolve of crew ???

[HiFlyer14]

Yes, I totally agree - the resolve to strike is extremely weak. After the last vote, everyone I flew with said they were coming into work, even though they had voted Yes. :ugh: I'm not sure if I respect them even less than I do the hardcore militants.:confused:

Either way the damage will be done, by deterring customers, and losing us money. And then, BA may well HAVE to change our contracts.

What we have at the moment is very palatable. One crew member off an aircraft. Everyone is doing it, and their is no hardship whatsoever. The hardship will come when our Pay and contracts HAVE TO BE changed due to all this loss of business. The crew community are not going to know what hit them.

The rest of us can but hold our head in our hands and weep.

[henkybaby]

The ballot for strike action is not about what actual changes have been made, whether contractual or not, it is about the imposition of changes.

So even if the changes are judged to be non-contractual Bassa will ballot regardless because changes have been made without their agreement. (as I understand it!!)

Well, I think you misunderstand it.

The original ballot was cast because BASSA said the BA had breached the contracts by imposing changes that were contractual. It was not about the changes themselves mind you, it was about due process. IF the changes are not contractual than there any strike over BA not following due process is illegal. If the changes are non-contractual BASSA can not call a strike over the changes themselves either. Illegal too, since it is not part of what they are party to (for lack of a better expression).

The only option BASSA would have is to now claim the new strike is about something else entirely. I don't think even the strongest BASSA supporters on here would accept that.

You see: the reasoning behind the strike has always been very, very flimsy (legally) and even with a successful re-ballot and with a ruling in its favor BASSA cannot strike. BA will hit them with another injunction and probably win again.

If BASSA wins, there is no more reason to strike (unless you make up a new one)
If BASSA loses a strike is illegal and besides, they will be in court defending themselves against all kinds of claims...

Nobody wins. Not BA, not the CC, not the passengers, not the rest of the staff, not the shareholder, not even WW himself.

We all lose.

BA staff can go work for a new airline (probably called BA Airways) against T&C comparable with Virgin. Remember Pyrrhus?

[Meal Chucker]

(PS,No offence meant to you personally, Meal Chucker)

No worries - none taken.


So regardless, BASSA will lead the rest of the crew community to the dole queue then will they?

I'm in agreement with you, although I'm not sure it will lead to the dole queue, but I do believe that if we/bassa hit the nuclear strike button again that Willie will respond in similar manner and announce the termination of all CC contracts with 90 days notice then re-interview everyone to see if they are still suitable for the job and only offer the successful candidates New Fleet contracts under SOSR.

I think Bassa are playing a very dangerous game with little or no appreciation for the full implications of their actions.

When if all goes wrong I suspect the likes of Malone and her team of Kitchen fitters will disappear off into the distance leaving the rest of us to pay the price and pick up the pieces of the job they have decimated with their ill-conceived short-sighted actions.

[101917]

Having began by observing the previous “locked” thread and now this one, along with following other forums and the media from the perspective of a “neutral” there seems to be a number of possible options:

BA management capitulate and give in to the Bassa “nuclear option”, in which case the airline will die a painful death. Odds. About as likely as me living to be the oldest person on this plant.
Bassa withdrawing their threat of another strike by way of the next ballot. Withdrawing from the court case and returning to the negotiations with a sensible approach. For this to come to pass the Bassa/Unite hierarchy would appear to need a brain transplant and I am not sure there is enough time left for the operations to take place. Undoubtedly, this would be the best solution for CC. In time the Company may return to its former glory. Odds. About as likely as me living to be the oldest person on this plant.
The current situation continues that will ensure the annihilation of BASSA. Recent past performance of both the CC and pilot unions indicate that the Company’s legal team is a cut above theirs. So far the results are BA 1 Bassa 0 and BA 1 Balpa 0. Although Balpa had the brains to realise they were on a hiding to nothing and returned to the negotiating table to conclude a satisfactory deal. On the balance of probabilities Bassa will have their tails between their legs when they next leave the High Court. It would not surprise me to learn that some where in the recognition agreement, between BA and Bassa, there is a clause that allows either party to terminate the agreement. 90 days sound familiar. On winning BA could terminate the agreement with all the implications that would follow.

Bassa win in court, then follow their usual tactics and the BA cost base remains unsustainable as losses continue running at £1m per day until the airline ceases trading.
BA does a Swissair. All employees on new contracts and working to the legal limitations with not an industrial agreement in sight. Legally difficult to do because of the pension deficit millstone around its neck. With regard to my options. I have a minimum of 12 flights planned for this year; fortunately, the first 2 are on BA that will not be affected by the next possible strike. All the others are going to be booked with other airlines for the following reasons. BA is now an unreliable carrier with a low morale workforce. But, more importantly I have doubts about the airline being able to deliver a safe operation and I regret to say that this opinion has been brought about by the selflessness of those employees who are prepared to see disaster strike and have no respect for the authority gradient when at work or the company they work for. How can I be sure that they will do their job in a conscientious and professional manner?

[Meal Chucker]

Well, I think you misunderstand it.

If I'm wrong I apologise, but I don't think I am after a quick re-read of the previous thread and the Bassa/CF forums from Nov time.

The original ballot was cast because BASSA said the BA had breached the contracts by imposing changes that were contractual.

The original ballot was over the imposition of changes not whether the changes were contractual or not.

The court action was started for the alleged breach of contract from your quote.

Unite issues legal challenge to BA over imposed changes to contracts
Unite the union is to take legal action to stop British Airways’ plans imposing contractual changes on crew without agreement.
The challenge, in the High Court, is over the imposition of contractual changes, including the reduction of crewing levels, which BA said it will force cabin crew to work to from 16 November. Unite is seeking an injunction against this imposition.
The High Court hearing is currently set for Thursday, November 5th
This action is separate to the ballot for industrial action which Unite announced this week it is intending to carry out.


The only option BASSA would have is to now claim the new strike is about something else entirely. I don't think even the strongest BASSA supporters on here would accept that.

Bassa can ballot again over the same reason - imposition. The judge took issue with the ballot process rather than the reason for the ballot.

IMHO!!

[henkybaby]

MC,

There is a difference between what they say and what is legally the case.

AFAIK BASSA claims that BA have imposed unilateral changes that are contractual. BA does not dispute the imposition, only that they are contractual.

The last couple of weeks a lot of discussion has taken place over subjects that were (legally) not part of the problem. BASSA has proposed different changes based on the assumption that the changes were contractual. BA refused to discuss this (logically) since they say the changes are not contractual and therefore there is no need to discuss them (or for BASSA to offer alternatives).

So, although BASSA makes us believe they are protesting the changes, they are in fact saying that BA is in breach of contract. A strike is not the way to settle such an issue, a legal case is. That is what is being decided Feb 1st.

BASSA can no more strike about non contractual changes than they can strike over what aircraft BA decides to buy. The real issue is therefore if the changes are contractual or not. If they are not, than BASSA has no legal grounds for a strike. It really is end of story then. Ballot or no ballot.

I do not know how to explain it more clearly.

[Meal Chucker]

Heckybaby,

I understand exactly what you saying, but I think you are confusing the court case and the ballot - they are separate issues according to Bassa.

The court case is concerned with whether the changes are contractual or not.

BASSA can no more strike about non contractual changes than they can strike over what aircraft BA decides to buy. The real issue is therefore if the changes are contractual or not. If they are not, than BASSA has no legal grounds for a strike. It really is end of story then. Ballot or no ballot.


Agreed - but Bassa are not balloting over contractual or non-contractual changes.

Bassa are balloting over the fact that changes have been imposed.

It matters not what the actual changes are - just the fact that changes have been made.

This is conversation is going around in circles, I don't know if Bassa's point of view is legally correct and I certainly don't agree with balloting again, Bassa believe that they can strike over any issue they disagree with, this is their stance at the moment

[henkybaby]

MC,

Don't know what to tell ya... It seems simple to me. BASSA cannot prevent changes it has no (for lack of a better term) jurisdiction over. As I said, they cannot strike because the don't like the aircraft that BA buys.

That is why they are not striking about the actual changes (since it is unclear whether or not they are entitled to) but about the process BA followed.

This is exactly why this strike business was so misplaced to begin with and why there is no legal foundation for it...

I can still understand the crew not liking some of the changes but maybe they simply have no say in the matter. Legally that is.

If a judge rules that the changes are non contractual and thus outside of BASSA's realm, then any strike over the changes or their imposition is illegal and will cost strikers their job and Unite their war chest.

Why is WW so adamant in his strategy? He has the law on his side.

[Joetom]

Management have allowed the CC unions to run the roost over many many years, I cannot see the CC unions changing all of sudden, just looks like they are trying to maintain T+Cs for their members, and non members.

From what I read, CC appear to be getting hit the hardest by far, yes I know they have high T+Cs, but other sections appear to getting treated much better with little changes to their deals.

Good luck to all the CC.

[wobble2plank]

From what I read, CC appear to be getting hit the hardest by far, yes I know they have high T+Cs, but other sections appear to getting treated much better with little changes to their deals.

Joetom, not quite correct I'm afraid.

If you listen to BASSA that is the impression you get. However you have to take into account the over the past 10 years or so ALL other departments in BA have rationalised their T's & C's.

Flight crew merged allowances, down route payments, box payments etc. etc. etc. 5 years ago. Ground staff, push back drivers, ground handling staff, baggage staff changed their T's & C's with the move to T5 and the Engineers have had their T's & C's altered beyond all recognition over the past decade.

The only ones who have successfully failed to budge are the CC. Whilst this may be seen as a victory for BASSA it can also be seen as a symptom of weak management. Sadly for BASSA Willie Walsh is anything but weak and wants to redress the balance hence the supposedly 'disproportionate' savings.

It is difficulty for a company to continue to pay 'Central Area Turnaround' payments when the CAT doesn't exist anymore!

[Meal Chucker]

Don't know what to tell ya... It seems simple to me. BASSA cannot prevent changes it has no (for lack of a better term) jurisdiction over. As I said, they cannot strike because the don't like the aircraft that BA buys.

I agree it's BA's train set and not BASSA's and this is where I feel the fundamental problem lies, a problem Willie must address. What does surprise me is the level of militancy and the determination to vote for a strike by the crew, even though any ballot for strike action will be extremely detrimental to BA.

I can still understand the crew not liking some of the changes but maybe they simply have no say in the matter. Legally that is.

But BA did give us a chance to have a say in the changes, unfortunately we trusted Bassa to represent us in the negations.

If a judge rules that the changes are non contractual and thus outside of BASSA's realm, then any strike over the changes or their imposition is illegal and will cost strikers their job and Unite their war chest.

Bassa doesn't see it that way, there is no logic in their thinking; everything is based upon emotion and a mistrust of British Airways. There are a lot of disgruntled crew out there who really believe that Willie is out to get them and is trying to ruin BA. These deluded crew have self styled themselves into the saviours of BA.

BASSA haven't exactly been totally forthcoming with the facts and most crew believe if they don't make a stand now BA will crucify them in the future. Bassa can't call a strike on what might happen in the future which is why I believe they have chosen the rather vague reason they have used.
When you talk to crew they don't appear to know what the actual ballot is for, let alone the details of the company offer.

Just how do BA deal with people like that?

[Joetom]

Wobble2plank, I agree other sections have made change over many years, but I think it's been slow and amount of change is small.

Yes, the CC need to live in the real world, but the reason why the company want such big changes in such a small time is due to a long history of weak management looking after the CC.

The CC are in a very tight spot, they have great T+Cs and would find it hard to match them in the real/outside world, this is why they will fight tooth and nail to keep as much as possible.

CC have hugh contact time with customers, I think a balance is needed, I think changers are too big and too fast, we all need to remember CC are people with family and bills etc etc.

2010 will be a bad year for many airlines, we will see some big headlines this year, good luck to all staff in all the airlines, none more so than the company CC.

[TopBunk]

Joetom wrote:
The CC are in a very tight spot, they have great T+Cs and would find it hard to match them in the real/outside world, this is why they will fight tooth and nail to keep as much as possible.

CC have hugh contact time with customers, I think a balance is needed, I think changers are too big and too fast, we all need to remember CC are people with family and bills etc etc.

I know that we are just going around in circles here, but it has to be said.

The trouble is that if they fight too hard they may well have to try to match them in the real world.

The changes being asked for are what?

No pay cut
Incremental rises for many of 2-7%
No change to allowances
No change to box/CAT/LDP payments
No change to reduced rest downroute
Work a little bit harder on some flights (for some people)

If you consider those big changes then I concede to you. If, like the majority of people you consider them very reasonable and minimal changes to help an employer stay solvent and continue paying you those 'great T+C's', then stop whinging about the imposition and get on with your life. After all, the imposition only occurred because BASSA wouldn't negotiate at all for 9 months, it has been commented on that if BASSA had proposed these changes that they would have been acceptable.:ugh:

[draglift]

　
You wrote:
　

"I have a minimum of 12 flights planned for this year; fortunately, the first 2 are on BA that will not be affected by the next possible strike. All the others are going to be booked with other airlines for the following reasons. BA is now an unreliable carrier with a low morale workforce. But, more importantly I have doubts about the airline being able to deliver a safe operation and I regret to say that this opinion has been brought about by the selflessness of those employees who are prepared to see disaster strike and have no respect for the authority gradient when at work or the company they work for. How can I be sure that they will do their job in a conscientious and professional manner?"

You are of course fully entitled to your own opinion and to make your own decision.

I think you may be making a big mistake in assessing the airline and its safety on what you read on this forum. The cabin crew are undoubtably militant in defending their terms and conditions but I think when you fly you will find the entire operation including the cabin crew very professional and safe. As a flight crew member I have no animosity towards cabin crew and do not receive any from them. You are seeing some extreme views here and you are perceiving that to be the norm.

[Joetom]

Topbunk, well said.

I still think changes are too much and fast from the CC point of view, other sections of staff seem over happy for the CC to take the lot, some sections stand out in their views ???

Any changes will just be the first cut, look at the pension story, stop new staff getting it, then reduce it, and this year the slice will be the biggest ever seen, so I can well understand why the CC are being so strong.

[Human Factor]

AFAIK, BASSA can ballot for anything they like. Whether or not it is sensible to do so is another matter.... :rolleyes:

[Bellerophon]

henkybaby

I heartily agree with most of your analysis of the present dispute, but there is one area on which we differ, and, with respect, one point where I believe you are not correct.

...The original ballot was cast because BASSA said the BA had breached the contracts by imposing changes that were contractual. It was not about the changes themselves mind you, it was about due process...

The BASSA ballot was not about whether contractual changes had been imposed. BASSA left that to the lawyers and the Court, thus far rather unsuccessfully!

The ballot was about BASSA’s objection to any change being imposed unilaterally, rather than negotiated, regardless of whether that change was contractual or non-contractual, major or trifling.

The court case is about whether BA’s imposed changes are contractual changes or not.

BA will argue that they are not contractual changes, and need not have been negotiated. BASSA will argue that they are contractual changes and should have been negotiated.

On the 05th November, (correction courtesy of Meal Chucker) BASSA applied for an injunction to prevent BA imposing certain changes until the case had been heard in full, but the application was refused.

BA imposed the changes, the full case will be heard in the High Court next month, and we will learn the judge’s ruling in due course.

If BASSA win, BA will not be allowed to maintain those changes, and will face a claim for damages as well as being required either to reverse the changes or rapidly reach a negotiated solution with BASSA.

If BA wins, then this will mean that BASSA will not have any legal grounds on which to oppose those changes.


Now, if BA should win the case, you appear sure that BASSA cannot ballot over non-contractual matters.

...It seems simple to me. BASSA cannot prevent changes it has no (for lack of a better term) jurisdiction over...

... If the changes are non-contractual BASSA can not call a strike over the changes themselves either...


I don’t think that is correct. One commentary on UK industrial legislation puts it this way:

...For a dispute to be lawful it must be a 'trade dispute'. This means it must be a dispute between workers and their own employer and it must be wholly concerned about employment related matters, e.g. pay, working conditions, jobs, discipline etc...

I’m told that the case law that has built up on the relevant legislation does not confine the term trade dispute to mean solely contractual matters. Just that it has to be a dispute between workers and their employer, which has arisen out of their employment, no matter how trivial or inconsequential others may think it.

Provided BASSA observe the technical requirements of UK industrial legislation (something that has singularly proved beyond them so far) such as balloting the correct people and asking the correct question on the ballot paper, it seems to me that a judgment in BA’s favour in February would not preclude BASSA from opposing these changes industrially.

BASSA has already indicated that its members will be re-balloted in mid-January.

As to the wisdom of, support for, or likely effectiveness of any such future industrial action, I leave that for you to comment on, from the safe distance of Sydney!


Happy New Year

Bellerophon

[Meal Chucker]

On the 17th December 2009, BASSA applied for an injunction, in front of Mrs. Justice Cox, to prevent BA imposing certain changes until the case had been heard in full, but the application was refused.

Nearly right - the court case on Dec 17th stopped the planned 12 days of industrial action.:ok:

The injunction to stop the change to new service routines etc. that Bassa applied for was denied on Nov 5th.:ok:

[Ancient Observer]

Your analysis is spot on.

BA now have to destry Bassa. No other outcome will work. They'll use the 90 day SOSR all-go, and then "re-interview for own job" technique that most UK majors use.


The moderate CC on here will get through.

The response of Unite, which is going through turmoil currently, and an election for its Gen Sec will be interesting.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

@ 101917 ... your Post 999.

With regard to my options. I have a minimum of 12 flights planned for this year; fortunately, the first 2 are on BA that will not be affected by the next possible strike. All the others are going to be booked with other airlines for the following reasons. BA is now an unreliable carrier with a low morale workforce. But, more importantly I have doubts about the airline being able to deliver a safe operation and I regret to say that this opinion has been brought about by the selflessness of those employees who are prepared to see disaster strike and have no respect for the authority gradient when at work or the company they work for. How can I be sure that they will do their job in a conscientious and professional manner?

I agree wholeheartedly with [my bold above] - "unreliable in terms of customer delivery" . It is for that reason that I shall be making my last personal round-trip journey with BA in April/May, and that I have directed that my company ceases using BA for business purposes unless completely unavoidable.

Tenuous agreement on "low morale workforce", other than as manifested by poor customer service on-board [long-haul LHR, others exempt]. I think they have very good morale on the whole; it's just that some of the CC derive their morale exclusively from excessively favourable T&C. "World's Favourite Airline"? Perhaps for the LHR CC, but not necessarily for the customers :sad:

Disagree with safety aspects - the Captain will ensure safety, regardless of what else may be happening down the back with 1st Class canapes etc. Miming to the on-board Safety Brief and executing "Doors to manual and cross-check" is not the most intellectually challenging Flight Safety exercise.

[I]If I exaggerate some aspects, like FS, it's only for impact. But some people need to realise that, regardless of the Legal and Industrial Relations aspects, the paying customers can no longer rely on BA getting them from A to B. Simples?

[MissM]

Two-Tone-Blue

Miming to the safety briefing? What are you going on about? You say that arming the door is not the most intellectually challenging "flight safety exercise". Do you know what happens to the door when doing it? And, do you know how to do it yourself or do you think it's all about moving your arms a bit, touching a few bits on the door and giving the impression that you are actually doing SOMETHING?

Why are you always slagging off cabin crew for their duties? Do you actually know what we are doing? Except miming to the safety briefing and doing less intellectual challenges of course.

Manifasted poor customer service onboard? Only at LHR WW?

[MissM]

Tiramisu

BA is your employer and pays you every month but who has negotiated all these different allowances and payments for you? Do you think BA came up with them themselves?

[Two-Tone-Blue]

Hi again, MissM. Paying customer calling.

Miming to the safety briefing? What are you going on about? The cartoon briefing is on the video screen - the CC point at the nearest doors [the first thing I check personally, and cross-check with the OH].

You say that arming the door is not the most intellectually challenging "flight safety exercise". Do you know what happens to the door when doing it? And, do you know how to do it yourself or do you think it's all about moving your arms a bit, touching a few bits on the door and giving the impression that you are actually doing SOMETHING?

Technically no, other than it is something you are told to do by the Captain of the Aircraft. My guess ... it's related to auto-deployment of slides against possible ground hazards? Oh, BTW, I assiduously read the Emergency Cards to ensure I know how to get out if the CC are unconscious. My life depends on that ... and the pilot.

Why are you always slagging off cabin crew for their duties? Do you actually know what we are doing? Except miming to the safety briefing and doing less intellectual challenges of course.
I'm not "always slagging off" ... I am DEEPLY disappointed in the standards of BA Cabin Service in J on L-H out of LHR. Oh, and of course the fact that BA CC are trying to disrupt my travel plans and potentially lose me holidays, and business trips, and money ... but don't let that worry you, please. Continue to be "primarily for my safety" if the flight I booked and paid for actually happens.
Do you understand where I'm coming from yet? :ugh:

Manifasted poor customer service onboard? Only at LHR WW?
Superb service JER-LGW, despite the time constraints on a very short sector.
Excellent service LGW-MLA, friendly and cheerful.
Consistently inconsistent and sub-standard LHR-IAD.

Next question to your paying customer, please.

[SweetChariotXV]

but who has negotiated all these different allowances and payments for you? Do you think BA came up with them themselves?

So because BASSA negotiated these different allowances and payments for you, by your rational, that means you are now all indebted to them for the rest of your working lives at BA?

BASSA tell you to do something completely idiotic and strike. You think "hmm not sure about this, could be ultimately detrimental to my job". Then you realise they negotiated those allowances for you and payments, so without further doubt, you blindly walk off, doing whatever they ask, and believe all that they say.

Why don't you ask yourself who gave you the job in the first place to get this wage, these benefits, this lifestyle etc etc. It wasn't BASSA who gave you the priveledge of being where you are today. BA interviewed you, BA employed you. And as you yourself said, BA pay you.

[MissM]

Two-Tone-Blue

Technically no, other than it is something you are told to do by the Captain of the Aircraft. Here's some news for you. It's not the captain giving that command except on arrival.

I'm not "always slagging off" ... Maybe not always but every now and then!

I am DEEPLY disappointed in the standards of BA Cabin Service in J on L-H out of LHR. Are you saying the standards are always poor or was it simply on one flight? Because it's mixed messages especially as you've given examples of three different flights (JER, MLA and IAD) you've done.

Oh, and of course the fact that BA CC are trying to disrupt my travel plans and potentially lose me holidays, and business trips, and money ... but don't let that worry you, please. Continue to be "primarily for my safety" if the flight I booked and paid for actually happens.Of course but do you think we are doing it because of the fun of it? No, I wouldn't think so.

Do you understand where I'm coming from yet? :ugh:Jersey! Sorry. I just had to do it.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

JER = good call :ok:
The clues were there, ust as they were with those who struggled earlier with speedbird67 from NZ.

Anyway ...

1. Technical Stuff.
Regardless of whoever says door to manual and when, was I close to the correct answer? Don't duck that one! The Public deserves to be told. ;)

2. Standards?

Honestly, I have always been IMMENSELY impressed with JER-LGW with BA. I really don't know how they do a J service in the time available, and actually feel guilty about expecting it [well, tbh, I don't expect that volume and quality on a 45-min sector].
LGW-MLA was a rare trip - again, VERY impressed, especially when we had a bomb-scare at MLA on return [pax debris discovered]. The Capt kept all the pax very well briefed about the delay.
LHR-IAD? Constantly disappointed on EVERY occasion. Honestly, I'm a nice guy, but cabin state and service has been inferior EVERY time. I'm not joking, that's why I'm banging on here to stress the point. J-class pax aren't getting what they're paying for anyway, and now IA adds the risk of not even getting the sub-standard service.


3. Justification?
As a paying customer, I really don't care a fiddler's toss about the "debate" between BA/BASSA/UNITE. I'm here putting the paying customer's view - there are other airlines I can fly with [and obviously will in the future]. "As you butter your bread, so must you lie on it", as Granny used to say in her demented years. Just don't expect too much public sympathy on the basis of the evidence posted here and in the Media.

[Tiramisu]

Posted by Miss M
BA is your employer and pays you every month but who has negotiated all these different allowances and payments for you? Do you think BA came up with them themselves?


Oh dear Miss M,
I feel like a naughty schoolgirl answering your question!:rolleyes:

BASSA certainly didn't come up with it by themselves either, it was negotiated by both parties, Miss M. The magic word is Negotiation, something BASSA failed to do!:ugh:

For the record, Miss M BASSA also failed to agree Eurofleet doing Fixed Links which would have meant better productivity from Eurofleet crews and a payment to keep both BA and CC happy. Talk about shooting oneself in the foot!:ugh:

I'm BA Cabin Crew and the above are my personal views and not those of BA.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

@ Tiramasu ... go on, "Trade Secret" ... was I right about "doors to manual"? Over-riding the automatic systems in case there' a ground hazard?
Or aren't we allowed to know? :uhoh:

[wobble2plank]

BA is your employer and pays you every month but who has negotiated all these different allowances and payments for you? Do you think BA came up with them themselves?

Errrrrm, BA came up with them when the transition from National Airline to private company took place. Back then they were sensible given the different circumstances that long haul flying found itself in.

All BASSA has managed to do over the intervening years is to hold on jealously to what it has at Heathrow by throwing all others to the wolves. BASSA has never had to fight to actually change the T's & C's of the Cabin Crew for the better!

Here's some news for you. It's not the Captain giving that command except on arrival.

Here's some news for you MissM, the Captain delegates the responsibility for the hugely technical task of 'putting the doors to automatic' to the senior Cabin Crew member as we have a little to do in the front such as checking push back clearances, starting engines etc. You know, minor stuff.

Do you know what happens to the door when doing it? And, do you know how to do it yourself or do you think it's all about moving your arms a bit, touching a few bits on the door and giving the impression that you are actually doing SOMETHING?


It always seems that way when I watch it at SEP! :}

TTB, the doors are placed to manual when approaching the stand so we don't get a nice little slide banging into the jetty for dis-embarkation. If you open the door from the outside the door will automatically disarm itself. Not if you open it from the inside though!

[MissM]

Two-Tone-Blue

Realised you wrote "manual" and not "automatic". I read far too quickly sometimes. In that case you were right about captain saying it!

[Tiramisu]

Miss M,
You previously mentioned that you enjoy the lifestyle BA gives you. Can you please tell me how you would feel if you were sacked for going on strike or given 90 days to be re-employed by BA if successful on to a new contract?
Have you read German Boy's post and those of Flyglobespan crew? I don't think you realise just how lucky you are working for BA with your current T's and C's.

Miss M, there is a saying 'Quit while you are ahead.' My advice to you is precisely to do that, before you jeopardise all our jobs by striking and bringing BA down.

I'm BA Cabin Crew and the above are my personal views and not those of BA.

[Two-Tone-Blue]

The Mystery of the Doors To Manual/Auto slowly unravels.

It may yet become clear. Possibly ...

Tune in for next week's exciting instalment ... "I operated a Switch!!" :)

[MissM]

BigBrutha

Very neat!

Tiramisu

Thanks for your patronising reply! Negotiation? I don't think I have ever heard of that word before. I better write it down in my pad.

Fixed Links? I haven't heard anything about that.

Have you ever forwarded your opinions or suggestions to BASSA? Or, are you one of those who think they will name and shame openly you for raising your voice? If you're a member maybe you should talk to them about your concerns. If you're not, tough luck.

wobble2plank

It was a misunderstanding between automatic and manual and I read it too quickly. I did put "It's not the captain giving that command except on arrival" in an earlier reply. Making a mistake is human.

[Dairyground]

MissM

A little off topic, but I am confident that arming and disarming doors (or to be a bit pedantic, enabling and disabling automatic deplyment of slides on opening of doors) is one of the less demanding elements (physically and intellectually) of your Safety and Emergency Procedures.

Back closer to the line, you complain that Tiramisu and others enjoy benefits negotiated by BASSA even though they are not BASSA members. If you had read the earlier parts of the discussion, you would realise that Tiramisu and others had been fully paid up members of BASSA for many years at the time of the recent ballot, and so were fully entitled, morally and practically, to all benefits negotiated by BASSA. The reasons for resigning were that they no longer had confidence that BASSA were representing the best interests of themselves or of cabin crew in general.

Ask yourself, is the current BASSA line likely to be to your long-term benefit? Think before you vote.

[MissM]

Tiramisu

If BA were to sack me for going on a strike I would take them to court even if it will take years. Spare me the forthcoming comment on not being successful because even if I wouldn't be at least I would have tried my best.

Be given 90 days to be re-employed on a new contract? BA would know exactly where to shove that piece of paper.

I have no intention of leaving BA yet! Maybe if they start offering VR again I would apply and hope for the best although I doubt it because there are a couple of thousand people ahead of me.

[MissM]

Dairyground

No, you are absolutely right about disarming and arming doors not being the most tiring part of the job.

It was not a complaim. As pointed out BA does not do individual contracts and it was more of a rhetorical question or a question about their values about these allowances. If they had been given the option to replace all those allowances and payments with a different payment structure, would they have accepted it?

If they have resigned from BASSA they have lost their vote. They can't forward their opinions either although I'm not sure if they would have even if they still had been members.

[Matt101]

The Mystery of the Doors To Manual/Auto slowly unravels.

It may yet become clear. Possibly ...

Tune in for next week's exciting instalment ... "I operated a Switch!!" :)

For my own amusement and so you never have to feel out of the loop again.

Essentially arming or placing a door into automatic engages a bar (called a girt bar - no it's not big or made in Somerset) into some brackets in the floor area by the door, usually underneath the box (bustle) at the base of the door containing the slide. This results in the slide being pulled from the bustle should the door now be opened, it will fall and engage an automatic inflation. (There is a manual inflation handle to).

In disarmed mode (manual) the girt bar and therefore the slide stay with the door as it is opened and therefore does not deploy and inflate.

Arming the door may also arm a power assist function where some gears and gas and chains power open the door as soon as the handle is moved past a certain position assisting the crew in opening the door (as the force required to pull the slide from the bustle can be a bit of a bugger apparently)

Usually this is all done via a handle or lever somewhere on the door. On the 737 you physically bend down and put the bar in the brackets, then wipe the MAN shuttle breakfast on your hands which has been rotting on the girt bar for days.

The cross check bit is just so the crew member with the opposite door comes and has a look to make sure you haven't made a cock up. Much like everything on an aircraft two heads are better than one.

So generally yes it is the operation of a switch/small lever and it really is the least of the Cabin Crew's duties with regards safety and security. Though like the curtain going up at "Cats" it's the bit everyone is still paying attention to before nodding off.

I don't really believe that this has anything to do with the terms and conditions enjoyed by BA cabin crew though and whilst I am not in agreement with the self destructive route BASSA are currently leading the crew down I don't think trivialising someone's role in a company will help.

To steal a phrase from the Janitor at NASA in 1969 "we're all trying to put a man on the moon" (or in this case get you from A to B).

In my experience BA cabin crew can be the best and worst, but then I can say that of most airlines I have flown with. Most of the time though they are above average.

Anyway less about doors. (Sorry Mods.)

[Two-Tone-Blue]

Agreed - I diverted the thread somewhat, largely from frustration at the dripping about safety aspects from CC instead of them justifying the poor standards of cabin service in J on LH from LHR.

I am both informed and chastised. ;)

Back to the UNITE/BASSA/BA War ... where everyone loses.

[Matt101]

I didn't mean to sound harsh if I did just trying to say that although frustration is understandable generalisations hurt those on your side of the argument to :)

As for IAD - between the people eating machines that collect you from the aircraft and the pine trees they hide the crew in one can only assume the attitude is due to downright confusion and boredom :}

(Though I quite like it there).

Anyway I am ex-crew hence my stance on being nice to them and wanting to kick BASSA in the balls and take them all to some place where negotiation and level headedness are not a foreign concept.

[GearUp CheerUp]

WW, Once again I repeat too many people who are not cabin crew seem to be trying to lay down the options when they are just trying to influence everyone around with views that are at best found on a local landfill site. Wait for the chess moves BA or BASSA will make that move and whatever the so called experts on this site will just rabble on and on until the move takes place. Close the company down 90 days notice etc etc is just pie in the sky everyone just relax and have another drink otherwise you may get too stressed that is not good for your health.

Well, when I compare the well reasoned scenarios posted by TOM100 to the drivel that you write on here, I know which outcome my money's sitting on.

Just do us one favour please, still be posting here in a month's time.

[Tiramisu]

VV/Watersidewonker,
You remind me of the THE JOKER played by Jack Nicholson in the 1989 BATMAN movie. Not the slightest bit funny.
Are you a CSD by any chance?

[GearUp CheerUp]

MissM
If BA were to sack me for going on a strike I would take them to court even if it will take years. Spare me the forthcoming comment on not being successful because even if I wouldn't be at least I would have tried my best.

Be given 90 days to be re-employed on a new contract? BA would know exactly where to shove that piece of paper.

Ha Ha. Ha Ha Ha. Ha Ha Ha Ha.

You really dont have the vaguest clue, do you?

I have no intention of leaving BA yet!

Better wise up sharpish then!

[sussex2]

Eh voila!

Bankruptcy mooted for Japan Airlines (http://www.flightglobal.com/articles/2009/12/28/336626/bankruptcy-mooted-for-japan-airlines.html)

[MissM]

GearUp CheerUp

You really dont have the vaguest clue, do you?

I do have a clue that I will never accept NewFleet. Good answer enough?

[pvmw]

I do have a clue that I will never accept NewFleet. Good answer enough?

Very clear. Start preparing your CV then - oh. and don't bother to include any previous employment with BA, any mention of that'll make you unemployable.

Better make it a very well paid job tho', you'll need the money if you plan to be spending several years in court fighting BA.

What alternative reality do you people exist in? You have understood nothing that has been said to you.

[ottergirl]

We may not have a choice. If we don't start negotiating, then we definately won't. If we learn nothing else out of this whole debacle, it should be the danger of a fleet set up with different T&C's! SF LGW will yet be the undoing of LHR.

As for winning a court case by sending in lots of reports on how we can't cope with reduced crewing levels, high levels of stress, increased safety concerns, etc., the whole thing is laughable when just round the M25 our colleagues are managing just fine! We need our unions talking not plotting!

[Albert Salmon]

MissM really underestimates her readers' intelligence:

If they have resigned from BASSA they have lost their vote. They can't forward their opinions either although I'm not sure if they would have even if they still had been members.

Well, well, well! If MissM had not told us that we would never have worked that out for ourselves.

[GearUp CheerUp]

Not really obvious at all, Albert. After all, the BASSA chair told people who were leaving the employ of BA that it would be OK to vote in the recent ballot.

Perhaps over at BASSA its OK to vote if you've resigned, as long as you vote the right way?

[MissM]

pvmw

Don't worry because I have been saving money since my very first month with BA and would be able to support myself for a long time.

I think most of us understand what has been said to us. Don't trust BA!

[Albert Salmon]

Once again I repeat too many people who are not cabin crew seem to be trying to lay down the options when they are just trying to influence everyone around with views that are at best found on a local landfill site.

This results from a couple of principles you appear not to be too familiar with, Watersidewonker.

They are:

1 Free speech

2 Democracy

This is a public forum, in case that had escaped your notice - not the BASSA website or CF.

[henkybaby]

The BASSA ballot was not about whether contractual changes had been imposed. BASSA left that to the lawyers and the Court, thus far rather unsuccessfully!

The ballot was about BASSA’s objection to any change being imposed unilaterally, rather than negotiated, regardless of whether that change was contractual or non-contractual, major or trifling.


Ok, but isn't that exactly the point? BASSA can only object to BA imposing changes unilaterally if they should legally be the bilateral party. BASSA cannot object to BA switching banks or issuing extra shares now, can it?

By making this about due process (e.g. objecting to BA imposing changes they should have been involved in) they shot themselves in the foot if the judge says "but dear BASSA, you don't need to agree to these changes! Off you go!". How can they still strike if the judge deems them outside of their influence?

So then they have to change the reason for the strike. It is no longer about the way of imposing the changes but about the changes themselves.

As I understand it, no matter how they spun it in the media, the legal motivation for the strike was not the changes themselves, or am I wrong?

[MissM]

Albert Salmon

Is that all you can contribute? If I were you I would have saved myself the energy from writing that on the keyboard.

[Albert Salmon]

Albert Salmon

Is that all you can contribute? If I were you I would have saved myself the energy from writing that on the keyboard.


Ah - but the comment has clearly riled you, MissM, otherwise you would not have taken the bait.

Don't worry, MissM; your time will come. And when it does BA's long-suffering, paying long-haul customers, who have been b******d about by you and your ilk since November, will be cheering outside T5.

See you outside the JobCentre, MissM!

[henkybaby]

I think most of us understand what has been said to us. Don't trust BA!

I am going to give this one last try: you are BA!

If you do not trust your employer you have but one cause of action: quit. Seriously. If you do not want to quit that is because you like your job better than you like your alternatives. This is logic and not debatable. Therefore your company, which BASSA tells you not to trust, employs you in a way that you have deemed to be better than all other possible alternatives.

...


Does something click yet?

[Carnage Matey!]

Over on crazyland the latest work of fiction from Fume Event has been posted:

A large number of BA pilots have given up with BALPA in disgust at they way the association has rolled over in its dealings with BA, and have joined the Civil Air Transport section of UNITE.

For a Captain, membership dues have dropped from over £96.00 monthly to £10.76!!

Many pilots have viewed BALPA as being too sycophantic in its dealings with Walsh and want better representation. One Captain told me how he admired the way that the cabin crew are standing up to BA and its imposition.

Dont' believe what you read on PPRUNE, the pilots in BA are split.

This is fairly typical of the fantasy posts that our cabin crew slavishly digest and believe. I'm sure Big Brutha will be along shortly to tell us how many members have actually left. I'm guessing it'll be single figures, if any at all.

[henkybaby]

Oh, nowadays I have to add:

"I am a Dutch passenger. We are not just there for your to serve but also to protect your safety!"

:)

[pvmw]

MissM said;
Don't worry because I have been saving money since my very first month with BA and would be able to support myself for a long time.

That explains a lot. You'll be all right, and stuff all your fellow workers who will be out of a job, unemployable and without all your wealth and resources. There was a film starring Peter Sellars - it was called "I'm all right Jack" - appropriate.

Contemptible?? That is an understatement.

[winstonsmith]

Let's face it - MissM is an old contract stewardess - if she had been full-time her basic salary would have been £28.000 - she's 75% so do your maths - why would she quit voluntarily?

[Albert Salmon]

Watersidewonker

You are so self-absorbed that clearly you have not taken the trouble to have even glanced at my previous messages. It's not difficult to do, you know: all you need is to click on my name to the left of this message.

If you had done so, you would know that I am not a BASSA member. I never was and I never will be.

In fact, I am a long suffering, long-haul J-class passenger. You must know who we are, because it is us, the regular travellers, who pay your wages.

Actually, the truth is that I was a regular punter - until you and your BASSA cronies decided on this Gotterdammerung of a strike.

Because of your union's crass stupidity, coupled with its leaders' apparent inability to organise a pass-up in a duty-free trolley I, and many other (similarly non-BASSA type) passengers will no longer take the risk of flying with an airline where the inmates seem to think they can take over the asylum.

So, Watersidewonker, thanks to you and your pals the only cheque I shall hand over - in the context of this thread - is the cheque not being written in favour of British Airways. Any other carrier - yes.

My company's travel budget (last year's spend with BA alone was a quarter of a million pounds) will now go to other carriers but NOT to British Airways.

This evening I flew from JER to LGW with flyBE. Unlike BA, they do not have a separate business class, but they got me into London without any threats of industrial action and no long, sullen, faces as I all too often get on my regular LHR-LAX trips with BA.

But that won't happen again - ever. My firm will not use your unreliable and downright unpleasant company any more. I am fed up with being regarded during my journeys as a nuisance that hampers you and your bolshie colleagues in the pursuance of garnering as many allowances for as little service as is humanly possible.

So, not a single farthing of my firm's money will pass to BA. That's a hell of a lot of farthings, you know, Watersidewonker - but you are clearly not worried.

And in case you had not noticed yet, Watersidewonker, I am not the only dissatisfied business traveller to have contributed to this thread.

Just wake up to the cold, hard, facts. When (not if) you lose your job you will find that having worked for British Airways will cause doors to be slammed in your face. You, and the rest of the BASSA-led group, will not be employable in any meaningful occupation ever again. No, that's not correct: perhaps you might get a job doing some menial and disgusting task that not even illegal immigrants would be ready to undertake.

And another thing: when you wrote to tell me "you are a disgrace to your fellow workers so don't try to defend yourself shame on you" you really made yourself look a total prat.

But that's par for the course for you, Watersidewonker.

And to the rest of BA's cabin crew, who have demonstrated in this thread that they cherish their jobs, and that they care for their passengers, my apologies. You do not deserve to be treated in this shameful way by your selfish and self-centred union bosses.

[midman]

Albert,

That's a valiant attempt at explaining the situation in a rational and reasoned way, but the problem with WatersideW and the rest of the Bassa lemmings is that they don't actually see themselves as part of BA.

Their allegiance, loyalty, trust and future lie with Bassa. BA are the enemy out to destroy them, and their status, and if people stop buying tickets and cause BA to fail, that's fine by them.

All that's important is that Walsh fails, and Bassa will provide for them in the future.

Don't try to think this through, logic plays no part in their fight. They are Bassa and the demise of WW and BA in its present form is their aim.

[Albert Salmon]

Salmon when you say you won't/don't fly BA anymore you are the foolish one here as BA owns a 15% stake in Flybe so money is making it's way to Villie anyway. So stick your 1/4 mil somewhere else I couldn't care less about the type of person you and your company employ it's small fry smokie. The reballot is coming and that's all that matters.


Wonker's response shows her true colours, and that is not pretty to see. Truly a credit to British Airways. HR must have been having a really sh1t day when the wonker was hired for work.

Wonker can not tell a BA passenger (now definitely an ex-passenger after that little outburst) or anyone else, for that matter, what he can or can not do with his money.

Notwithstanding your assertion that flyBE is partially owned by BA, I do not see any of their cabin crew supporting your strike, Wonker. In fact, the flyBE CC who sat opposite me on the train to London hooted with laughter at the very thought of it. So no solidarity among the workers there, it would seem.

Whether my flyBE fare goes to "Villie", as you call your Chief Executive, or to the man in the moon, does not matter in the slightest to me or any other passenger. What is important is a reliable service that can be depended upon. No more and no less.

And thank you, Wonker, for your kind permission for me to "stick my 1/4 mil somewhere else": I will and I have.

Thanks also for your caring thoughts about my staff and myself. That really is an indicator of your selfishness and lack of concern for the people who would still be flying with your employer if it were not for your obvious apathy and cynicism.

But as I wrote earlier, if my firm's money, rolled up with all the other customers Wonker has p1ssed off, does not suit her, so be it. Some other flight attendant, in some other air carrier, will have his/her job security assured, while Wonker will sit at home, penniless, unemployable, and drawing state benefits.

Shame about the "reballot", Wonker. But if your BASSA saviours had got it right in the first place there would be no need for a "reballot" now. But it's your subscriptions to BASSA that will pay BA's legal costs - not BA's profits derived from my fares.

Given Wonker's shameful response, it really is a pity that - under the rules of this forum - she cannot be publicly identified. The poisonous bile being emitted by this person is a disgrace to her employer, her colleagues - and also to BASSA.

[LD12986]

Given Wonker's shameful response, it really is a pity that - under the rules of this forum - she cannot be publicly identified. The poisonous bile being emitted by this person is a disgrace to her employer, her colleagues - and also to BASSA.

I've not checked the rules of the forum, but is this right?

If a BA employee is bringing the company into disrepute on this forum, can't BA force disclosure of the poster's identity to pursue appropriate action?

[Dairyground]

Henkybaby in post #1053 says:


Ok, but isn't that exactly the point? BASSA can only object to BA imposing changes unilaterally if they should legally be the bilateral party. BASSA cannot object to BA switching banks or issuing extra shares now, can it?

By making this about due process (e.g. objecting to BA imposing changes they should have been involved in) they shot themselves in the foot if the judge says "but dear BASSA, you don't need to agree to these changes! Off you go!". How can they still strike if the judge deems them outside of their influence?

So then they have to change the reason for the strike. It is no longer about the way of imposing the changes but about the changes themselves.

As I understand it, no matter how they spun it in the media, the legal motivation for the strike was not the changes themselves, or am I wrong?


I believe that he is wrong.

My understanding is that certain named individuals, with the backing of BASSA, sought an injunction that would place BA in contempt of court if it imposed cabin crew complement reductions. The basis of the claim is that BA is contractually bound to maintain the cabin crew strength at certain levels, above the numbers prescribed by the CAA. The BA case appears to be that the agreement with BASSA is not part of any cabin crew contract of employment. This case is not yet decided, but will come to court in February.

After the initial hearing on the first case, BA imposed the reduced cabin crew numbers. BASSA thereupon initiated a ballot among its members requesting approval of industrial action (generally accepted as being a strike). However, they provided ballot papers to members who were not affected by the changes, principally members who would have left the employment of BA by the time any resulting action began, and BASSA officials encouraged such members to vote.

Whilst possibly not illegal under criminal law, the ballot, because of the inclusion of ineligible members, fell foul of (civil) labour relations law. Any instruction to BASSA members (or other Unite members) to strike would not have been protected by the law, and thus rendered the union liable to action by BA for inducing breach of contract. Hence the second court case, won by BA.

If the court decides the first action in BA's favour, declaring that cabin crew complements are not a contractual matter, it would still be open to BASSA to demand that contracts are amended to include them, and, subject to due process, take strike action in support of that demand. Similarly for any other changes or requested changes to contracts. But by then, BA might be sufficiently disenchanted with BASSA to send out those 90-day notices.

A final thought - since Gatwick CC and Heathrow CC are on different contracts, would a ballot about an imposition that affected only Heathrow staff be valid if it included Gatwick staff?

[SlideBustle]

Albert Salmon,

As BA crew myself, can I just on behalf of the rest of us say sorry! VV can apologise his/herself. I sincerely hope he does not speak like that to our customers on the aircraft. Mind you, even if he doesn't he still obviously has a poor attitude to customer service. VV you should be ashamed of that post! BASSA bang on about having the ''best crew ever'' and how we are better because we pay more, ''pay peanuts get monkeys'' - oh dear VV, are you being paid peanuts as, using BASSA logic you must be. By the way I hate that saying, as I have flown many airlines VS charter etc and they all have good and bad like BA and paid less. I agree we DO have some of the most professional crew who do make BA what they are, please do not be put off Albert Salmon. Just the vocal minority of militants are abit toxic that is all! Even many of the crew who voted Yes are very good.... let's hope we can rid BA of this evil attitude to the employer, work ethic and even worse as shown by VV towards the customer!!

Anyway MissM, VV, et al.... please please think before you vote Yes again. Where will BA be after a strike??? What do you hope to achieve. Oh yes I forgot you are willing to strike 'til BA shuts. Anyone that says that really, really needs to leave or get the sack!! Truly, truly disgusting attitude to say the least! Wake up please!

The company are asking us to work harder, and introduce a New Fleet.... that could be avoided by changing our scheduling agreement in addition to our new crew complements. Don't want that? Oh well New Fleet will have to be brought in then. Sorry that is the simple reality. Air travel has changed dramatically, it is not the 1970s anymore I'm afraid. We are lucky really T&Cs were not changed years ago! Good we managed to go this far on these terms but change comes.... With NF we will still be a good employer. Current crew will not be effected. OK the starvation of work is an issue but negotiate to protect that.... Or if you still are worried negotiate ways of us working harder, Fixed Links et al, things have to change and that includes you Liza N Malone yes you will have to go on a trolley.... the red lev erbrakes the trolley, the green releases the brake :}

Get real.... times are a changing. Like I have said before I don't advocate everyone being forced on NF whether eventual or immediate, but guess what? Because of the unions stubborness and resistance to change and accept BAs reasonable proposals, just negotiate them properly, we may have to with 90 days notice!! It might be the only way for BA to survive! There are many new recruits ready to take your place on NF which probably still will have some better T&Cs than some airlines! BA only wanted New Fleet to be for new crew and voluntarily for current crew if we found it attractive like for promotion etc. Quite a few Main crew whether you like it or not would be willing to go for promotion on NF... I would if it didn't disadvantage me financially. I am young and have 40 yrs left so what would I do.... never get promotion because I may be regarded a scab otherwise. NF may be my only avenue for promotion which as I am passionate about BA, customer service, standards and safety I would really like. I know BASSA keep on about the ''no promotion ever again'' mantra which does worry me - but as some sensible crew have pointed out they will either a) need SCCMs on NF and if NF was negotiated away, on current fleets do you HONESTLY think they will never need new psrs/csds?? They may have a surplus now, but when we return to growth, the a380/787 and 777-300 comes in and there is attrition there is bound to be promotion. Anyway as I have said, New Fleet could be pushed away if only the union could realise things on current fleets can be changed.... Now ALL of us including us dedicated staff could have to be FORCED on NF terms, it may be the only way the company survives, as nearly a year has gone by since the talks and the company has lost more money! BA is a business not some untouchable, unsinkable entity, so to play around and f around with the company like BASSA are doing is wrong so wrong!

Oh, and anyone willing to strike 'til BA shuts/goes bust and you see mean little WW out of work - get in the real world sharpish! It's selfish, stupid and blinkered! If you don't want to work harder leave! You have not so far been asked to take a pay cut! As for NF starving us of work it is a worry but one BF has said he will be willing to negotiate ways to protect us current crew. To say you will strike 'til BA shuts is selfish, pure selfishness and I hope you guys will be the worst off on the dole and will be forever unemployable IF the worst came! Harsh but sometimes you need to be harsh to get people to WAKE UP!

[Bellerophon]

henkybaby

...BASSA can only object to BA imposing changes unilaterally if they should legally be the bilateral party...

BASSA can object to anything it doesn’t like! If BASSA wishes to ballot its members for industrial action in pursuit of that objection, then BASSA members balloted must be involved in a legitimate Trade Dispute with BA.

That is all.

There is no requirement for that Trade Dispute to be a contractual dispute. It could be a dispute about something very trivial. Provided it is a legitimate Trade Dispute, BASSA may ballot its members for Industrial Action over it.


...By making this about due process (e.g. objecting to BA imposing changes they should have been involved in) they shot themselves in the foot if the judge says "but dear BASSA, you don't need to agree to these changes! Off you go!"...

...How can they still strike if the judge deems them outside of their influence?...

BASSA, presumably, are hoping for a ruling in their favour and a quick legal victory over BA, but the court ruling will only be on the narrow point of contractual v non-contractual change.

If the Judge should rule in favour of BASSA, that the imposed changes were contractual and that therefore there was a legal obligation on BA to negotiate the changes with BASSA, then BASSA will have won, as BA will then be obliged to negotiate with BASSA.

If the Judge should rule in favour of BA, that the imposed changes were non-contractual and that therefore there was no legal obligation on BA to negotiate the changes with BASSA, then BASSA will have lost and will receive no help from the court. As you put it, “Off you go BASSA”.

However, whilst BASSA, will have lost the legal argument, on this narrow point, they will still be free to pursue their aims by industrial action, and the court decision will not prevent them from doing so. Whether BASSA would be wise to do so, I don't feel the need to comment on, as other posters have already done so in abundance.

I suspect BASSA will be much more careful about what questions it asks, and which members it ballots, in its next ballot than it was in the last one!


Best Regards

Bellerophon

[Desertia]

MissM,

Amazingly, you have yet to comment on the simple facts I posted in #981. Perhaps you missed that post; there is a fair amount of traffic on this thread.

Perhaps I can reiterate so that you don't have to scroll back.

In answer to your question, BASSA have consistently lied (and are still lying) to their members (See #981 for details).

Would you like to ask any more questions?

Honestly, I'll do my best to answer each and every one.

Regards,
D

[malcolmf]

Another possibility?
Derecognition owing to lack of support - worker application

A worker (or workers) from the bargaining unit can apply to the CAC for derecognition - but only where no such similar application has been made in the past three years.
If the CAC accepts the application as valid, it will try to help the workers, union and employer reach an agreement on derecognition.
If an agreement is not reached, the CAC will arrange a secret ballot to test worker support for derecognition.
However, it will do this only if it believes that:

at least 10 per cent of the workers in the bargaining unit favour derecognition, and
a majority of the workers in the bargaining unit are likely to favour derecognition
A union will be derecognised as a result of the ballot if a majority of those voting and at least 40 per cent of those entitled to vote favour derecognition.

[TorC]

Another possibility?

Possibly! Although, like all things, never quite as simple as it may appear.

As far as I can tell, the full info is here:

CAC - Schedule A1 (Part 4 & 5) (http://www.cac.gov.uk/index.aspx?articleid=2334)

then click on Guide to Parties (309kb) and scroll down to page 21;

Section 3 – Part IV of the Schedule

Worker (or workers) wants to end the bargaining arrangements on the grounds that the arrangements no longer have the support of the bargaining unit.

[TorC]

More on Derecognition:

It seems from here: Statutory derecognition of a trade union | Business Link (http://www.businesslink.gov.uk/bdotg/action/detail?type=RESOURCES&itemId=1074439033) that we'd first have to establish how it was that unite/bassa/cc89 came to be "recognised" in the first place. Was it "Voluntary Recognition" or "Statutory Recognition" by BA of unite/bassa/cc89?

[MrBunker]

Maybe it's the new year for me, I don't truly know but I rather believe now that a hardcore of belligerent, unwilling, ungrateful individuals may well spell the demise of our company in order to prove a point that they, and only they, believe in.

I'm not quite sure why a tiny number of posters are regurgitating the same old negative spin. Dropping the odd phrase of militants & the miners & Arthur Scargill, is a bit below the belt. All crew are working class mothers, fathers, partners, single, dedicated to doing a fine job, & wanting to fight to retain their jobs. shock, horror, how very dare they stand up for what is theirs.

No point in getting your knickers in a twist. It's quite simple. Vote Yes. All crew have to worry about is picking up a pen, putting a cross in the YES box, & hey presto, the rest will sort itself out beautifully.

KEEP CALM, CARRY ON. Just vote YES.

My bold I must add.

Oh no, I copied from CrewForum again. Best send my name to Lizanne so she can excoriate me with her spittle-laden rhetoric.

Oh, and apparently, a no vote, or not voting is a wasted vote. Nothing like a democracy is there? Quite literally.

I genuinely fear we're buggered, and I make no apology for the language.

MrB

[Meal Chucker]

MrBunker

I'm not quite sure why a tiny number of posters are regurgitating the same old negative spin. Dropping the odd phrase of militants & the miners & Arthur Scargill, is a bit below the belt. All crew are working class mothers, fathers, partners, single, dedicated to doing a fine job, & wanting to fight to retain their jobs. shock, horror, how very dare they stand up for what is theirs.

No point in getting your knickers in a twist. It's quite simple. Vote Yes. All crew have to worry about is picking up a pen, putting a cross in the YES box, & hey presto, the rest will sort itself out beautifully.

KEEP CALM, CARRY ON. Just vote YES. .

Strange why you highlighted this individuals post.

I had the pleasure of flying with this poster just after the first ballot was issued, on this particular flight there were a few very active CF members (funny old thing!). They terrorised two of the other crew to such an extent that the Captain thought it necessary to contact London.

Lovely person when alone, but nasty and vile when with fellow CF members.

[MrBunker]

Meal Chucker,

I'm not entirely surprised. That place is a febrile, rotten and hate-filled environment.

[cessnapete]

If MissM is a long serving old contract cc( should be a Purser with her years of service) she is earning in excess of £40,000 pa pro rata for 75%.
Info from colleagues wife, her payslips over last 12 months ,BA purser WW Lhr.

[Jockster]

Tomorrow or possibly tuesday for the announcement of 90 day termination of all CC contracts - at last!

[overstress]

Have you got good sources for that one, Jockster?

[Meal Chucker]

Tomorrow or possibly tuesday for the announcement of 90 day termination of all CC contracts - at last!

Where has this come from Jockster? (or are you having a watersidewonker moment!!)

Oops crossed with overstress!

[Tiramisu]

Jockster
Tomorrow or possibly tuesday for the announcement of 90 day termination of all CC contracts - at last!


Maybe Jockster is just trying to rattle one or two individual's cage, ie VV or Miss M?;)

[TorC]

Tomorrow or possibly tuesday for the announcement of 90 day termination of all CC contracts - at last!

It wouldn't surprise me. Can't see any reason for BA to put-up with this union-led, destructive lunacy any longer. As much as it'd impact me personally, I'd rather deal with something concrete, and get on with my life, than have to deal with yet more uncertainty. I just hope that wheat and chaff would be sorted in the process.

[overstress]

Has VV gone quiet because he has discovered that BA's legal dept use archiving software to automatically save postings made to a forum? And even if postings are amended or deleted the original will still be kept?

And perhaps he has realised that using a pseudonym on a forum doesn't give an individual carte blanche to flout one's employment contract (bringing employer into disrepute)?

It would be obvious to anyone who studied the last BA v BASSA High Court report that BA have such access to forums...

[overstress]

sww: welcome to PPRuNe, very brave/foolish of you to advise BA's customers to look elsewhere if you are in fact a BA employee...

From what you write I can see that you have swallowed the BASSA line very thoroughly..

[Tiramisu]

Tomorrow or possibly tuesday for the announcement of 90 day termination of all CC contracts - at last! It wouldn't surprise me. Can't see any reason for BA to put-up with this union-led, destructive lunacy any longer. As much as it'd impact me personally, I'd rather deal with something concrete, and get on with my life, than have to deal with yet more uncertainty. I just hope that wheat and chaff would be sorted in the process.


Same here TorC, and it would be what's needed to sort the reckless BASSA individuals once and for all. Yes, it would impact us, but we're prepared to accept that change is needed for BA to survive.

[GearUp CheerUp]

Its remarkable - uncanny really, how certain types of posters on here display certain charateristics with unerring accuracy.

Those posters who regurgitate the BASSA rhetoric so clearly display their limited intelligence in so many ways. Their posts display their obvious inability to think for themselves, to reason what the outcome of damaging industrial action (or the threat of it) might be to BA and thus to themselves.

They tend to write in one long paragraph, devoid of any punctuation, frequently confusing "there" with "their" and "theyre", "your" and "you're" and usually not knowing the difference between "loosing" and "losing".

Quite an interesting study really.

[sillywillywalsh]

With a heavy heart as i said i am not a unionist but dirty tricks are alive and well at Waterside.