BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions

[Ancient Observer]

There have recently been some very thoughtful posts, so I thought I'd add my comments.

One of the frustrations as a by-stander in this dispute is that many staff's attitudes at BA appear not to have changed much since they were in the Civil Service.
I worked in manufacturing for quite a while before I joined Aviation, - starting in Merseyside in the 70's. Back in the 70's it sometimes appeared that the TUs had most (but never all) of the power. As with a ball of string, they incrementally took more power from the managers/owners. We often wondered when we could get control of the ball of string!!.

-Paxboy - it's more like a ball of string, and who has control of it, than a pendulum.

Over time, we learnt that by and large, managers got the TUs that they deserved, and many in manufacturing began improving their managers, by both removing the bad ones and properly training their replacements.
Better techniques were introduced to both manage better technically, (MRP processes, Quality, Customer Focus and so on), AND to manage the people better. Manuf did stuff like PPF and STUCK with it.

So the REAL improvement was not a reduction in the TUs power base, but a massive improvement in the managers, and how they managed people. The TUs became less and less relevant to their members' lives, but they satyed as members for "insurance" purposes.

Managers began to manage folk effectively - and "firmly but fairly". For instance, BA's lack of control of sickness absence in the CC and in the Check-in desks has been non-existent until Willy came along.

Oldflyboy - until the last couple of years, BA has been completely unable to effectively man its CC berths as they had zero control of sickness. All they did was over-man the operation to compensate for outrageously high sickness rates. They had NO idea how to deal with Europe's 900 hour limit for CC.

These sorts of issues were resolved in most of manufacturing during the 80's and 90's.

No matter what BA do with TU facilities, and all that stuff, they will continue to have Bassa-type TU represntation until BA make a quantum leap in how their CC are managed.

If I were in Willy's shoes, I would want a complete and rigorous clear-out and/or re-training of those who can change, of the managers who've managed CC over the last 20 years.

Trublue - there will be no "sea-change" in BA IR until there is substantial manager-change, otherwise the old ways will quickly creep back in.

Stoic/Call100 - There are at least 4 camps in Unite. It makes Willy's task tough.
First of all, Mr. £200k+ Simpson and Mr Woodley hate each other. That's 2 camps. Secondly, Mc "I was never a "member" of Militant Tendency" Whatever is seeking re-election. That's the third camp. (He's the torchbearer for the "Broad Left" campaign, which includes the Militant tendency, Socialist Worker and etc camps).
The fouth camp is the local branch - and of course, that itself is split in two, with Amicus reps still hating the Bassa shower.
A couple of friends of mine are National Officers in the "fifth" camp in Unite - who are simply worried about the impact of the call for £700k on their membership numbers. Their members are more in the North than the South, and they regard the BA CC as very posh, very rich Southerners. Why should their branches cough up? (The Branches will cough up because the branches are mainly run by the "Broad Left".

Time to change the managers!!!

[Mariner9]

BASSA will not be able to put up any meaningful resistance to this as it has been proven quite convincingly that only a very small percentage of the work force support them.

Don't think its quite so simple GW.

BASSA's missives to date all carry the same story, namely the strikes have cost BA millions, CC crossing picket lines only coz they're being bullied, its only a matter of time before WW caves in or is booted out by the board, ST will be reinstated etc etc :hmm:

Human nature tends to give greater credence to "information" which agrees with and/or supports one's point of view. Conversly there would be a natural distrust of "information" supporting any contrary view.

I therefore expect many BASSA reps, supporters etc actually believe their own propaganda. The "20 jets at Cardiff" story is a good case in point -surely nobody in their right mind would attempt to peddle that story in an attempt to garner support when it was so easily disprovable. I suspect that rumour probably started with 1 BASSA member saying that's what BA would probably do and a couple of Chinese whispers later it was taken as "fact" and triumphantly announced to the media.

It is possible therefore that BASSA truly believe that the ball is firmly in WW's court and its up to him to make the next move. If so, they'll likely have a long wait....

[Global Warrior]

BASSA's missives to date all carry the same story, namely the strikes have cost BA millions, CC crossing picket lines only coz they're being bullied, its only a matter of time before WW caves in or is booted out by the board, ST will be reinstated etc etc

You make a very interesting point......... with reference to your quote above, maybe the whole point and certainly the direction i meant to go in is how many people actually believe what BASSA are pedalling. From reading the other thread, but not contributing to it, so not getting an answer directly, it does seem as though there are disillusioned BASSA members as well as disillusioned UNITE members.

The more militant members will believe that Arthur Scargill is about to team up with Derek Hatton and between them find a way to bring the airline to its knees and then BASSA will have taught everyone a lesson!!!!!

The reality, IMHO is very different. WW does not have to do anything. He has already said that he wants to deal with UNITE as the official representative of the CC. My feeling, (and wish) and you are right i might be totally wrong, is that BASSA is weakened because it will make BA a much better airline. Not because of the lack of representation of the CC but because the airline will not have to deal so much with the Militant element anymore.

The comerarderie and the good will shown by the CC during the strike will probably continue for a while and the only way the militant element can ruin it is through intimidation which will get those perpetrators fired.

Several people posting on both threads have mentioned about surly CC but the strike may just have put people in a better frame of mind and that hopefully will make the company a better one and then fans of the product, like myself, will see an even better product.

[MPN11]

I will not add hypothesis to hypothesis ... I guess we'll all have to wait and see what happens.

WW does not have to do anything. He has already said that he wants to deal with UNITE as the official representative of the CC. My feeling, (and wish) and you are right i might be totally wrong, is that BASSA is weakened because it will make BA a much better airline. Not because of the lack of representation of the CC but because the airline will not have to deal so much with the Militant element anymore.

I hope Global Warrior's perspective is correct - one thing is abundantly clear from this and other Forums and Boards: things simply HAVE to change. The good people of BA will be a major force in achieving that ... the baying hordes of BASSA certainly won't.

FLY BA

[Chuchinchow]

, how much actually gets to BASSA senior staff?

Every single letter of each word in all the sentences of each message on this website is anxiously pored over and analysed by BASSA bigwigs.

It's the only method at their disposal to obtained unbiassed information on what crew, customers and every other interested party thinks.

Apart from LalaLizanne Homalone, of course; nothing penetrates into her cranium: only what she wants to read.

[Chuchinchow]

are as much in the dark of the inner workings

I was taught to be cautious, West Lake! ;)

[MPN11]

Tsk tsk, CCC ... that's "biased". :cool:

But I would agree ... there are undoubtedly staff at BA exploring the various Forums, and recording the 'inappropriate comments', and identifying the subscribers. I doubt that WW hadn't planned that particular angle.

Perhaps that's why the CC Thread now lacks the "balanced input" of those heroic strike supporters we knew - otherwise known as 'keeping your head down when the sh1t hits the fan'. Belated Union advice to the 'militant few', perhaps?

Have a good weekend. :ok:

[Stoic]

Act against PPRuNE!
Watch out PPRuNe! The utterly barking BA cabin crew have decided enough is enough and they're going to take this site down - by writing to the TUC!!:ugh:

Be afraid, be very afraid!!

[PAXboy]

Ancient ObserverPaxboy - it's more like a ball of string, and who has control of it, than a pendulum.
Good analogy.

One of the frustrations as a by-stander in this dispute is that many staff's attitudes at BA appear not to have changed much since they were in the Civil Service.
Ah, I know what you mean. Twenty years after the privatisation of British Telecom - there were still some old thinkers in there (not necessarily 'old' people!) who thought that BT deserved to get the business - because they were BT. Corporate culture does not change quickly.

Over time, we learnt that by and large, managers got the TUs that they deserved, and many in manufacturing began improving their managers, by both removing the bad ones and properly training their replacements.
Yes, I agree 100%.

Only once did I see it reported that Thatcher complained about weak British mgmt.

[call100]

Act against PPRuNE!
Watch out PPRuNe! The utterly barking BA cabin crew have decided enough is enough and they're going to take this site down - by writing to the TUC!!:ugh:

Be afraid, be very afraid!!

Well that's going to be acted on really quickly!!!

[Boy In Blue]

Just browsing an article on the strike and I was struck by the big differences there appear to be in the types of crew on strike.

BA Unite strikes: Willie Walsh vows to win war of attrition | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1259684/BA-Unite-strikes-Willie-Walsh-vows-win-war-attrition.html)

1. Piccy of the Bath Rd demonstrators. Not sure how many are actually BA CC or just rent a mob. Still the whole episode showed a very militant and aggressive side and switched off a lot of public support.

2. Piccy of the smiling girl with the 'Time for the snip Willie' plackard. Happy, making her point in a humerous and non offensive way. If Bassa were more like her they may have stood a chance.

3. Piccy of the mum and her kid. Im afraid designer jeans, timberland boots, sunglasses perched on the head and the ever so precious tiara will not be going down well with Unite union members, in hard factory jobs, who are now being asked to dig deep and cover her wages.

A strange strike indeed.

[Basil]

Piccy of the mum and her kid.
Anyone who takes children, let alone babies, on a picket line or demo is clearly stupid or has little regard for the safety of their offspring.

[Landroger]

Get Smart has just posted the text of 'A Report from your Reps' from the BASSA camp, which reveals a little of what is going on behind the scenes. Most interestingly it makes clear that BA's strictures on Reps working within BA premises is causing them difficulties and worse, the Reps themselves are being rostered to fly.

Derostering is not being permitted, as in the past, and it is this that is causing the most disruption among union members. One wonders if the deafening silence from BASSA will lead a few more people to read and listen to what BA are actually saying? I am not sufficiently familiar with the various organisational structures, but it seemed to me that the missive offered some Rep' emergency mobile numbers for only LHR crews - LGW are on their own?

One paragraph I think, absolutely typified the sort of BASSA statement that has virtually brought about this dispute. The completely baseless, unverifyable yahoo insult to WW that has mesmerised cabin crews and made them listen and believe anything and everything that BASSA tells them and totally ignore anything that BA says.

Many crew have been asking us if there is any truth in the rumour that the strike breakers will be first on to any New Fleet. Obviously with no meetings this is currently just a rumour. "Honest" Bill is on record as
saying no one will be forced onto New Fleet. With his track record since
arriving as head of IFCE, expect postings in weeks!


Have Bill Francis or Willie Walsh been found (and documented) to have lied or even been 'economical with the truth' when making any announcement or report? Do they have the slightest evidence anywhere, at any time? If you say that sort of thing to an adoring and largely unquestioning audience, what they think is exactly what you want them to think. Doing this should be actionable, because it causes strikes.

Roger.

[call100]

Have Bill Francis or Willie Walsh been found (and documented) to have lied or even been 'economical with the truth' when making any announcement or report? Do they have the slightest evidence anywhere, at any time? If you say that sort of thing to an adoring and largely unquestioning audience, what they think is exactly what you want them to think. Doing this should be actionable, because it causes strikes.

Roger.
Well to be fair. WW said that a meeting had been arranged with ACAS and Unite did not turn up....That was a fabrication that ACAS took him to task on. So the answer to your question is yes. As to anything else he/they have said I don't know how much is truth and how much is spin. I think it will all come out some time after the dispute. I'm sure someone is gagging to write the book.
I gave up thinking that either side was being entirely truthful a long time ago. Unfortunately that's one of the downsides of conducting the dispute in the press.....

[Landroger]

I'm sure someone is gagging to write the book.
I gave up thinking that either side was being entirely truthful a long time ago. Unfortunately that's one of the downsides of conducting the dispute in the press.....

Oh yes, I had forgotten that one C100, but in the circumstances of the time, I suspect the ACAS thing fell within the 'cockup theory', rather than actual fabrication. Everything else that happened at the time made fabricating a story utterly pointless for WW to try.

As for the book, I might retire and do exactly that! It is a fascinating story although, I have to say, it hasn't really been conducted in the press. Of course it has grabbed headlines -'12 days of christmas' and 'cabin crew walk out' and many others recently - but that has only really been since christmas. All the origins and escalation of the dispute have carried on by internal communications and meetings. And the way forums have worked has, I suspect, had a far greater influence on how the whole issue has developed, than the media.

In all of what has become public on this forum, I'm not sure that there is much balance between the two sides, in the ratio of verifyable fact versus complete bo11ocks spouted to their adherents and the public. I would think even the most partisan reader would have to admit BASSA have been way out in the lead with that particular acheivement - one of their few.

Roger.

[call100]

They lost my support when a 12 week strike was called in the first instance...Having been involved in negotiating and consequently the odd dispute for many years, I considered that to be suicide and showed an acute lack of any strategy and a disregard for the welfare of the members.
To be honest I dread the outcome of the dispute...It could have far reaching consequences to the UK workforce, that I fear will result in many disputes that would have otherwise not happened.

[RTR]

On the question of who has the upper hand I think that BA win hands down! Insofar that Unite and BASSA drifted apart on Sunday and created a silence that was deafening, and then BASSA's low grade straw grasping tactics with lies and half truths did themselves no favours. The reps could have demonstrated that they would suffer the same as those who will not be able work, by not accepting work themselves. Never! They would not do that. All they have done is given some vague instructions on how to claim some money from the union. Hypocrites!

The loose ends need tying up now but I fear that BASSA have shot their bolt. How is Liz Malone going to commute back and forth to LAX? Not only with a bad foot but no ST. Unite will act after Easter and I would expect that a few docs will be torn up.

[MPN11]

I would guess that next week, once everyone in the big leather chairs has had a few days off, that there might be a few 'quiet and polite' telephone calls.

This isn't going anywhere, for anyone's benefit. It isn't like "The Pit's shut down" or "The Nation is paralysed", because BA is still operating. OK, a lot of pax are pi66ed off, and some have possibly left BA never to return. But BA is flying, and so are a very large %ge the pax that pay for it.

The strikers are dancing at Bedfont, and screaming from buses, but that achieves absolutely NOTHING. Do those performance artists not notice that BA is doing quite well without them? or even better?

All that remains is the exit strategy, for both BA and Unite. I would suspect that BASSa will be sidelined, by a diktat from high up in the Labour Party to Unite. How far WW is prepared to concede will be the interesting factor - I doubt he will go back on his word on ST, for a start, regardless of how much additional grief that may cause.

So the BASSA mob at Bedfont might well end up baying at the moon for all the good it will do them - they either go back to work or, from what I've read on the CC Threads from their 'colleagues', preferably not.

I'm standing by for something called "Breaking News" on Thursday.

[Chuchinchow]

How is Liz Malone going to commute back and forth to LAX?

In the immortal words of Rhett Butler, in "Gone With the Wind":

"Frankly, my dear, I couldn't give a damn."

And nor could anybody else in BA (except Toxic Liz herself, perhaps).

[Boy In Blue]

You are right. As I posted on here a while ago the BA CEO has already won this one. The only question now is how much he is preapred to negotiate a return v letting Bassa whither on the vine. The only reason he will not destroy Bassa is if the Govt broker a deal with Unite and he has to cut them ie Unite not bassa, a little slack. I have no place taking sides in this dispute but i have to say WW has put on a great show and come across very well. I travelled on a BA LH flight during a strike day and the atmosphere was great. I feel really sorry for the decent CC who fell for the Bassa line. is the head of this Union really living in LAX? Unbelieveable.

[MPN11]

@ CCC ... Liz-Anne wither on the vine? I would suspect [uncharitably] that she has played that 'recovering from osteoporosis' card to the hilt, whilst extracting BASSA expenses at £100 a day for writing scribble on their website. Her days must be numbered - you can only play the same 'sickness card' for so long.
IMO, of course, E&OE, happy to be corrected with facts from her CA medicos.

@ BIB ... we shall have to wait and see. There is no doubt that WW [and his staff, who did much of the hard work] planned this incredibly complex counter-campaign with commendable efficiency. As to the BA CC involved - sadly they sow what they reap. A few hundred militants? versus a huge majority of honest, hard-working CC? I just hope that WW's end-game includes rewards as well as penalties, and I'm sure it will. This has been pre-planned to ensure BA's survival and that means that the loyal CC HAVE to be part of the package..

[Lou Scannon]

Sorry if this has already been answered, but now that the dust has settled, is there a list of which top BASSA negotiators stood by their team and went on strike for any of the withdrawal days?

In other words, how many of the BASSA team have now had pay docked and permanently lost their Staff Travel?

Surely they couldn't all have avoided standing in line with their members?

[RTR]

That would surely be good to see!

BA from the days of Miles Thomas, King, Marshall, Ayling and the 'Concorde killer' Eddington have all had a what can only be termed a very poor attempt to sort BA. It didn't work. Each of them let the unions dictate. Bad strategy however you look at it. Never enough cutting of numbers, which was desperately required. It is needed now and WW knows it. He is a clever man, regardless of what Liz, Tony or Len think. They are out of their depth and they know that WW will do what he has to do to "save this airline!" The days of diktats from the unions is over. He will probably allow the bare bones but I suspect he will lay down the rules but only on his terms - with perhaps a few crumbs.

Bassa and Unite dug this pit and as they days go by they will find the sides getting very slippery. As someone said - you reap what you sow.

The unions spin on the city was ill judged and very mis-understood. What they should recognize is that people are happy to invest in BA now and have confidence in the CEO. Helluva an incentive that!

The unions will NEVER break the will of WW - NEVER. Get used to it.

[Winch-control]

:ok:Can any one explain where the extra 10% comes from, ie BA rate plus 10%. Why do the CC at BA deserve this? surely pay base rate, there are thousands out there ready to jump into the BA CC shoes, probably at Market less 10%!, but then I did say BA = Market rate...

[slf22]

Well to be fair. WW said that a meeting had been arranged with ACAS and Unite did not turn up....That was a fabrication that ACAS took him to task on. So the answer to your question is yes.

Did ACAS actually come out and say no such meeting existed? I know the Union claimed this but I don't recall ACAS actually confirming it. I remember them taking Walsh to task over the fact he was talking about ACAS meetings outside of ACAS meetings. They also told the Union off for this as well.

[MPN11]

@ WinchControl .... My guess is that the 10% extra reflects the need for BA to provide a premium product [ie First and Club], thus demanding a higher level of customer service/training than would be typically be associated with LoCo CC who are being paid "the average".

Hopefully someone who actually knows something will be along later! ;)

[call100]

Did ACAS actually come out and say no such meeting existed? I know the Union claimed this but I don't recall ACAS actually confirming it. I remember them taking Walsh to task over the fact he was talking about ACAS meetings outside of ACAS meetings. They also told the Union off for this as well.
No, they have not publicly made any statements to the press. They wouldn't do that. I know from a source close to ACAS that this was the case. I was told this before I read anything from the Union. To be fair I didn't expect the Union to say anything other than they had not arranged a meeting, I don't think they should have mentioned anything about ACAS not being happy. Also note that WW did not make any counter claim.
It may have been a genuine misunderstanding, these things happen, but, we will never know one way or the other.
I hope that both sides will give ACAS another go. I have always found them to be helpful in clearing the waters and enabling a solution that does not leave a nasty taste in the mouth and enables both sides to continue working in the right atmosphere.
I really hope that over the next week things begin to cool and talks get under way, I don't believe the dispute is showing either side in a good light.

The unions will NEVER break the will of WW - NEVER. Get used to it.I notice that BASSA style shouts are not confined to one side. Triumphalist mantra emanates from both sides of the fence.....Never helpful.

[oggers]

Last week we had the Guardian letter from 95 academics with the false statement about ‘WW rejecting Unite's acceptance of BA's previous offer’, which was quietly amended a day or so after initial publication.

Now the Guardian has had to - again rather quietly - make a correction and apology to a Prof Frank Burchill, whom they accused of producing a “comprehensive guide to undermining Bassa's current leadership”. The allegation was untrue and has been removed.

guardian.co.uk | Search | Frank Burchill (http://browse.guardian.co.uk/search?search=Frank+Burchill&sitesearch-radio=guardian&go-guardian=Search)

[TruBlu123]

The e-mail posted by Birdspeed on the other thread makes for interesting reading.

The individual who wrote it is all over the place As ever in denial that what BA needs is a long term step change in its CC cost structure. A short term alleviation in the form of a temporary pay drop just does not cut it.

The rest of the post I'll leave to others to decide their response. I'm off to a dark room to calm down!
:sad::sad::sad:

[Mr Optimistic]

Yes, that does take a bit of swallowing, it has an interesting mix of self-pity and glorification. Since high speed trains are not accident free, why the disparity between train staff and airline CC ? Can't children cry and people have health issues on trains ? About the only difference I can think of is the ability to walk to the buffet in a train, so the real discriminator is the serving of refreshments. Not a very obvious basis for glamour or perks. See the RMT is now also shouting 'safety' when what is really at stake is the protection of pay and conditions. Must be catching.

[kappa]

To get this thread back on the BA CC IA matter, this was posted today on the CC thread by a BA pilot as "the latest from the chair". I wonder if he means LizAnne?

For your info since last Tuesday most BASSA reps have been spread all over the world rostered on flying duties. BA do not de-roster us any more so it is almost impossible to function efficiently. Being suspended I am virtually the only one able to conduct BASSA duties but even doing do technically contradicts the rules of my suspension. However I have chosen to press ahead and communicate with you all in my capacity as your secretary. We are doing all we can under the circumstances. We are preparing for more industrial action and hope to be able to make an announcement this week.

BA have been asked to de-roster all reps for a pensions briefing on Wednesday and afterwards the senior reps (those that can get there) will meet with Tony Woodley to agree our next steps. This is the first time we will be able to get together. I appreciate it is frustrating but we simply are not being allowed to represent you.

Since the strike many more crew have been suspended and that is something else we have to deal with. Pilots are now virtually entraping crew and any heated discussion is ending in the crew being suspended while the pilot walks free. Last night I spent much of the evening advising a WW purser who was taken off his back to back and suspended and this is not an isolated incident. This is all down to flight deck and it is no longer a small number. Frankly I am disgusted with them and will never trust them again. What this is doing to CRM is very very serious but apparently it does not seem to bother the BA management or their flight deck lackeys (I am sorry if there are any decent pilots I might have offended but not many seem to be speaking up right now and by sitting back and doing nothing you are as guilty as those doing the entraping). Many good and decent crew are now potentially facing the sack because of the shameful actions initiated by a certain captain. (We have seen his postings on the BALPA forum boasting about his arrangement with Walsh - we hope he is proud of himself).

Yes Walsh is training up volunteers, yes this is now a full assault on your jobs and yes in my opinion we should go for all out industrial action in a determined effort to bring this madman to his senses, but not everyone can see what is happening and some crew still think there are more gentler ways of resisting this dispute. Their e mails have to be answered and their worries addressed. Walsh's actions are taking us to the precipice but not everyone sees it yet. BASSA knows what needs to be done but when we do it we want all the members to be convinced there is no easier way. Quite frankly what we have now is Armageddon and it has all been caused by Walsh backed up by his pet Captain.

Please bear with us and have a little faith, as I said there will be developments this week as far as BASSA is concerned. Speaking personally I shall be pushing for an all out strike as I see no alternative now.

[Lou Scannon]

Following in the wake of other Union failures in the past perhaps Miss Malone is already considering calling some of her supposed "victims" "The Cranebank twelve" or something similar in the hope of attracting sympathy.

By the way, did you notice all the stuff in the quality Sundays about the strike?
Of course you didn't. In the eyes of the press and the public it's all over bar the final tidying up.

[Mr Optimistic]

So its 'Tony Woodley' but only 'Walsh'. No first name, no Mr. Just petty: This seems more like a football crowd chant than a discussion.

[Dawdler]

Clearly not Lizanne as: in my capacity as your secretaryI guess this is from Duncan Holley.

[Boy In Blue]

Well, heres what I posted nearly a week ago. Going by tonights postings I think I may be right...................
_____________
I would say that the Airline have won this contest hands down and they will not back down. The primary reasons for their victory is an almost complete lack of public support for the strikers. The resons being, well my view anyway:

1. Things are tough in the UK and going to get tougher. People have enough to worry about.
2. Militant Unite. Again there is no public appetite for militant unionism a the moment. Posturing talking heads who no doubt still enjoy union sponsored first class travel just dont cut it anymore.
3. The demo outside the Arora Hotel was a disgrace.
4. The head of the BASSA Union swanning it in LAX - on a sicky?
5. A well played media strategy by the BA CEO. Dignity in press conferences and not rising to the bait.

In short the BA CEO has won a massive victory. Without him BA would probably be finished. From reading this it appears he will come out with a happier company. I would also like to think that the loyalty shown by crew who worked will be recognised as the company undergoes change in the next few years.

______________
Good luck to you all, strikers and workers - as people not causes. This IA is a busted flush.

[R Knee]

Wiggy on the main thread summed it up.

N A S T Y

Not Allowed Staff Travel Yahoos

or for BASSA - Not Allowed Staff Travel YET

I am dismayed to read of the attitude towards the flight deck (from the other thread), not all of whom would have volunteered. This appears to be a clumsy diversionary tactic to gather members towards a unifying cause (since the main one appears lost). This will, IMO, further distance the public from any sympathy towards the strikers.

[Boy In Blue]

posted by R Knee - I am dismayed to read of the attitude towards the flight deck (from the other thread), not all of whom would have volunteered. This appears to be a clumsy diversionary tactic to gather members towards a unifying cause (since the main one appears lost).
______________________________________

I think you are bang on. The initial phase of IA has failed now someone has to become a scapegoat. Reading the BASSA missives it appears it will either be FD or Senior CC who worked. the only issue being, if Bassa decide to pick on both groups you might actually outnumber them.

Arthur Scargill did the same scapegoat thing, trying to blame first the Union of Democratic Mineworkers and then the Police for his defeat. In the end it was a strick dogma and a lack of public support which cost him. But thats a whole other story........ so no more on that one. I only mention it to support R Knees's thought that we are entering the end game and a return to work.

There will be some nastiness but it will subside. In the meantime I'm off to set up my ebay shop specialising in selling tamper proof tupperwear sandwich boxes for Flight Deck staff :ok:

[MPN11]

So is it end-game this coming week? Or not?

I fly BA to USA in 2 weeks, and I'm about to book for Sep as well. :ok:

I honestly don't think "BASSA United" have any substitutes to bring on to turn this game around.

I still struggle with figures, though. Out of 12,000[?] CC, how many are actually on strike? None, or virtually none, at LGW or LCY it seems. So it's realistically the "militant minority" at LHR - can anyone say how many CC that is? I've seen a figure of 3,000 strikers [the "P45 Brigade"] being covered by about 1,000 VCC ... is that where things are? Please define the numbers and %ges in relation to LHR, if you can answer ;)

FLYING BA

[jetset lady]

MPN11,

I don't think anyone can say for sure, that's the problem. No one knows how many of those that were on leave, off duty or sick would actually have gone on strike and the way the dates were organised, many crew would in between trips for both sets of dates. Co-incidence maybe? :hmm:

The figures for LGW were more or less correct from what I saw and the LCY figures were, in my eyes, company spin. The only mainline crew at LCY that can legally strike are those doing the LCY-JFK and they are in fact LGW crew! However, this may have been put out by the company to reassure those booked on CityFlyer flights.

Unfortunately, the only way we will know for sure is if we end up with a prolonged walkout. I suspect more will work than not if the past trends are anything to go by, but until it happens, I would guess few of us would be able to say one way or the other for sure. Sorry. Not a lot of help, I'm afraid.

[JackMcHammocklashing]

I have never flown BA
I tried to
I booked from Glasgow to Dubai
Previously my flight was direct from Glasgow to Dubai with Emirates, quite exceptional
Anyway this time it HAD to be BA
So it was EDI to Heathrow and Heathrow to DUBAI. It did not happen
After saving up on my (State) pension (After reaching the dizzy heights of an annual income of £16k) for a holiday of a life time (after family bereavements both of us, we needed a break to bring us both back in the world)

First I was miffed at the NON direct flight
Then Bassa cocked it up big style for us

As a poor tosser, all my previous flights apart from EMIRATES were with charter and never again Ryan Air, Easy Jet by far were the best cheap airline
Certainly not EMIRATES quality, but err I have no experience of BA and now never will

The stress and disappointment were too much to risk it again

Easy Jet are and were magnificent, Happy YOUNG crew as with EMIRATES I think they must put them to pasture at 28 :-)and BA looking at the pics take them on

To those that helped get most SLF away well done and thank you (though it did not help us)
To those that disrupted everything may you live in interesting times and reap what you sowed

Not ALL your passengers are business men, who thank you for the day off and the company pays WHATEVER huh

I only hope that those that did this to me, and have lost Staff Travel now know what it feels like to live on a wage of £16k per year and now on a state pension, To save up all year to travel on day x month x and lose it
The airfare was returned the £5k cruise was lost NON SHOW MY fault

Jack McHammocklashing

[MPN11]

@ JackMcHammocklashing ... You have my sympathy, Sir. Your message should be x-posted to "the other thread" and beyond, because some people need to be reminded of the impact their posturing is having on other people. Sadly, too many seem to regard this all as a game.

[Snas]

Easy Jet are and were magnificent, Happy YOUNG crew as with EMIRATES I think they must put them to pasture at 28 :-)and BA looking at the pics take them on

Jack

If you are suggesting that the age of BA's crew is an issue for you, then: -

I too have my issues with BA service on occasions, however to suggest that the age of the staff is an issue would seem rather unfair. My own partner, for example, I can assure you strives to provide the highest levels of service at all times, including strike dates, and in your eyes she falls the wrong side of 40 and presumably should be put out to grass in your world.

Comments such as yours are simply considered ignorant, unless you are an employer in which case these days they are illegal.

BA don't need young staff anymore than they need white, gay, Christian or whatever staff, they just need good staff, of which they have a great many – end off.

If however you were being ironic or something: -

Post better...

[Ten West]

Comments such as yours are simply considered ignorant...

Ding ding! All aboard the outrage bus! ;)

[4t2b]

Snas

Lighten up, you are too close to this dispute to be objective.

Jack was merely highlighting the apparent senior age group in the CC(with a smiley) , this same senior age group that we are assured on all the newsgroups is at the root of this dispute?

He is, like most of us here, the end user and ,IMHO, entitled to be very upset by his experience.

What the CC should be picking up on is that everyone they drive away to try out other carriers MAY not come back.

Jack's Emirates illustration is a perfect example, since flying with them, I now look at their routes/pricing before BA's and that is mainly because of the excellent Cabin Service.

[etrang]

Out of 12,000[?] CC, how many are actually on strike?

By my estimation, primarily using data in BA press releases, between 3,500 and 4,000 BASSA members have gone on strike, 4,000 to 4,500 have worked and 4,000 are unknown as they were not rostered to work on strike days. But it would be a reasonable assumption to expect the unknowns to split in similar proportions.

[Snas]

Ding ding! All aboard the outrage bus!


Yeah, I guess so. Sorry. Just got me miffed that one did.

[MPN11]

@ etrang and others ... thanks for the clues on the numbers.

Clearly there's a large element of unknowns that we know, and unknowns we don't know ..... :)

Ball-park figures = 4,000+ striking and losing ST. Amazing. :ugh:

[Mariner9]

Ball-park figures = 4,000+ striking and losing ST.

Its a pity that none of those 4000+ strikers have managed a single posting between them setting out a clear and valid intention for the strike and its desired outcome :=

Anyway, onto staff travel.
According to some recent BASSA missives, losing ST is no big deal as they are only standby tickets (though they demand ST be reinstated anyway :hmm:)

However, with 4,000+ fewer competitors for those standby tickets, and with fewer paying customers thanks to the strike, far more "actual" seats will be available, virtually guaranteeing standby ticket holders a seat on an aircraft.

BASSA have therefore managed to make the benefit more attractive than it previously was :D

[Ruthanne]

Silence is golden !!! or is it

What is the latest news if any on the next potential strikes? getting awfully near my planned reunion in Phoenix!!

[MPN11]

Just a passing observation on how I trust BA these days ....

I've been following numerous threads on PPRuNe and in other places since this all started kicking off. I've drifted [reasonably gently] through "Hang the lot of them" to "Maybe they have a point" to "BASSA madness" and an eventual understanding that there is a load of good CC out there. They care for their company, and they care for their pax ... and the VCC fall into the same category.

Having seen the various to-and-fro tussles over the last month or so, and seen though the BASSA lies, and listened to the sensible posters here and on the 'other thread' ... I have again invested in BA. I'm already booked to fly in 2 weeks anyway, but today I've also just booked LHR-IAD in Club for Sep/Oct.

FLYING BA

[Lou Scannon]

You should have waited for the special offers on club seats that always follow a BA debacle as I am doing!

...or perhaps you have BA Staff Travel!

[MPN11]

@ Lou Scannon ... VS are doing a sale at the moment [travel up to end-Sep], and BA are having an un-publicised one that matches the price. Obviously it depends on where you need to fly, but that did it for me :)

A bit of keyboard time, and a phone call to BA ExeClub, sorted.

:cool:

[I am not BA Staff, never have been, never will be ... ;)]

[Boy In Blue]

2.40 into the clip a mystery blonde appears......... Is this LAX Liz? If it is I may hve to revise my, ill informed, previously held opinion :eek:

YouTube - BA Contingency Plan Holding Up During Strike (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yLNbPH6YJfk&feature=related)

[rowan11]

I would just like to say that I travelled out on the 3rd day of the second strike, prior to leaving Customer Services and Ground staff - splendid
Cabin Crew a mix of regulars, pilot[s] volunteers - splendid
reurned yesterday - regular cabin crew - splendid.

Just wanted to say thank you.

[fincastle84]

A bit of keyboard time, and a phone call to BA ExeClub, sorted.


SSShhhhh, you're giving away a very secret secret. I've just arranged similar for NBO at the end of September.

I reckon you'll be enjoying your upcoming IAD trip, free of any interference from the rapidly decreasing Bassa membership.

[MPN11]

What-ho, Finky!

Not a secret - much scribbling on "Another Forum" on that subject! ;)

I'm comfortable with the prospects for the IAD sector - too many Govt people travelling on that one.
"BA/BASSA starts WW3?"
I don't think there's any risk! :ok:

[R Knee]

There are an awful lot of TLAs (Three Letter Acronyms) on this thread. SLF is explained LGW seems self explanatory as does EDI. What/Where are IAD NBO LOL :bored: etc?

[ExXB]

IAD = Dulles Airport, Washington DC
NBO = Nairobi, Kenya
LOL = Laughing Out Loud (actually its Lovelock Nevada)?

[binsleepen]

TLA

IAD - Washington Dulles
NBO - Nairobi International
LOL - Laugh out Loud :ok: or Derby Field, Nevada :)

On a separate point does BASSA have to give BA 7 days notice again before the next round of strikes. So for example if one was going to Pheonix on 16 Apr, in order for a strike to disrupt it, they must be announced by 8 Apr ie Thursday.

What has happened to CC89? They always played David Steel to BASSAs David Owen (I was a spitting Image fan) but they seem to have disappeared completely.

Regards

[BAAlltheway]

does BASSA have to give BA 7 days notice again before the next round of strikes. So for example if one was going to Pheonix on 16 Apr, in order for a strike to disrupt it, they must be announced by 8 Apr ie Thursday.

What has happened to CC89? They always played David Steel to BASSAs David Owen (I was a spitting Image fan) but they seem to have disappeared completely.

Regards

1)Yes, all strike action has to have a minimum of 7 days notice. So you might be in luck! Rumour has it that with the election being officially announced, the union has been discouraged from announcing any info on dates whilst election is fresh news. A) cos it looks bad for labour, B) as the election will steal the news and UNITE/BASSA dont want their headlines smothered.

2)CC89 were absorbed into the BASSA/UNITE machine sometime ago. Interestingly some independent thinking crew in despair of the representation options available to them, have started up The Professional CrewCouncil, (PCC) which is how CC89 originally started. PCC hasnt gained official recognition from the airline (yet), but from what i hear, is attracting ever increasing support from disillusioned crew.

BTW (By The Way), as a non flying member of BA staff, i want to say a HUGE thank you to the customers who are continuing to support us by booking BA. The vast majority of staff, crew and non crew, want simply to offer you the best service we can and value you as our customers.

[kenhughes]

Is this Liz Malone in the clip?
2.40 into the clip a mystery blonde appears......... Is this LAX Liz? If it is I may hve to revise my, ill informed, previously held opinion

I've read elsewhere that Ms Malone is on long-term sick-leave with post-menopausal osteoporosis. I don't think that young lady was anywhere near post-menopausal - but then, at my age it's getting harder to tell the ages of ladies. :)

Here's a picture: The BA comrade out in California: £50,000 a year union activist who lives in LA and hasn't flown for a year | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1236471/The-BA-comrade-California--50-000-year-union-activist-lives-LA-flown-year.html)

[pencisely]

Well worth a read The strikes at British Airways: Maintaining altitude | The Economist (http://www.economist.com/business-finance/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15772880)

Easy to see why UNITE cannot win this one, 20 days to train a CC and 3 days for a VCC.

Thanks again to all the CC and VCC on my recent trips to SFO and LAX during the strike, excellent service in difficult cirumstances.

[fincastle84]

Strangely enough the Bassa statement to which you refer has been removed from the other thread. Maybe it was too long.

However, it does look as though Bassa are determined to carry on along their destructive path. It will be interesting to see if the Unite hierarchy have a different game plan, in light of the forthcoming election.

Edit
In fact Unite have just announced that talks with BA are continuing & that any future strikes are on hold.

[Mariner9]

Shamelessly nicked from the "official" thread....

Talks between Unite the union and British Airways aimed at resolving the cabin crew dispute resumed over the Easter weekend and are continuing, the union said today (Wednesday).
Joint general secretary Tony Woodley said: “It is welcome that talks have resumed and I am pleased that some serious progress has been made over the issues which have divided us.
“However, there is more work to be done, and further discussions will take place with the company over the next few days. I reported to representatives of our cabin crew today and explained that it would be unnecessary to set further strike dates while these talks are continuing and making progress.”(my bold)

But will BASSA agree with Mr Woodley's assessment I wonder? :(

It seeems to me that this announcement has pulled the rug from under BASSA's feet* with regard to further strike action.

*On the assumption that there is indeed a split between BASSA and Unite, as many on here have suggested.

[Mariner9]

You may well be right baggers. The reps who have flown have been greatly encouraged by the response of all the crew who are saying "if that is what Walsh wants - then bring it on because I will not be browbeaten, bullied or blackmailed into giving up something I care for and which I am entitled to fight for". Unfortunately, the BASSA rep once again fails to spell out exactly what it is they are not prepared to give up (Surely the CSD's former ability on certain LHR flights to put their feet up cannot be it? :ugh:)

[MPN11]

Just back in .... interesting updates there, for which thank you all.

The disconnect between Unite and BASSA simply had to happen, IMO. There is no way the [current] PM could go into a General Election with their financial supporter being involved in this nonsense. I look forward to seeing the BASSA leadership and their militants hung out to dry, although I do have some sympathy for the CC who have charged blindly into the unknown ... however, being terminally stupid is not an offence under Common Law.

Good luck to all the rest at BA.



FLYING BA

[R Knee]

Thanks for the reply on TLA, sorry it was a little off thread, but it helps my understanding.

Have you seen on the BA/BASSA thread the mod FlapsForty has taken off all of todays earlier input! Well it was getting quite heated and IMO juvenile. Perhaps a sign of the pressure build up. Let's hope cooler heads prevail.

[MPN11]

i missed much of the afternoon input, sadly, although I caught some of it.

FlapsForty and other are having a nightmare time trying to keep that Thread on the rails, and it's hardly surprising. Apart from the 'political' differences, people have their livelihoods at stake [or not, depending on you position]. No wonder things get a bit heated.

@ baggers ... the CSD is the one who borrocks my wife when her seat is u/s and won't go fully vertical.
They emerge from their coffins occasionally :)

Unfair, of course, because I'm sure there are some very good CSDs out there - but they are being tainted by the "chosen few" at LHR. Which is another good reason for BA to move on.


FLYING BA

[dubh12000]

So the BASSA secretary is sending a memo talking about catering at Bedfont for the next strike, and the Unite officials are announcing no further strike dates whilst talks reconvene.

One can begin to see the disconnect between the various parties. Not same hymn page, etc.


"Jacket Potato and salad bar"......because they are listening to their members apparently.

[Chuchinchow]

perhaps Miss Malone is already considering calling some of her supposed "victims" "The Cranebank twelve" or something similar in the hope of attracting sympathy.


An equally good title would be "the Waterside Wonkers".

Oh no - silly me - a BASSA stooge is already calling himself that.


[Back to the drawing board!]

[MPN11]

"Jacket Potato and salad bar"......because they are listening to their members apparently.


"There are important issues at steak, brothers and sisters. The lack of HP Sauce will be addressed under the new Labour Government, using EU funding. For now we have to accept that, in this time of strife, that Heinz Tomato Ketchup [the food of the masses] will have to suffice."

That should do, mate. Anyone for a lobster dinner [on the Union, of course]?

[R Knee]

Thanks MPN11.

At last some humour. At least this thread has some balance.

[Chuchinchow]

That should do, mate. Anyone for a lobster dinner [on the Union, of course]?

That's a wonderful idea, MPN11! Which is the better venue, do you think: the Pomme d'Or on a Friday evening, or Big Vern's?

[Boy In Blue]

I've read elsewhere that Ms Malone is on long-term sick-leave with post-menopausal osteoporosis. I don't think that young lady was anywhere near post-menopausal - but then, at my age it's getting harder to tell the ages of ladies. http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/smile.gif

Here's a picture: The BA comrade out in California: £50,000 a year union activist who lives in LA and hasn't flown for a year | Mail Online (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1236471/The-BA-comrade-California--50-000-year-union-activist-lives-LA-flown-year.html)


Thanks - if thats the right word - Kenhughes. In that case I better put my Iwo Jima flag T shirt back in the drawer :suspect:

[LD12986]

Talks between Unite the union and British Airways aimed at resolving the cabin crew dispute resumed over the Easter weekend and are continuing, the union said today (Wednesday).
Joint general secretary Tony Woodley said: “It is welcome that talks have resumed and I am pleased that some serious progress has been made over the issues which have divided us.
“However, there is more work to be done, and further discussions will take place with the company over the next few days. I reported to representatives of our cabin crew today and explained that it would be unnecessary to set further strike dates while these talks are continuing and making progress.”

Note there has been no confirmation from BA about the progress of talks....

[manintheback]

One rather suspects BA dont actually give a monkeys.

[call100]

It would be naive to think that both sides have not been talking continuously. Both sides being Unite (Not Bassa) and BA. ;)

[Boy In Blue]

Cancel the Bedfont baked potatoes and salad bar I think.

I feel sorry for the decent BA CC who fell for this strike. The discussion of a salad bar at the next picket line shows how a far this dispute was removed from the public mood in these dire days for the UK. I said previously that some CC had an issue with their public image in respect of getting public support. Designer clothes, sunglasses pearched on the head and an ever so precious tiara. Come on. The bedfont bakers was just another example of a completely out of touch Union.

Again I hope the decent people on strike dont suffer as a result of this crazy IA.

[Sogriada]

Flight from HKG to LHR April 3. Originally flight booked for April 1, but postponed 48 hours due effects of strike.
One cup of coffee/drink offered throughout flight. Food poor. Viewing screen not working. CC not interested and very much not in evidence throughout most of flight.
That is IT! I will never, EVER fly BA again.

[ChicoG]

It sounds like both of you should log into BA and leave your comments regarding the flight. If it was some pompous striker deliberately causing problems, then at least BA can investigate and take the appropriate action.

Added: I note from the BASSA "Jacket Potato" missive the following comments:

We are very aware that Walsh is still blundering full steam ahead with recruitment, and volunteers are still flying and being trained. We will obviously take all this into consideration when briefing Tony and Len and will influence what steps will now be needed to force a halt to BA plans. In other words we realise the gloves are off.

Jaysus, you have to wonder why they didn't realise it when WW said prior to the first strike: "I can tell you one thing, we'll be flying this weekend".

[Final 3 Greens]

Why does BA have to reply on passengers to report problems, this is double punishment

1 - poor service
2 - have to invest time writing a report

Just vote with your feet, the airline notices lost revenue.

[earleyboy]

Yes, but it wont identify the actual problem, which will be "fixed" very quickly, I can assure you.

[Mariner9]

Jaysus, you have to wonder why they didn't realise it when WW said prior to the first strike: "I can tell you one thing, we'll be flying this weekend".

Remember Unite's statement on the eve of the 1st strike that BA's planned strike flight schedule was a "work of fantasy"? They were clearly deluded enough to think that WW was bluffing at the time. Hopefully Tony Woodley can inject some sense of realism now.

[Mariner9]

Some very good points baggers :D

But I wonder how many striking commuters there actually are?

[ChicoG]

Why does BA have to reply on passengers to report problems, this is double punishment

1 - poor service
2 - have to invest time writing a report

Just vote with your feet, the airline notices lost revenue.

I happen to like the airlines that I fly with, and freely comment if I think things need tweaking (defective IFE, defective seats, defective CC <heh>). I find by replying I see two things:

(1) It often gets something done about it, and
(2) It often gets rewarded by the airline.

And as long as I'm happy that they take the time to listen and actually do something about it, it keeps me flying with them. (And I made a specific suggestion to one airline a month ago that I know from inside was acted on immediately with a message to all bases from the ground staff manager).

So why not?

If I voted with my feet every time something didn't go right on a flight, I'd have a more frequent flier cards than air miles :}

[MPN11]

See post 1520 ... (http://www.pprune.org/cabin-crew/409697-british-airways-vs-bassa-airline-staff-only-76.html)

Why? Perhaps it helps clarify things, reading between the lines?

Whether or not we like or fully trust UNITE is not really the issue right now - the time for Spanish Inquisitions is not during a dispute. UNITE are the only game in town, they hold the key to the safe (yes I know it is your money in that safe) and as such it is wise that a good relationship is maintained. TW and I have had our share of differences but I am putting that behind me while we have bigger battles to fight and I know he feels the same way. At the end of the talks - he may think we have a good deal, we may not but you will be the ultimate. judge.

Election pressures being brought to bear? ;)

[Snas]

But I wonder how many striking commuters there actually are?


Unite have previously stated that it was a third. I seem to recall elsewhere from BA them saying it was between 10-20%, so in reality I guess somewhere between those two.

As there is no requirement to declare yourself a commuter, and many (in my experience) maintain a UK address anyway for post if nothing else, I dont imagine there is a totally accurate bang-on figure to be had.

Lets say a quarter as a working figure eh..?

It's a lot either way, more than I would have guessed to be honest.

Edit to add after revisiting question - I'm talking all BA CC here, not just those that went on strike, to be clear.

[Snas]

Any "deal" that TW may think he has secured from BA will be put to a full postal ballot of you the membership. YOU have the final say.



MPN11 - I thought this was the most interesting part of that communication, odd choice or wordking but perhaps he was just in a hurry when writing and I'm seeing more than there is here?

[Airclues]

BASSA believe that the 28 day rule no longer applies as they have taken industrial action. Is this correct?

Trade Union and Labour Relations (Consolidation) Act 1992 (c. 52) (http://www.opsi.gov.uk/ACTS/acts1992/ukpga_19920052_en_13#pt5-pb3-l1g233)

The act states that the call must be made and the action to which it relates must occur within four weeks of the ballot. It is an interesting legal point as to whether any new action falls within the 28 day rule.
I don't know the answer, but so far the BA legal team seem to be rather more switched on than BASSA.

Dave

[MPN11]

@ Snas ... whatever the interpretation, there is certainly something happening in the undergrowth.

I will not be presumptive or pretentious by trying to read too far between the lines, but I do suspect that things in 'Castle BASSA' are not going the way they would wish. A wee bit of 'cover my arrse' seems to be in play here.

[ExXB]

I happen to like the airlines that I fly with, and freely comment if I think things need tweaking (defective IFE, defective seats, defective CC <heh>). I find by replying I see two things:

(1) It often gets something done about it, and
(2) It often gets rewarded by the airline.

I'm no longer the eternal optimist. With BA you either get a boiler-plate reply and insincere apology or silence.

Deep inside, I suppose, I keep hoping that BA will return to the former standards but reality kicks in - they have gone past the point of no return. I no longer see them returning to past glory (or whatever). I was gold, now silver and heading for blue. Their loss.

[Final 3 Greens]

I'm no longer the eternal optimist. With BA you either get a boiler-plate reply and insincere apology or silence.

My experience too.

And my point is that a service provider should have a better mechanism to deal with what sounds to be problem (2 posters in swift succession) than relying on complaint cards.

Were I WW and given some of the comments on the other thread, I woul dhave had a few 'mystery shoppers' on board flights, post strike.

No union rep worth their salt is going to let the company discipline a member on the basis of a complaint lodged on a website.

And before the normal suspects accuse me of being a 'BA' hater, I have never experienced less than acceptable service on a BA flight.

[emanresuym]

BASSA believe that the 28 day rule no longer applies as they have taken industrial action. Is this correct?
Bassa is right. As long as they call one period of IA within the 28 days (even for only one day) they can then continue to call further strikes with only 7 days notice of the dates.

However, after 12 weeks, the ballot is no longer effective and the union would need to call a new ballot (or face compulsory redundancies or dismissals etc).

[LD12986]

Were I WW and given some of the comments on the other thread, I woul dhave had a few 'mystery shoppers' on board flights, post strike.


I have been told that this has not happened in the past because BASSA wouldn't allow it.

[77]

Stewardess uniforms become big business in Japan

Air hostess uniforms given to employees of Japan Airlines (JAL) have become massively popular on the black market.

Shops specialising in replica uniforms of all kinds are common, but the airline stewardess uniforms are the real thing.

After filing for bankruptcy protection in January, the company is asking for volunteers to take redundancy.

While that has raised hopes of a flood of uniforms becoming available, JAL is keen to ensure all its clothing and equipment comes back.

Roland Buerk reports from Tokyo.

Will there be a market for ex BA uniforms??

[Jarvy]

I hereby volunteer to be a mystery shopper should Mr walsh be reading this.
I flew LHR-Boston between the strikes, enjoyed the salad but overall the crew where poor. No smiles, slow service except for one crew member who was smiling, helpful and was for most of the trip the only one in club doing any work. He said all the rest where on their breaks. I am sure that on a 7 hour flight you don't need a 2 hour break.
We where up graded from WT+ to Club, and for the first time in along time the CSD came and said hello to Mrs J (Mrs J is Gold) but Mrs J said she shouldn't have bothered as the CSD was so gumpy!
When I got home I went on the BA website and complimented on the service from the one member of crew who far out shone the rest, he was even helping an old couple sort out their luggage in Boston airport.

[Entaxei]

Can someone please explain how you can live in and commute from another country to work using ST, how can you guarantee getting a seat on any flight, let alone on a frequent basis ?.

Way back when, you only got the seat if there was one available, after all bookings were taken up, up to approximately 30 - 45 minutes prior to flight time. In addition, you had to take your place in the waiting staff queue for that flight. :bored:

[Basil]

Can someone please explain how you can live in and commute from another country to work using ST
With stress and difficulty.
I have done so from Glasgow to London and from London to Bahrain - concentrates the mind.
At least I shared a flat in Windsor and had my company house in Bahrain and made sure that I left several flights to give myself a decent chance of making it; always did.
The Buffalo crew seemed to have put themselves in an impossible situation.

[PAXboy]

LD12986
Quote: Were I WW and given some of the comments on the other thread, I would have had a few 'mystery shoppers' on board flights, post strike.
I have been told that this has not happened in the past because BASSA wouldn't allow it.
Are you saying that BA cannot ever have mystery shoppers? Surely, they have some hand picked people who regularly run every route in every cabin and report back? How can they otherwise hope to know what they are actually delivering? If any member of BA staff/mgmt is going to be recognised (or known from paperwork) then they cannot be anonymous clients of what is happing in the cabin.

If they cannot have mystery shoppers than mgmt have failed.

[wascrew]

I doubt very much if BA could in current times employ mystery shoppers
Why?
Because BASSA would object to the `spy in the sky`
BA rely on GPM surveys from customers and things like customer forums as a measure.
GPM surveys are distributed by the crew (usually the CSD as part of their duties,) to supposedly customers randomly selected by seat number. These seat numbers are written on the envelope the surveys come in. In reality it is difficult to achieve this due to customer refusals, empty seats etc.,. As the CSD is measured by the percentage of returns they achieve, quite often customers are `selected` to fill in the surveys with the obvious one sided results.
As for individual comments,(letters to BA, comments cards etc.,) it seems these are rarely replied to apart from the standard replies.

[R Knee]

'Mystery Shoppers' are an important management tool in service industries and if it is true that BA do not use them that may explain the wide difference in customer experience.

GPM sounds like a tick box culture with obviously unreliable results.

BA probably needs to adopt a better monitoring system.

[Dawdler]

I once knew a chap who had some trick cards printed up. They looked very authentic and bore the wording to the effect. "You have today been assessed by Service Authentications Ltd., on behalf of your organisation. A full report will be issued in due course." Or some such wording. They had logos of major companies, BP, M&S, hotel chains etc., possibly even airlines. He would hand a card to a staff member or simply leave one in a place to be found. He amused himself greatly by the distribution of these cards and who knows? He may even have done some good! All highly illegal all the same for the unauthorised use of the logos, but he was never caught or challenged.

[The SSK]

A flatmate of mine was a BOAC overseas station officer. On one occasion, in between assignments, he was given a multi-sector ticket, out to Hong Kong, back via Seychelles and Nairobi, and told to make sure his baggage was well over the limit, to see how often he was charged excess. He emptied his wardrobe and shoe cupboard into his case and dragged it halfway round the world and back. He never did get charged, but on his very last sector (Rome-London) they lost his bag and he arrived back home with nothing to change into.

On another occasion, in the 1970s, all the clerks and juniors in Market Research were given first-class tickets to all points of the globe and told to report on the usage of the upper deck lounge on the 747. Some poor soul sat up there all the way back from Sydney and the only other punter thay saw was a senior BA manager.

[jimtherev]

I'm astonished by the statement about mystery shoppers
that this has not happened in the past because BASSA wouldn't allow it.

and astonished that no-one has challenged this.

If true, it does give a further insight to us punters into the insidious power of BASSA. Would any pro-union supporter (or anyone else, for that matter) like to justify this?

[dubh12000]

Not unusual at all when you have a militant union. I come across it all the time. It can basically be seen as a metric on productivity. Try bringing "lean" concepts into old style big business.....brick wall guys.

[Airclues]

This thread seems to be drifting into a discussion about 'mystery shoppers'. The threat of strike action is still very real in BA so why not start a separate 'mystery shopper' thread?

I believe that there are people in the BA legal team who disagree with emanresuym in the interpretation of the 28 day rule (post #855). If another strike is called I think that you will find that the validity is challenged in the courts. The wording of the act is by no means clear.

Dave

[Fly380]

Re ST and commuting cabin crew - I flew from Alicante to Gatwick on Ryanair last November and there was a BA stewardess on the flight all dressed up for work. I payed 10 euros each way for that flight so ST is not so important from some places. BA gave up the route last year and ST was a damn site more than 20 euros if you could get a seat.

[etrang]

Thread drift is due to lack of news. When either side makes a move the discussion will come back to the strike.

this has not happened in the past because BASSA wouldn't allow it.

There is no way BASSA would even know it was happening, let alone stop it, if it was done properly.

[emanresuym]

That's interesting. However, I really don't believe that there could be any challenge to further IA based on it requiring a longer notice period (I think this is what you suggested?). I am pretty sure that many interpretations of the act (including that published in the Department for Employment and Learning's pamphlet ER29 'Industrial action and the law: A guide for employers') make it reasonably clear that during discontinuous IA, the dates can be changed as long as 7 days notice are given.

However, where there may be some sort of legal challenge possible is if BA believe that "the result of a ballot no longer represents the views of union members or that something has happened or is likely to happen which is likely to result in union members voting against taking, or continuing with, action if there were a fresh ballot".

[Snas]

@ Fly380

It is the flexability of ST tickets that is important over the price in many instances.

If you are late getting back to base and miss your ST flight it is no problem, you juet get the next, or nip to Gatwick and fly from there (in the case of Spain for example). This is not the case with Ryan, Easy etc - when you miss one of those flights it can be an axpensive experience indeed.

ST is rather important to commuters and vital to some believe me.

[The SSK]

I had the pleasure (?) last year of spending a couple of hours in the Staff Travel waiting area of T5. While I was there a dozen CC drifted in off their various longhaul duties, enroute to Glasgow. Only one of them got away on the first departure but all of them got on the next one. As it was getting towards the end of the day (a Sunday) I did wonder how often people got stuck overnight.

[Airclues]

emanresuym

There is a statement on page 2 of that document which states "Please note that this booklet gives general guidance only and should not be regarded as a complete or authoritative statement of law. Authoritative interpretations of the law can only be given by the courts".

As I said, I don't know how the law should be applied. However, it as always possible that the BA lawyers might test this in the courts.

Dave

[Neptunus Rex]

There is certainly no shortage of lawyers in Parliament. If a law has been drafted so badly that it is open to 'interpretation' then one can only surmise that the drafters are incompetent, or that they are deliberately embedding future work for their profession.

http://www.augk18.dsl.pipex.com/Smileys/Antique/Antique1.gif

[emanresuym]

Airclues, of course you're right. Its always the case that the ONLY absolute interpretation of any law is by the courts.

[Boy In Blue]

Snas....
If you are late getting back to base and miss your ST flight it is no problem, you juet get the next, or nip to Gatwick and fly from there (in the case of Spain for example). This is not the case with Ryan, Easy etc - when you miss one of those flights it can be an axpensive experience indeed


From the Easyjet website
No worries if you miss your flight We understand how frustrating it is to miss a flight. That’s why you can catch the next available flight for a flat charge of just £43 if you turn up at the airport within two hours of your original flight’s scheduled departure time.
--------------------

I like to fly BA. I still think you have the best looking hosties :ok: However, in fairness to Easyjet, they have a very good rebooking policy if You miss your flight.

[Snas]

@ Boy In Blue - fair enough, in the case of Easy the rebooking policy is quite good I agree.

Wont help you if you commute from Hong Kong, LA, New Orleans, and thats just a few that I know personally. Missing a non ST flight for those sort of destinations is a bigger issue I promise.

Nevertheless, ST is important and a loss to some I know.

[Boy In Blue]

@ Snas.... Hi, Wasn't being picky, just I think Easyjet are trying to get it right.

ST from Hing Kong and LA! Bloody hell. It takes me back to my initial point on the strike - some CC have no perception of the reality of life in the UK at the moment. How they could hope to get public support was beyond me. Im afraid that some of them don't realise that the world is not full of First Class ticket holders who might, just, find it a drag when their choice of wines is limited.

I will again state the CC I know personally are great - striking or not - so im not having a go. The vote was stupid but Bassa and Unite have led them down a dead end. I really dont think the militant unionists really give a flying fook for your average CC. The speech from the Labour MP at Bedfont was cringeworthy. I dont think they ever had your interests at heart. It was just a case of we will take on Willie Walsh and his 'posh' business no matter the cost to decent people.

[ExSp33db1rd]

ST is rather important to commuters and vital to some believe me



Nevertheless, ST is important and a loss to some I know


Me too.

I've been banned from PPRuNe threads, and reviled by pruners, for daring to suggest that I might also be upset at now, RETROSPECTIVELY, be losing my Staff Travel in Retirement as a result of WW's dictate to management to conduct negotations about the new S.T rules under a 3 year cloak of secrecy - so that those who are now affected were unable to have any input - and yet there seems to be some sympathy here for those who have now brought it upon themselves !!

What did I do, just grow old ?

Funny Old World.

[binsleepen]

Exspeedbird

You are not reviled for airing your concerns about the loss of benefits for retirees. What does annoy people is that you keep banging on about it in every message you post, on every thread no matter what the thread topic is.

I have suggested you start a dedicated thread to discuss it. Maybe you have but other PPRUNERS have shown no interest so you keep bringing it up on other threads.

Everyone is making cuts in BA to help it survive, why should some one working at BA today make additional cuts in their T & Cs so pensioners can go on without any change in their conditions. People are living longer now than ever, why should present staff and shareholders continue to subsidise you for more years than you worked. Everyone has to take some pain

Regards

ps if you want to continue this lets do it by PM as this thread is not the place for it

[TightSlot]

Quite so binsleepen - Now we have to add ExSp33db1rd as a Martyr to the equation - Tedium redefined

[PAXboy]

I was aware that some staff commuted from Scotland to London for LH work and some from just across the channel BUT to commute from HKG to THEN do a LH trip? No wonder they can't wait to get us all to shut up so they can get to sleep.

If I was an employer, I would never hire staff that had to commute that distance. You cannot call them in on urgent standby and they are ALWAYS going to be tired and jaded. This sounds like another bit of the last century that has been allowed to go way beyond any reasonable usage. If mgmt allow this to continue, they are silly.

[L337]

BUT to commute from HKG to THEN do a LH trip? No wonder they can't wait to get us all to shut up so they can get to sleep.

To be fair, the vast majority of long commuters arrive the day before they operates, crash for the night, then report for work the next day. They have a statutory duty to report for work rested, and rested enough to do a 15 or 16 hour duty day if required.

[77]

The issue of where crew live is quite complicated. Many of the crew who arrive from long distances do arrive the day before. Some crew drive long distances to work. Personally I find driving in the UK quite stressful. Maybe someone arriving at work by air will be more rested. Not all crew can afford housing near Heathrow or wish to live near Heathrow. Some cabin crew work part time and stay near LHR for work and then return home for extended days off. With pilots on very long flights some go straight in the bunk after take-off as they are used later in the flight as relief crew.
The important thing is that they adopt a professionel attitude to work and arrive at work fit,well and rested for the ensuing duty.
We all have a different bodyclock. I know of some pilots who will never do longhaul as they cannot sleep on aeroplanes. Others will sleep for ever in the bunks.
Lifestyle is a personal choice. Different to yours maybe. But don't be so judgemental.

[Mr Optimistic]

I presume that long haul commuting is very rare, jet lag must be an issue if only 1 day's rest. Anyhow, can someone advise how things are going now that everyone is back at work. Under control and professional or tense ?

[vanHorck]

Somebody should open a poll like this
http://www.pprune.org/terms-endearment/405848-poll-balpas-performance-vote.html
but this one regarding BASSA
on the CC forum, but I am not a CC member nor do I know how such a poll is constructed

something like:
I have not been a Bassa member recently and I m NOT likely to become one now given the recent dispute
I have not been a Bassa member recently but I'm thinking of joining them now given the recent dispute
I have been a Bassa member recently, but I resigned over the current dispute
I am a current Bassa member, but I intend to resign over the current dispute
I am a current Bassa member, and I do NOT intend to resign over the current dispute

Any CC member with more forum brain than me who cares to put this poll on the CC section?

[L337]

I presume that long haul commuting is very rare, jet lag must be an issue if only 1 day's rest.

Every time I go to Miami, New York, Chicago, Boston, Bombay, Delhi, Nairobi, Philadelphia, Lagos, Bangalore, etc. etc. I get "1 days rest." Then back to work. In truth it is less than 1 day usually, nearer 20 hours rest.

If you think 1 days rest is not enough would you mind calling Willie and asking him if we can have more time off please?

[Mr Optimistic]

...would love to but he asked me not to phone again.

[GemDeveloper]

There is an interesting contribution that has been made by one of the CC on ‘the other’ forum : British Airways vs. BASSA (Airline Staff Only) : regarding their payslip.

They report the data from their payslip: their wages are £21,000 and their allowances are £28,000. This total remuneration is for a CC member who works on a 75% contract.

Using the 2009-10 tax rates, and assuming no other incomes (for example, additional earnings or interest), they will pay £2,905 income tax, making their net earnings £18,095. Thus they actually take home (net pay plus allowances), £46,095.

If one was working in a ‘normal’ environment, where all the remuneration provided by one’s employer was subject to income tax, then in order to take home £46,095, one’s gross remuneration would need to be £60,041.40

And remember that this is the situation for this particular contributor to the CC forum who works on a 75% contract. If one increases pro rata their wages and allowances for an 100% contract, then they will be taking home £61,028.33, equivalent to a gross income that is subject to full income tax of £84,930.33

One can see why so many senior CC are very reluctant to try their luck in the job markets ‘outside’.

[just an observer]

Re CC wages - I read that pay slip etc as basic £21000, with allowances, £28000. Ie allowances of £7000. I agree the lack of a comma after 'with allowances' in the original text is confusing. So on 75% contract, after 20 years a full time basic is £28000, presumably allowances would be similarly increased to £9333. I don't know which bits of the allowances are taxable, it seems likely some may be, so grossing up isn't straightforward.

[617sqn]

Gem developer
It is posts like that that cause mass hysteria and get a queue for the outrage bus.
I read the post to mean a basic of £21000 and with allowances added on then a total salary of £28000.
A basic salary is taxed in the same way as any UK wage would .Why would it not be? Even though allowances are earned overseas 59% are taxable.
In your post you are suggesting that allowances are tax free which is simply not true.
Please do not post false information as it really does not help.

[Dawdler]

On a completely different topic, but relevant to this thread, I happened upon this today from the election of officers to BASSA in 2008.

[quote]Lizanne Malone's track record on equality issues is second to none, she argues that "in facing down one of Britain's most aggressive employers, whether bargaining on pay and conditions or campaigning in solidarity with others, fighting back and winning is not a gender issue - it's a union issue!"I wonder if most of us would agree that " one of Britain's most aggressive employers" has been as aggressive as her.

[MPN11]

I think Mzzz Malone really misjudged her opponent. :ok:

i'm not sure where the "equality issues" come in either, but perhaps male CC get paid more than female CC? :}

Otherwise, with you entirely ... she wanted a war, and she got one. :D

[MissM]

There is an interesting contribution that has been made by one of the CC on ‘the other’ forum : British Airways vs. BASSA (Airline Staff Only) : regarding their payslip.

They report the data from their payslip: their wages are £21,000 and their allowances are £28,000. This total remuneration is for a CC member who works on a 75% contract.

Using the 2009-10 tax rates, and assuming no other incomes (for example, additional earnings or interest), they will pay £2,905 income tax, making their net earnings £18,095. Thus they actually take home (net pay plus allowances), £46,095.

If one was working in a ‘normal’ environment, where all the remuneration provided by one’s employer was subject to income tax, then in order to take home £46,095, one’s gross remuneration would need to be £60,041.40

And remember that this is the situation for this particular contributor to the CC forum who works on a 75% contract. If one increases pro rata their wages and allowances for an 100% contract, then they will be taking home £61,028.33, equivalent to a gross income that is subject to full income tax of £84,930.33

One can see why so many senior CC are very reluctant to try their luck in the job markets ‘outside'.

£28.000 INCLUDE allowances. £21.000 without.

Like 617sqn says, our meal allowances are 59% taxable. Taxes are even higher on EF and SF.

[Mr Optimistic]

Hasn't the pay and allowances thing been done to death already ? Whatever the rights and wrongs of the broader dispute, surely it is intrusive (bordering on demeaning) that people have to disclose their own earnings to defend their point of view ? Yes, OK, some BA CC are surprisingly well paid and generally above the industry norm, but that isn't directly the issue is it ?

[GemDeveloper]

I apologise that my misinterpretation of the original post led me to produce data that “cause mass hysteria and get a queue for the outrage bus.” I shall request that any such potential passengers form an orderly queue.

If the data are corrected (allowances of £7000 of which I understand 59% is taxable), then the net money for this individual is £24,269 which is equivalent to a salary on which full income tax is paid of £28,717

If the pay and allowances are factored pro rata for an 100% contract, the net money is then £31,927 equivalent to a salary on which full income tax is paid of £38,290

If one takes the data from the CAA table for the average cabin attendant cost to British Airways*, and exactly the same factors are used for allowances, then the average net money is £27,058 equivalent to a salary on which full income tax is paid of £32,204

If, as I assume, within the CAA figures there is a number of staff who are on less than 100% contracts, the average will be an underestimate for the average 100% contracts.

I have not included employee National Insurance or pension contributions in these figures, as this is a more complex calculation. Thus these net of tax figures are overstated, but are indicative.

I shall now retire, and leave others to debate the appropriateness of these indicative salaries. The Institute for Fiscal Studies provides a helpful web site:
http://www.ifs.org.uk/wheredoyoufitin/

* The CAA Document states: Included are gross salary (before deduction of income tax, pension social welfare and voluntary payments), overtime pay, sales commissions, flying pay and subsistence allowances, (such as cost of living allowances, station and overseas allowances) and all crew hourly flight allowances (i.e. those in excess of travel and incidental expenses).

[617sqn]

MrOptimistic,
I agree that discussing one's salary is vulgar and I do not think that such details should,or indeed ,need not be made public.It does not solve anything.
However,what I take issue with is someone posting on here about cc salaries ,when clearly they are not airline staff themselves .They have no knowledge of the tax paid and are talking complete nonsense.
There ends the salary debate!!

[jimtherev]

Yes, OK, some BA CC are surprisingly well paid and generally above the industry norm, but that isn't directly the issue is it ?
Dunno. I've been reading this thread and the other thread very carefully, and I'm confused what the issue actually is! Am I right in thinking that the offer(s) which were put on the table before are now absolutely the dog's danglies and everyone will flood back if one of them (any one of them!) is offered now?

For weeks now (it feels like) posters on both threads have asked the question "What are you actually striking about?" but if anyone knows, they ain't tellin'.

Puzzling.

p.s. It can't be that thousands were persuaded to strike because several senior officers of UNITE are throwing their pram dollies at each other, could it? They wouldn't do that...

Would they?

[Mr Optimistic]

Fair enough.

[617sqn]

Moving swiftly on ....

No pax on the outrage bus anymore!!

Glad to hear the queue would have been orderly,you are welcome onboard anytime with manners like that.

[jethrobee]

I think being taxed 59% is outrageous, even as a benefit in kind your tax rate is lower. I am surprised Gordon Brown et al havent found a way of taxing staff travel for you to really get his pound of flesh.

However, from reading previous posts arent the rates different between different crew based at different airports?

For me, the thing I find the hardest to get my head around with the strike, aside from all the hassle it has caused me personally, is this. Why are the rules different for BA CC that fly out of LHR than they are out of LGW?

I have flown long haul premium cabins from both airports, and must say that the service has been excellent with both.

[just an observer]

I think being taxed 59% is outrageous, even as a benefit in kind your tax rate is lower. I am surprised Gordon Brown et al havent found a way of taxing staff travel for you to really get his pound of flesh.



That means 59% of the amount (of allowances) is taxed, not that it is taxed at 59%. It is taxed at whatever is the appropriate rate, depending on total salary etc, probably 20%. The non taxable element of allowances are deemed to be expenses, not salary. (Although perhaps by eating somewhere cheaper, it is possible to make a profit on a meal allowance for example)

Why staff travel isn't taxable has already been discussed.

[Ancient Observer]

What on earth is the BA CC argument over on their thread, about upgrades? Both strikers and non-strikers are taking public positions about whether or not they get enough upgrades on their FREE tickets, and who gives them their upgrades.

They are worried that their CSDs will reduce the number of upgrades that they give to crew.

Well as far as I am concerned, the only people who should get upgrades in any circumstance, whether from Ground staff or CSDs, are FULL-Fare paying customers.

No crew should ever get upogrades, and all those pilots in First on long haul should get back down the back. End of. Simples.

No wonder BA is having a strike if all their crew spend so much time and energy worrying about their own upgrades!!!

[PAXboy]

I accept that these CC have to report for duty rested. So, my observation is:

If it's worth using up 14hrs flying from HKG, then a day rest - in order to get to to work? Then they are being paid way over the odds. To be able to use up two days to do a sequence of sectors? (that is, HKG-LHR, rest, work + rest,work rtn LHR to HKG) They MUST realise that that is a pattern of work that no employer can support through the worst recession since the depression. Yes, living near EGLL is expensive but that is a very funny solution.

[AA SLF]

The question asked is:

Why are the rules different for BA CC that fly out of LHR than they are out of LGW?

Answer seems to be that a few years ago BASSA agreed to allow LGW crews to be paid less, with worse T&C's, in order to protect the LHR "pay & practices". LGW crew numbers were relatively small then and LHR "reps" sold those fine LGW folks down the river to protect themselves. Now you know how "solidarity" works at BASSA ! ! !

[emanresuym]

Dunno. I've been reading this thread and the other thread very carefully, and I'm confused what the issue actually is!

Jimtherev, the way I have read the situation is as follows:
UNITE/BASSA are complaining about imposition of 'changes' without negotiation. However, they now seem to be saying that the changes themselves are OK, its just that they shouldn't be imposed they should be negotiated.

Another way of reading this is that the union is protecting its own position and doesn't like the idea that BA and CC may be able to get along just fine without them. :)

[jethrobee]

That probably explains the low strike rates at LGW.

I can't believe that the union would not think that adopting different T&C's for a subset of crew might come back to bite them in the bum in the future....

[jethrobee]

How can they legally strike about the imposition when the court ruled that it wasnt imposition?

[L337]

PAXboy I am totally befuddled by your post.

You do realise these people elect to commute in their own time, and at their own cost?

To use your example of HKG. You fly overnight to LHR. Landing at 05:00. Spend 24+ hours in digs. Report for work at midday to go to .... LAX. Land back into LHR at midday, ish. Hang around until the HKG leaves in the evening, and sleep all the way home.

I could not do it. For me that is madness, but for a few, it suits them.

I know of a few people who do it because of family reasons. Wife and the children live in a far away sunny place, and she refuses to live in the UK.

If you think the UK is bad, the Americans do it all the time. And to a far greater extent.

[emanresuym]

How can they legally strike about the imposition when the court ruled that it wasnt imposition?

I think the answer is they can't - hence why no-one is saying much about the reason for the strike. But nonetheless, imposition seems to be the real reason (in my opinion). This is why there are a lot of people talking about "the thin end of the wedge" (ie if we let BA impose changes now, what will they do in the future? etc).

[wiggy]

Agreed,
The commuting seems to have brought out the green eye in some. Some crewmembers (pilots and cabin crew) choose to commute, in their own time and at their own expense. The only caveat is that they should be adequately rested for Duty. As you say, most of those who commute "Long Haul" arrive in the UK 24 hours ahead of their working flight to ensure they get adequate rest prior to duty. As an aside some with control over their rosters then operate back to their "home" airport, so they are probably in a better shape with regards to "jetlag/acclimatisation" at destination than the UK resident crew members.

As for the shock/horror some have expressed about the commuters only having one night off between Longhaul sectors - as has been previously pointed out that happens to all BA Longhaul crewmembers on most trips (JFK/IAD etc etc etc); feel free to call the CAA and/or the CEO if you think it should be stopped.

[ChicoG]

This is why there are a lot of people talking about "the thin end of the wedge" (ie if we let BA impose changes now, what will they do in the future? etc).

That was BASSA's spin on it, because most of the reps are CSDs and couldn't be arsed doing a little work for a change.

If it was that much of a "thin end of the wedge", why didn't they threaten a strike when it was "imposed" on Gatwick then?

ANS: BASSA REPS ONLY CARE ABOUT THEMSELVES.

Which is precisely why UNITE are trying to take control of negotiations out of the hands of these selfish, intransigent dinosaurs, and properly represent the membership as a whole.


They probably have a chance of success if they can keep McThickwit and "Bangkok Babes" Simpson out of it.

[Entaxei]

As I now read it, given the events so far this year, this IA is now purely a power struggle.

Last year BASSA did not attempt to negotiate, as always, all the controls were in their hands, they had total contempt for management of BA - as they had always won over the years and their main preoccupation was with internal arguements with Unite, CC89 and within themselves - but they failed to recognise the frustration and sea change in BA's management philosophy.

They were dumbfounded by the two legal strikes against them, that the change by BA was legal and, the union ballot was illegal. They had suddenly lost their dictatorial power over the management of BA and the company operation. Regardless of all else they had to regain control, hence their total focus on IA and ignoring any offers put forward by BA. They are now totally desperate, the CC and their concerns are completely irrelevant. Egos and lifestyles are on the line. :mad:

[Andy_S]

How can they legally strike about the imposition when the court ruled that it wasnt imposition?

Not quite true. The court ruled that the changes BA had imposed were not contractual. As such, while it was still imposition, BA were legally entitled to make those changes to working practices.

The fact that BA's imposition was legal doesn't prevent BASSA / Unite taking industrial action. If the unions are unhappy about something BA has done then they're still entitled to ballot their membership.

As regards the reasons for the strike, then officially it is about the imposition of a pay freeze and new crewing levels. However, the reality is that the strike was actually a convenient proxy for a wider and more complex variety of (perceived) issues and grievances amongst the cabin crew community. If you spoke to two different CC about why they were in dispute with BA you’d probably get two different answers.

[MissM]

I accept that these CC have to report for duty rested. So, my observation is:

If it's worth using up 14hrs flying from HKG, then a day rest - in order to get to to work? Then they are being paid way over the odds. To be able to use up two days to do a sequence of sectors? (that is, HKG-LHR, rest, work + rest,work rtn LHR to HKG) They MUST realise that that is a pattern of work that no employer can support through the worst recession since the depression. Yes, living near EGLL is expensive but that is a very funny solution.

If you think this only happens at BA you will be in for a surprise.

To many it's worth to commute as they have their families and homes somewhere else. It's every commuter's own responsibility to get to and from work and BA has little tolerance if they get late to work because their commuting flight is either late or they didn't get on it because it's full.

BA has also occassionally used "commuting" as part of their recruitment drives, especially when they were recruiting for language speakers all over Europe.

[Mariner9]

Hi Miss M, welcome to the "unofficial" thread.

Your recent posts on the "official" thread have made interesting reading - there's been hardly any pro-strike posters clearly explaining the reasons for the strike so well done for being perhaps the only one to provide a lucid explanation of the reasons at least:D

To summarise your posts, it seems you are striking (or supporting the strike)because of the imposed reduction in crewmembers and fear of further impositions if this one is not resisted. You lack trust in BA in this regard.

So what did you expect from the strike? What could BA have done to make you trust them again? And given that everything that WW said about the strike has happended, has the "failure" to ground the airline perversely persuaded you to trust BA more?

[MissM]

Thanks Mariner9!

I was on strike during the first round and out of the country during the second round.

What was I expecting from a strike? We did make a stand about how we feel about this and that we are serious. I think all of us were expecting serious negotiations and hopefully a settled agreement. There has been some talk since the strike but I think one of the issues is that BA and UNITE are really far away from each other which makes it even more difficult to come to an agreement.

By bringing in strikebreakers has not really increased my trust in BA. People say WW, himself included, he has no intention of destroying our union. This is exactly what he has done. WW and all the strikebreakers have undermined exactly everything what a union is all about. Exactly what a strike is all about. I'm very disappointed in them and I know that many of my striking colleagues feel the same way.

[Winch-control]

People say WW, himself included, he has no intention of destroying our union. This is exactly what he has done
Nope this was BASSA's doing!:=

[Mariner9]

WW could not of course have broken the strike had one not been called. So even if he had intended to break the Union, BASSA/UNITE gave him the ammunition to do just that. How would he have managed it otherwise?

I can understand your disappointment with your colleagues, but do you not feel that they are equally entitled to feel disappointment with BASSA/UNITE should they disagree with the aims of this strike? Further, surely you consider that while you are entitled to strike in an attempt to put pressure on a company, the company and its staff are also entitled to resist that pressure?

[Winch-control]

Mods please delete...
The "other thread", is now quite hilarious! The poor CC Militants still can't see the end of their own demise!
Made me laugh on a quiet monday though.

[MissM]

Maybe through proper negotiations. BASSA is as guilty as BA. I don't think it's easy to negotiate with either side because they are simply too far strong-minded. BA has one agenda. BASSA has a completely different one.

Everyone is entitled to their own opinion. If crew have voted against a strike or are not part of a union it would make perfect sense for if they don't strike. We had an almost 80% turnout for a strike in our latest ballot and I'm very disappointed with all those who voted for a strike but didn't go through with it for whatever reason. There were crew who came down to Bedfont and showed their "genuine" support and then headed off to work. If you don't intend to strike, don't vote for it. It's not rocket science.

It's a saddening behavior. It's the same with all strikebreakers from behind the flight deck door, Waterside, other departments within BA and ex-temporary cabin crew who have returned to the company.

[R Knee]

It's a saddening behavior. It's the same with all strikebreakers from behind the flight deck door, Waterside, other departments within BA and ex-temporary cabin crew who have returned to the company.

Why is it the same? They didn't vote for a strike

[slf22]

WW is not in BA for life but many of us can see ourselves in the company for many more years to come.

I'm curious - how are striking cc so sure that WW isn't at BA for life? Is there any fact to base this on? Is it just wishful thinking? He seems to have only had one other employer. Which is a bit unusual in this day and age, I would have thought.

[Mariner9]

We had an almost 80% turnout for a strike in our latest ballot and I'm very disappointed with all those who voted for a strike but didn't go through with it for whatever reason

Again, understandable at face. But what if those crews who initially voted to strike later received information that led them to change their mind? (for example they read the court judgement, or wanted to accept the revised BA offer/did not accept the BASSA counter-offer). Would you not say that they were entitled to change their views? If there was a ballot for strike action today what do you think the result would be?

[oldflyboy]

Miss M,

You say it is sad behaviour of those who elected to work, including temporary crew and volunteers, but is it not really the case that those folk care about their futures, whatever department they come from, and are determined that the narrow minded approach of BASSA to the current financial situation will not prevail, as it may actually destroy the Company?

This is a time of much change in BA, most of the rest of those who work in the Company have already made a lot of changes to their T & C's in order to help BA survive, and many see the recent cabin crew action as bringing a real threat to their future.

Until I retired 3 years ago I was cabin crew for BA for 39 years, and in that long time I was both a Performance Manager and in the 1970's a BASSA rep, and I am genuinely saddened that so many crew follow the BASSA line without question. I have been told by friends who still fly that some do not bother to even read what the Company position is, in the internal communications they are sent.

It is time to be a realist. I believe Mr Walsh is not out to break BASSA, but what he does want is a trades union he can engage with for the sake of both crew and the Company. To do that BASSA have to change tack, though frankly I don't think this will happen. Mr Walsh has been given the task of making BA fit for purpose in a rapidly changing business environment at a time of extreme financial uncertainty. Change has to come to IFCE, and BASSA have to change to have any chance of influencing it.

And oh yes, I offered to return to flying to help BA during the strike period, but sadly as a retiree my offer was very politely refused. I would have been a Happy person, not a sad one to have done it!

Finally keep posting, it is nice to see some balance on both threads, and Safe Flying.

Oldflyboy.

[ExecClubPax]

Hello MissM

You say "I think all of us were expecting serious negotiations and hopefully a settled agreement."

I'm not quite sure what you mean by this. Am I right in saying at one of the racecourse meetings last year, the rank and file CC voted overwhelmingly for a motion specifically barring the Union from negotiating with BA over the planned changes. Having taking strike action and inflicted some damage on your employer, you now expect serious negotiations to resume. Why? Has the Union proposed a motion to countermand the original rank and file requirement? Or is it just planning to take action without its membership's democratic consent?

Another thing troubling me is, if you don't trust your employer, why are you still working (except when on strike) for the company? Surely it would be in your interest to find a more agreeable occupation with management you do trust.

[Ruthanne]

Will CC have an opportunity to vote on the proposed new offer on the table, or will their reps make that decision for them? I truly hope that they are given the opportunity, in light of what the consequences could possibly be....I wish all of the CC the best of luck whatever side of the coin they maybe be on......the free world gives us the freedom of having our own choice.....making our own decisions ....our own truths

[Final 3 Greens]

PAXboy I am totally befuddled by your post.

Paxboy's thinking is crystal clear.

In a market where the focus has shifted from differentiated product to cost leadership, it is an apparent anomaly for a company to be able to pay staff enough to motivate them to commute for 13 hours and then self fund a rest day, as that implies a 3 day self funded period to go to work.

[MissM]

R Knee

Why is it the same? They didn't vote for a strike

No, but they were strikebreaking a fully legal and democratic strike.

slf22

I'm curious - how are striking cc so sure that WW isn't at BA for life? Is there any fact to base this on? Is it just wishful thinking? He seems to have only had one other employer. Which is a bit unusual in this day and age, I would have thought.

Nobody can really know for sure but I don't really think he will stay in BA for another 20 years. Not even for another 10 years.

[MissM]

Mariner9

In December we had a 90% turnout and in March it was 10% less than that. Do you think crew would have received some heart changing information in the very last second? It's way above majority and don't you think it's a sign that there's something wrong?

People can change their mind. If we are to believe the numbers presented by BA about over 60% crew reporting for duty, where did it go wrong? Did the majority suddenly get some last second important information which changed their mind? I can think of other reasons why some yes voters crossed the picket line.

1. They never thought in the first place it would go as far to an actual strike as previous CEO's have always given in at any sign of a possible fuss with the cabin crew.

2. Afraid of the possible consequences involved in going on a strike.

3. Not wanting to lose staff travel (many strikers were actually commuters).

4. Not thinking beyond their next trip which is a good trip i.e. NRT, HKG, CPT, LAX (most were fully crewed with regular crew).

5. Thinking that other crew can take the hit as everyone will still be on same terms and conditions after the strike.

6. Hoping for a promotion if reporting for duty. Back in 1997 they used this threat that if you went on strike you could say goodbye to any future promotion.

7. Not having the courage to go on a strike.

If there was a ballot today I am convinced the outcome would probably be even lower than before. Crew, including strikers, are tired and extremely fed up with the dispute. It has been going on for over a year and everyone wants a settled agreement.

[Papillon]

No, but they were strikebreaking a fully legal and democratic strike.

They were legally and democratically deciding to go to work. You can't have this both ways - people are entitled to break a strike if they wish. You're absolutely right to point out that for a strike to be effective, it needs to have the support of the vast majority, but it doesn't alter the point that just as people are lawfully allowed to strike, others are lawfully allowed to work during that strike.

[MissM]

oldflyboy

Maybe BA should present to all other departments what BASSA has offered but what has been completely denied by the company. No wonder every single department in this company think we are a bunch of spoiled crew when they probably only get one side of the story.

Most crew understand we need to change and I think most are willing to. There are the odd ones who still live in the old days and don't agree to any change or when something is different but they are in minority.

This is not fighting for survival as WW was shouting out last year, which did nothing but bad to the company.

[MissM]

ExecClubPax

That meeting was last year and I was not present. I have always been hoping for and wanting proper negotiation between our union and management. I have never have supported their actions at the race course last year. I can only say it was probably one of BASSA's old tricks showing who's in charge.

Why am I still working for the company? Because it's a lifestyle which suits me and I like my job. I work with really good colleagues (most of the time) and there's a special feeling over it!

[PAXboy]

L337PAXboy I am totally befuddled by your post. You do realise these people elect to commute in their own time, and at their own cost?
[snip]
I could not do it. For me that is madness, but for a few, it suits them.Sorry if I have not made myself clear. I understand that they do this in their own time and of free will. I know that some folks in the UK commute to offices in London with 2.5hr train journey each way in order to maintain a domestic lifestyle and that they are able to work on the train. I, too, could not do that.

The reason I am surprised by it is that: If someone is able to spend all that amount of free time just to get to/from work - then the financial reward must be huge. That fact then tells them their salary is very good. To persist in trying to protect that is human nature but observation of the world across the 35 years of my adult life tells me that the situation is anomalous and cannot be maintained. Essentially, that level of remuneration for their job description is out of balance with 2010 and the market will be corrected. If manufacturing is being exported to China and office jobs to India, you must expect that jobs that require a physical presence will be subject to some constraint.

No, it is not nice to be the one having to give up such a nice salary but look around and see what has happened to everyone else. It is rumoured that some CC think: "OK, if BA goes under, a new carrier will emerge and will want good staff. OK, that might be at a lower rate but - until then - I'm going to hold out for the current rate." If that is the case (rumour!) then they are short sighted. Yes, there will be something to replace BA (at some stage) just as there was to replace Swiss, Sabena and JAL and all the rest but it will NOT have the same range and coverage as there is oversupply of seats in an unprofitable market place! The competition are waiting for BA to fail and will have already prepared several battle plans, may I suggest that taking on disaffected and (formerly) overpaid staff of the failed carrier will not be part of it.

wiggyThe commuting seems to have brought out the green eye in some. If you are referring to me, then - No. I could not care less what commute people choose to give themselves for the benefits they want. My point is set above, the salary to fund a HKG~LHR commute is out of kilter with the job. It is based on contracts of last century and will not continue. My sympathies to those that lose a benefit that they have come to rely upon.

MissMIf you think this only happens at BA you will be in for a surprise.
[snip]
BA has also occasionally used "commuting" as part of their recruitment drives, especially when they were recruiting for language speakers all over Europe.No, I don't think I would be surprised, I'm only surprised it's taken this long for folks to realise the imbalance. If BA have used this to their advantage in the past - fair enough. If they now choose to move the goal posts - fair enough.

May I add that, I think the Union had some valid points to make about the declining standards of BA but their choice to make the argument in this way (with the inevitable focus on salaries) has been a poor one. I shall not rehash my oft stated view that BA is in it's terminal decline phase and no action by any party can stop that. The die is cast, you only have to look at many other old companies in this country and the world. Again, not nice but that is how human beings are.


I should state for the record that I am not (nor ever have been) an employee or shareholder of any airline. Nor am I an avid capitalist who thinks that all staff are out to rip you off. My comments are all based on observing the world and the changing patterns of employment from my father's work (1946~1988) and my own and my siblings since 1973 - which have sometimes worked for me and sometimes against me. As BA CC are now finding out.

[MissM]

Ruthanne

We get to vote on the proposal!

[Ruthanne]

Miss M

Well that is something then, at least you all get a chance to vote for what you think is the right thing for you, there is so much to lose here for all of you! at least by voting you can always justify the whys and the woes for your own individual thinking...good luck

[4t2b]

One thing that intrigues me on these two discusion sites is the seeming disagreement between CC as to just how much support there is for this action.

Apparently ! some have not been able to show their support because they were not rostered for the strike dates, other reasons were quoted which escape me at the moment.

My question is, for what period would a strike have to be to involve ALL the CC ?

Any of you knowledgeable pundits hazard a guess ?

[MPN11]

My question is, for what period would a strike have to be to involve ALL the CC ?

From what I have read, given the number of part-timers on VERY part-time contracts, it could theoretically be a very long time! By the time you also factor in 'not rostered on strike day' and/or 'sick on strike day' it might take months for all CC to actually be rostered during a declared strike period, and then have to put their commitment to BA on the line.

I doubt that situation will arise.

[R Knee]

Ms M (politically correct?) @ 1724 No, but they were strikebreaking a fully legal and democratic strike.

But if they are not a member of Unite they are neither blacklegs (a horribly emotive and very out dated term) nor can they be strikebreakers since their union or personal responsibility does not deem it a legal and democratic strike according to their own interpretation or responsibility since they had no vote in the matter, with which they are allowed legally and democratically to disagree

1984 was quite a thought provoking novel, have you read Animal Farm by the same author? 2 legs good forethought bad to misquote

[MissM]

Some crew works 6 weeks off and 3 weeks on. A strike including everyone would have to be a very long one!

R Knee

Flight crew, ground staff, temporary cabin crew and union crew members who went to work during the strike and performed our job are indeed strikebreakers.

[R Knee]

Beagle 9 said BluRibband, I know it's going back a few pages, but re post 1577 Cabin Crew pay, specifically "CSD basic salary starts at £44,000".

Now as you will see from my posts, I'm firmly in the anti strike camp and VERY critical of BASSA, but purely from the viewpoint of accuracy, I'm a CSD with close to 30 years seniority (16 as a CSD and at the top of the increment scale) and my basic, even now, is over £2000 LESS than that you quote as a starting basic.

I'm sure that the general public will see a £2000 difference in Basic starting Salary and very generous tax advantageous allowances on top, without even considering other ST perks, remains an envious salary . How much do you think a manager of a medium sized nationally owned supermarket earns?

Cribbean: Now, in case anyone thinks that BA won't axe routes, let me list those Asia/Pacific destinations that BA doesn't fly to any more

I know you're talking on the main thread but please can you or other posters quantify these TLAs its just jargon to us non cabin crew. Quite meaningless, is there somewhere others like myself can find out these destinations TLAs?

[emanresuym]

R Knee, you could try Welcome to World Airport Codes (http://www.world-airport-codes.com/)

[TrakBall]

You beat me to it...:ok:

TB

[Boy In Blue]

Hi MissM,

Although I don't often agree with your point of view it is nice to hear it :) I'm sure lightbulbs will be happy to have some support :cool:

I only know two CC. One working and one striking. One at LHR and one at LGW. Easy to work out who is on strike perhaps! Both great people though.

I flew back form BOM during the stike. There appeared to be a few VCC on board but there were also working crew. The CSD appeared to be acting up a grade. I talked to two of the working crew and thanked them for working. I appreciated it. Both were nervous about striking crew returning to work but felt that the Union was leading them down a dead end. They felt the current economy would mean an end for BA if the strikers grounded your airline. They were working to protect their jobs and their belief, in their future, was as valid as any strikers.

I felt sorry for them. I have seen first hand IA get out of control in the mid 80's. Rancour and a fraught return to work. You do not want this at BA. Don't you think its a bit unfair to single out those who worked as being responsible for the unwinnable situation you are now in. IMHO it appears to be Bassa who got you into this mess. You and other strikers should be demanding answers from them. Anyhow, good luck to you and heres hoping that all at BA have a future to look forward to.

[ChicoG]

There has been some talk since the strike but I think one of the issues is that BA and UNITE are really far away from each other which makes it even more difficult to come to an agreement.

MissM, here is the crux of the argument. This dispute could have been resolved had you been given a chance to vote on the offer placed on the table prior to the announcement of strike dates, but UNITE/BASSA decided that you should not have that opportunity. Further, they announced strike dates knowing that this offer would be withdrawn as a result.

Do you not feel that your union are not representing you properly?

Or do you blindly accept everything they say?

As far as I can see, BA and cabin crew may well have been able to see eye to eye, but those in charge of BASSA and UNITE don't want this to happen, as it shows them to be worthless.

[wiggy]

UOTE] My point is set above, the salary to fund a HKG~LHR commute is out of kilter with the job. It is based on contracts of last century and will not continue.
[/QUOTE]

What aspect of the contracts do you think is out of kilter?

1. Being able to afford to commute?

Crewmembers are using Staff Travel, thereby providing the company with revenue for seats that would otherwise be empty. We're talking about commuting once or twice a month, which quite possibly costs less than running a car in the UK.

2. Having time to commute?

Crewmembers duty and flying hours/days off are constrained by the Legal limits for avoidance of fatigue laid down by the CAA. BA crew (certainly pilots) run pretty close to the limit of those figures, no matter where they live. Their commuting is done in their legally required time off.


We're not talking about people ditching work or leaving work early on a Friday PM in order to be able to commute. Personally over the years I've commuted both by road from within the UK and by air (shorthaul, Europe). I've only ever been late, once, when driving, due to traffic on the M4, I've always done standby at the airport when required, and I'm often as not up near the CAA legal limits for hours flown/days worked, and I'm not the only one. I certainly know of several pilots who commute to/from Long Haul destinations. They "block" their work together, commute maybe once a month, and work very close to the legal flying hours limit.

Making Crewmembers live in Colnbrook and walk to work might make some people happy but it will probably not improve profitability or crew availability one bit.

[L337]

The reason I am surprised by it is that: If someone is able to spend all that amount of free time just to get to/from work - then the financial reward must be huge. That fact then tells them their salary is very good.

You are mixing financial reward with lifestyle choices.

Long distance commuting is almost always about family, and secondly lifestyle. Finance is at the bottom. For these people if you halved the salary, they would still do the commute.

Google, crash pads for flight attendants (http://www.google.co.uk/search?q=crash+pads+for+flight+attendants&ie=utf-8&oe=utf-8&aq=t&rls=org.mozilla:en-GB:official&client=firefox-a) You will begin to get the size and extent of the "problem."

To quote another source, in the USA this time where it is a far greater problem.

Pilots for regionals frequently commute across the U.S. for flights because they can’t afford to live near the airports where they’re based, Darby says.

Before operating a plane, they often sleep in crew lounges or at so-called crash pads, temporary apartments where as many as six pilots share a bedroom. Former Colgan pilot Preusser lived full time in a crash pad in Albany, New York, in 2007.

He says he slept on an air mattress and shared a room with three or four people. One pilot slept in a walk-in closet, he says. Many regional pilots can’t afford meals and keep track of which hotels offer free continental breakfasts, Preusser says.

Preusser says he remembers falling asleep in the cockpit while piloting a 50-seat Embraer RJ145. He had been on standby and was assigned at the last minute to fly a 7 p.m. flight from Dallas to Cincinnati.

‘It’s Very Scary’

The next day, he started at 5 a.m. and flew three more flights. On the final trip that day, he dozed off for a few seconds.

“That adds up to: Let’s just play Russian roulette with air traffic safety,” Preusser says. “In the pilot world, being aware of your environment and what the airplane is doing is absolutely requisite. You’re not fully conscious or even conscious at all and then you snap to, and it’s very scary.”

John Nance, a retired Air Force pilot who also flew for Alaska Airlines and has about 40 years of flying experience, says airlines are closing their eyes to issues of training, pay and living conditions among regional pilots.

“This business of see no evil, hear no evil doesn’t cut it,” says Nance, who’s testified for both plaintiffs and defendants in civil cases as an expert on air safety. “It is totally unacceptable legally, morally, ethically for any airline leadership to pretend they don’t know what they know.”

A link to The original article. (http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601109&sid=aaNPBjZ2kB54)

These people commute because they are so poorly paid, not because they are so well paid.

Low cost sometimes does mean low standards.

[Mariner9]

In December we had a 90% turnout and in March it was 10% less than that. Do you think crew would have received some heart changing information in the very last second? It's way above majority and don't you think it's a sign that there's something wrong?

There was indeed clearly something wrong. I wasn't of course there, but understand that most at the meeting who voted to strike believed that the crew member reduction was imposed due to BA's refusal to negotiate. Whereas, the Court judgement found that it was in fact imposed due to BASSA's failure to negotiate. Big difference. I would have changed my view upon reading that judgement.

No doubt the other factors you mentioned caused some, perhaps many, perhaps even the majority of staff to change their mind. Whatever reason it was, people are of course entitled their own viewpoint, even if that POV had changed since the vote. Understandable perhaps that the strikers currently feel let down by this, but if you want to continue your career with BA with any degree of job satisfaction you must come to terms with this, and attempt to regain mutual trust and respect with your colleagues of whatever persuasion.

As for the possibility of further action, I would say that if BASSA/UNITE had any honour whatsoever, they would not call for any further strikes without re-balloting their members. They clearly no longer enjoy 80% support.

PS Once again well done for continuing to argue your case eloquently and without rancour. :D

[R Knee]

Thanks for the link emanresuym now I know!

MissM
By your definition StrikeBreakers would include anyone who assisted in the running of the schedule:

the BA passengers, air traffic controllers, airport bus drivers, hotel staff, the RAC man who mended the car for someone to get to work, the shop assistant who sold a Yorkie to a working crew member, etc.

In fact anyone who wasn't on the picket line .... the rest of the world?

You have every right to strike and I fully support your freedom to do so. You do not have the right to demand everyone else supports you regardless, especially those who do not want to allow your actions to risk their own livelihood. Your arguments are somewhat reminiscent of the old demarcation disputes of the 70s and similarly almost certainly doomed to failure.

[Snas]

Hmmm

Writing in the latest edition of British Airways News, Walsh said: “I very much hope that our customers are not once again disrupted by unnecessary action.”

He said he “genuinely” believed the new offer would be acceptable to cabin crew.

Unite has said the talks with BA are making “serious progress.”

Neither side would comment on the details of the proposals.

New offer eh. We can only but wonder as to the details at the moment I guess, but progress is progress.

[ExSp33db1rd]

let me list those Asia/Pacific destinations that BA doesn't fly to any more

Like - New Zealand ?

Who do you think the Kiwis would have to use to fly to "The Old Country" to help them out in World War III - as they did in I & II ?

"BRITISH Airways ? - who are they " might well be heard ( " and do we care ? " )

BA have just kicked Air New Zealand out of the Interline agreements, too, so that they can't be used for Staff Travel anymore - Whoops ! not allowed to mention that !

[jimd-f]

as i understand the role of a union, it is to represent all its members and to get the best deal for them.
regardless of how/why it was done, BASSA got a mandate not to negotiate from its members. so they have not done anything wrong by refusing to negotiate and by calling a strike, in accordance with the members wishes. they got 64% of all members to vote for a strike(80% of 80%) and called it.
as i see it,if i view this from a union members point of view, if you are 1 of the 36% who voted no, or did not vote, then you are still bound by the rules of the union to follow the majority and strike.if you choose not to, then i feel that you have no other option than to resign from the union. that is the only honest decision that you can make.
of the 64% who voted yes, and then went against their views and went to work, you should also resign from the union, as you clearly have no sense of right and wrong nor honour.
if you are part of the 64% who voted yes, and went on strike, then good luck to you for making your most courageous decision and being prepared to back it up when called on.
that only leaves those members, who were no doubt part of the 64%, who were not rostered and attended the football club "to support their comrades" and then went to work for whatever reason on other strike days;you should be so ashamed of yourselves and should at the very least resign from the union, and should reflect on their choice as i would not care to work with someone so two faced under any circumstances.
having said all that, i feel that the majority of cabin crew, partly due to the way they have been brain-washed by BASSA over the years, have never truly been in a position to understand what has been happening on their behalf -the "ballot" at the football ground being the classic example, as well as their refusal to read messages from BA because BASSA told them they didn't need to read BA's lies - and so must shoulder most of the blame for where they are now.
the BASSA committee should also shoulder a large % of the blame for continuing to put their own interests before that of their members. the fact that very few, if any, were actually physically "on-strike" i.e, in a position where they lost wages or staff travel is to me repugnant. all 55 committee members should have told BA that they were unavailable for work on day1 of the strike, whether they were suspended/sick/unrostered, and led from the front. the fact they did not should, i feel, be the subject of an emergency general meeting demanding they stand down and seek re-election.
from my personal point of view, i admire the staff that made a stand early, and backed BA, as i feel that was the trigger for those no voters and those that subsequently changed their minds to rally to the BA cause. without the few who had the courage to stand up initially this could have degenerated into an even worse mess than it is now.
i feel that BA have, right from the start, offered a fair deal to the cabin crew, and if the CSD's (BASSA committee??)had not refused to demean themselves by doing a bit of work this could have been settled at a very early stage last year.
how do i see this ending;
BA are still training volunteers so in the event of another strike being called then i would expect BA to run nearly a 100% operation. if a strike is called, supposedly for an indefinite period, then i would expect BA to roster the volunteers for the forseeable future and, as promised by Mr Francis, anyone choosing to return to work after taking part in the next strike could find that they have to wait a fair amount of time before they got rostered, and i would be willing to bet that they would not get any of the "plum" routes for a long while.i think this is when the 90 day notice period will kick in, and so i would be very wary about taking part in the next strike call.

this has been a complete disaster for the union and its members, and it was/is the wrong fight at the wrong time and for the wrong reason.

my opinion on why this has come about; ms malone and her committee could not bring themselves to go back on the trolley.

i am SLF who uses BA when i can, and have nothing to do with any union

[pencisely]

Have just booked club world down to Delhi in May, a few things that the BASSA militants might like to consider -

I usually use another carrier on this route but because of your action have now come back to BA as a show of support
I really hope the flight falls in the next strike period because -
I fully expect BA to be able to get me to and from my destination as they did during the last strike period
Although my last flight to SFO was cancelled during the 2nd strike period BA seamlessly moved me onto an earlier flight with an upgrade so perhaps this may happen again
The atmosphere on the flight with the dedicated and brave CC standing up to the union intimidation along with several VCC was absoloutely brilliant, it was a real siege mentality with everyone working for the same cause
The prospect of travelling in a Non strike period with no doubt some element of militant BASSA CC on board is really quite depressing. No doubt the strained atmosphere will be felt by all
I am not alone in this view amongst the business community and know of many premium corporate customers returning to BA to show their supportGood luck with whatever it is you were trying to achieve, it really does look now as if it is game over.

[Ancient Observer]

If I worked for BA I would be VERY worried about future bookings.
Never mind what the spinners of BA and/ot Bassa are saying.............I rang up 2 days ago to book a BA flight to USA in September for my wife and I.
As ever, the booking was efficiently and effectively taken, and at the end I asked the person taking the booking if they were busy.

She clearly had plenty of time for a chat, and said words to the effect of "It has never been quieter. No-one seems to be booking anything". We could have chatted for some time, but unusually, I was busy and had to ring off!!

Adding that low number of bookings, to the fact that BA are price-matching Virgin to the USA, and I would be very worried about both bookings, and the prices that they are getting for each booking.......

PS - GG and JSL - after my fling with Virgin for Syd. earlier this year, I thought I'd give BA another chance.

[MissM]

Boy In Blue

Do I think it's unfair to single out those who worked? No, not unless they are not part of a union as they wouldn't have had any other choice. If they voted for a strike and still went to work I think they made the wrong decision. They should have supported both their vote and their union.

ChicoG

This dispute could have been solved by now too if nobody had went to work during the strike. Management then would have been forced to come back to negotiations. I think the main reason why BASSA announced strike dates is because they didn't want a déja vu of what happened a few years ago when TW sold us down the river at the eleventh hour.

I don't blindly accept or believe everything they say but I don't have enough faith in our management to give up my trust in our union. They have negotiated for the best terms and conditions in the UK and don't always do bad things. When you look at what was on the table a year ago it looks like a good proposal but I still have a feeling they would have gone ahead with New Fleet. Too much time and work have been put into it.

Mariner9

There is a difference. The judge said he might have ruled differently if the situation had been different so he was not solely on BA's side. This strike is about protecting our jobs and as much as people seem to deny the fact that WW isn't after our union I disagree.

Imposition was placed on us because they couldn't reach an agreement. I don't believe BASSA can be solely blamed for this. BA is also to be blamed and as I have pointed out previously, they are far away from each other and I don't think WW is easy to negotiate with. Neither is BASSA. They probably don't have as much support as before but I think there's still a majority. It doesn't necessary mean that if we were re-balloted it would in favor of a strike because crew, myself included, are extremely tired of this. It has been going on for a very long time and we want to settle this once and for all.

R Knee

Strikebreakers include people who did OUR job during the strike. Pilots and ground staff who trained to become cabin crew, ex-temporary crew who have come back to the company on a six month contract, regular crew who voted for a strike but crossed the picket line.

[Snas]

The judge said he might have ruled differently if the situation had been different

Try as I might this makes no sense to me at all. Can you explain?

My last speeding fine may have been different if that situation was different also, i.e. if I hadnt been speeding perhaps?

[Surrey Towers]

Miss M.

Shouldn't you be in the other thread? Why are you here? This is for Pax not CC. You are vociferous enough on CC thread so what gives you the right to try to influence the pax. You would not like it other round would you?

The mods ban anyone who NOT CC/airline on the other thread so I can see good grounds to ban anyone who is not a pax.

Go away Miss M we can handle it here thanks very much.

[ChicoG]

This dispute could have been solved by now too if nobody had went to work during the strike. Management then would have been forced to come back to negotiations.

MissM,

I'm terribly sorry, MissM, but how could Management return to negotiations with a union that most of the time refused to negotiate?

And when BA put a reasonable offer on the table - I believe you saw it - and one Unite leader accepted an extension of the ballot period to allow CABIN CREW to consider this offer, another Unite leader called a strike knowing it would sabotage this opportunity for YOU to make your own decisions.

It is this naive mentality - that a strike would win the day for BASSA - that that has left Malone and the rest of them looking like a bunch of sour-faced ne'er-do-wells who have no support from the rest of the company.

What I don't understand is how you can let these people lead you over a cliff like lemmings, when you should be DEMANDING to know what BA are offering so that you can decide for yourselves if you want to accept it.

The people doing the negotiations here are the ones that do not want to do a bit of trolley work, and they are making decisions based on how it affects THEM and not YOU.


Go away Miss M we can handle it here thanks very much.

Surrey Towers,

MissM not only offers an interesting insight into the mindset of cabin crew (whether you like it or not is a separate issue), but she can also listen to what pax think and perhaps carry the message back to her colleagues.

I for one think it's good that she posts here, and her opinion is as welcome as those who did not support the union in this debacle, so unless you've become a moderator here, I'd rather you didn't try and decide who posts what in this forum, thank you. If you aren't interested in her posts, I would suggest that you simply skip past them.

[Snas]

Surrey Towers, I disagree totally.

[MissM]

Go away Miss M we can handle it here thanks very much

Fair enough. I'll leave this thread!

If anyone wants some answers feel free to PM me!

[Mariner9]

I think the majority (over 80% ;)) of posters on here wish you to continue to post on this thread Miss M. In my view, this is a constructive debate :D

[fincastle84]

Please don't leave, your comments have brightened up what has become a rather mundane discussion.

Ignore Surrey Towers; he/ she is in an intolerant minority.

[R Knee]

Surrey towers -

You do not win an argument by refusing to listen to any view but your own. Miss M should be allowed to present the case for BASSA.

[Llademos]

Exsp33db1rd stated ...

BA have just kicked Air New Zealand out of the Interline agreements, too, so that they can't be used for Staff Travel anymore - Whoops ! not allowed to mention that !

The truth is somewhat different ... (fromthe BA Intranet)

The majority of rebate travel agreements with other airlines are Zonal Employee Discount (ZED) agreements. The benefit of these agreements is that bookings can be made online and that only one ticket is required when a number of ZED airline operate the route and the fare is the same.

Other agreements are percentage agreements. These are not based on the ZED system and therefore cannot be automated.

Negotiations have been taking place with these airlines for over a year trying to move them to ZED, most however are not in a position to do this at the moment and there is little chance of this changing.

Because of this the agreements with the following airlines will be terminated on 28 February 2010 and no travel will be permitted after this date regardless of the date of ticket issue or ticket expiry date.

Air Botswana (BP)
Air New Zealand (NZ)
Air Pacific (FJ)
Bahamasair (UP)
Royal Air Maroc (AT)
Royal Brunei (BI)
Singapore Airlines (SQ)
Tunisair (TU)

I know, not particularly relevant to the thread, but I don't like people stirring when the facts show otherwise.

[MPN11]

1. Perfectly happy to have MissM here. I can read the 'other thread' easily by having another 'window' open, but like all SLF we can't enter into public debate there. Besides, it saves me having to communicate with her by PM ;)

2. Llademos, exspeedbird's everlasting concern is the impending withdrawal of 'pensioners rights'. When he retired [a long time ago] he was entitled to cheap travel for life. BA have decided to remove that right at some point in the next couple of years.

[Neptunus Rex]

On the other thread, on which we cannot post, they are talking about the bidding system. From a passengers point of view, it is simply dreadful. It seems that the oldest, most senior CC get the lion's share of the good trips, such as Hong Kong. Too often these senior crew are the ones with 'attitude.' No wonder a lot of businessmen prefer to travel with Asian carriers, who do not suffer from that particular malaise.

There are notable exceptions. Some years ago, I was travelling in J Class on United from Auckland to Sydney. The weather was great, and the seat belt sign went out at about 5,000 ft in the climb. Two minutes later, I saw two senior ladies pushing the drinks trolley uphill! They were both over 50, smiling, charming and a credit to United. The service on that flight was up there with the best I have known. I did not expect vintage Pouilly Fuissé on an American carrier.

http://www.augk18.dsl.pipex.com/Smileys/trip.gif

[MissM]

Back for a moment then...

ChicoG

Our union refused to negotiate because some members raised their hand and voted for no further talks. I wasn't at the meeting last year and have never been against negotiations.

I would never allow BASSA to led me over the cliff. I can make my own decisions based on what I read and hear. I'm not like some of my colleagues propaganda with the purpose of brainwashing you. Why did I choose to go on strike? Because I have very little faith in BA that they are wanting to do what's best for us. They have their own set agenda and this is not the first time management has ignored our agreements.

This dispute is not about our CSD's working on a trolley. It's about imposition (I'm beginning to hate this word) and could easily be confused with the fact that crew members were removed in November and December last year but also because BASSA seems to be insisting that they should be put back. I don't think it's too much of an issue any more to have our CSD's working on a trolley even though that some flights can be VERY difficult to manage. Today, six months later it's not important for me to have them back to their previous position. I had a different opinion around Christmas but back then we were also getting used to our new practices.

From my understanding it was BASSA who called the strike dates and I think it's for the simple reason that years ago when we had another dispute with the company TW agreed to a settled agreement with BA at the eleventh hour. They were simply afraid this would happen again.

[Boy In Blue]

Surely you are free to post on this thread now that you have, I'm guessing, lost your ST.

Welcome to the ranks of the SLF sister.




:) ......Not meant in a cruel way..... :)

BIB xx

[Der absolute Hammer]

I take a big liberty and paste a table from the other thread which is reserved for the enlightened or the deluded - you can read that any way you want to.

Further information for crew who have lost staff travel concessions from 14 April 2010.

Q I have a trip booked for travel on British Airways, but I don’t return until 15 April, will I still be able to use the ticket to come home?
A No, the loss of staff travel concessions applies from 14 April 2010, therefore all travel must be completed before then. If you choose to travel out on a rebated ticket before that day, you will be responsible for arranging alternative means of getting home after 14 April 2010. Any unused tickets for yourself or nominees will no longer be valid and the reservations will be cancelled, please apply for a refund on these tickets in the normal way.

Q I am travelling on my partner's concessions and we are booked on their 100% rebate ticket to travel in May. Will I still be able to go?
No, you are unable to travel as a nominee of another serving or former British Airways employee from 14 April 2010.

Q I am a commuter, how will I get to work?
Staff travel is a non contractual, discretionary concession, there is no contractual entitlement. It is your responsibility regardless of where you work to ensure you are able to report for duty. Prior to the ballot for industrial action and again before the strike, it was clearly communicated that any individuals choosing to take strike action would lose staff travel eligibility.

Q My friend is travelling on my concessions and is due to fly back on 21 April, will she be able to fly?
No, the loss of staff travel concessions applies to your nominees from 14 April 2010. If your friend decides to travel, they will need to arrange alternative means of travelling home.

Q I have a staff travel ticket booked with another carrier for travel after 14 April, am I allowed to use it?
No, all travel must be completed by 14 April 2010. Any unused tickets for yourself or nominees will no longer be valid and you will need to cancel the reservation and apply for a refund on these tickets in the normal way. Any travel that takes place on any another carrier (including Oneworld, franchises and subsidiaries), after 14 April 2010, or contacting other airlines directly to request rebate travel will be considered misuse of staff travel and will be managed using the appropriate disciplinary procedures.

Q If I change jobs, will I get my staff travel concessions back?
No, the loss of staff travel is permanent and applies to any future jobs you may move to.

Q I have completed over 15 years of continuous service with British Airways. When I leave, will I be eligible for staff travel concessions?
No, the loss of staff travel is permanent, therefore you will no longer be eligible for former staff concessions.

Q I took strike action on the first dates, but came to work during the second strike dates, do I still lose my staff travel concessions?
Yes, the loss of staff travel concessions applies to all crew who took strike action.

With such a generous privilige available for friends, oneself, lovers, partners and retirees etc - is it any wonder now that so many are about to loose their fantastic freebies, that seat numbers will be down? This will surely benefit the airline. It will save BA fuel and free up seats for potential revenue passengers or perhaps even more profitable freight weight?

[dubh12000]

I can't help but get the impression that there is a significant proportion of the BA CC still living in some sort of bubble....

Anyways, travelling BA at the weekend, using up the auld airmiles. By all accounts, speaking with our company TA rep forward bookings on BA are shocking. The big two corporate agencies are giving BA a wide berth apparently.

[MPN11]

@ MissM ... and glad you stayed!

Why did I choose to go on strike? Because I have very little faith in BA that they are wanting to do what's best for us.
BA do not want what's best for you. They never will either ... because they're not a Charity or part of your extended family. They are a business, and they will do what is best for the Company and the shareholders. You really do need to learn to live with that reality.

They have their own set agenda ...
Of course they have their own agenda ... they would be stupid if they didn't. They need to drive down costs, which mean that NEW employees at some point in the future [not YOU] will be on less-favorable terms.

... and this is not the first time management has ignored our agreements.
When it comes to agreements [like Disruption] BASSA have a track record of ignoring them. And refusing to discuss matters such as BA Finance. And refusing to sit with CC98.


Remind us, which agreements did BA ignore?
Your 'concern' appears to be constantly about "imposition" - which has not been imposed on YOU.
You constantly say that you do not trust BA - so why not leave?



This can go on forever .... :bored:

[Landroger]

Oh well played Surrey Towers - what a blinder. :D Just how did you hope to improve the quality and interest of this thread by telling one of the key players to 'go away'? :ugh:

Mariner9 wrote: "I think the majority (over 80% ) of posters on here wish you to continue to post on this thread Miss M. In my view, this is a constructive debate" I agree.

Fincastle84 wrote: "Please don't leave, your comments have brightened up what has become a rather mundane discussion.

Ignore Surrey Toweres; he/ she is in an intolerant minority." I agree.

R Knee wrote: "Surrey towers -

You do not win an argument by refusing to listen to any view but your own. Miss M should be allowed to present the case for BASSA." I agree.

Chicog wrote: "MissM not only offers an interesting insight into the mindset of cabin crew (whether you like it or not is a separate issue), but she can also listen to what pax think and perhaps carry the message back to her colleagues." I agree.

Others wrote in support of Miss M's presence in this thread. I agree.

If all you can contribute is to be rude and offer counterproductive suggestions, may we ask that you do it elsewhere? This thread and the main one are too delicately balanced for buffoonery. :=

If Surrey Towers does not offer an apology, may I offer Miss M a general apology? :) It should not have happened. :ok:

Roger.

[Der absolute Hammer]

Just renew my Gold Card please, which has expired, and I'll come back to BA and so I think will many others in the same circumstances. The Virgin red and the Dutch blue lounges are just not quite the same.

Do you think MissM (Oh welcome, welcome I make haste to add) could be Miss Malone of apparent and of course much undeserved evil repute?

[4t2b]

Can't help thinking that all the talk about forward bookings is based on conjecture rather than facts. The bookings I am making, and researching, do not seem to be any cheaper compared with other airlines, suggesting that BA are not too worried.

Personally I am still doing what I have always done, looking for the most convenient and cost effective way to fly. BA continues to give me the best deal for the Atlantic runs but fails on the Middle East.

Of course I would not book BA during a planned strike but I do not allow the threat of a strike to deter me.

One further question when does price matching become price fixing (BA/Virgin) ?

[MPN11]

@ Hammer ... thanks for the cross-posting of the FAQ on the previous page.

"Ouch" indeed, but then everyone except the ostriches knew all that was going to happen.

[Der absolute Hammer]

Price fixing occurrs when Willie speaks with Dickie and since Dickie dumped Willie in the pond to the tune of £270m over the last lot of price fixing? Probably not at all.

[Stelton]

You constantly say that you do not trust BA - so why not leave?

I think I know the answer!

Miss M says she has been with BA for 15 years so a rough estimate is that her basic salary is somewhere around £30.000 a year - excluding allowances so throw in another £12000. Not bad! :ok:

[cym]

Its important that the views of staff like MissM are listened to, they are the otherside of an argument / dispute that needs to be resolved.

Whilst some may not agree with her perspective she has every right, as does every member of PPRune to share them with us.

[Der absolute Hammer]

Well I am not so sure about that. I thought that the purpose of this thread was::::

Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight) If you are regularly a passenger on any airline then why not post your views or questions here? Many of us pilots like to know exactly what you think of us, the job, the airline or anything that you think we should hear about.

So I don;t think that the purlieu extends to debate with striking cabin staff. But you have my permission to continue of course if you feel it is your right.

[pvmw]

Well I am not so sure about that. I thought that the purpose of this thread was::::Passengers & SLF (Self Loading Freight)


Er, no. The purpose of this THREAD is "BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions"

So I don;t think that the purlieu extends to debate with striking cabin staff. But you have my permission to continue of course if you feel it is your right.
That is very generous of you to give us your permission. I join the others here to say that MissM, whether or not I agree with you I hope that you continue to post on this thread. I want to try to understand what is the motivation of the striking crew, and without hearing the other side of the argument this will become a very sterile place. Please disregard Hammer and his ilk, and continue to post your thoughts here. I suspect you won't change any views, but by posting and reading here you will at least make your position clear - and possibly appreciate the other point of view.

By the way, just why ARE you striking, and what would it take to satisfy you. These are two questions that I have still never seen answered satisfactorily.

[Mariner9]

By the way, just why ARE you striking, and what would it take to satisfy you. These are two questions that I have still never seen answered satisfactorily

To be fair to Miss M, I think she has answered your 1st question in a number of posts over the last couple of days. Basically, she is striking due to a fear of future imposition based upon a lack of trust in the BA Management*.

Whats not clear to me yet though is what her view of the 2nd question is. Presumably, the only acceptable outcome would be for trust to be restored. Perhaps she doesn't know how that may be achieved?

*Miss M - Apologies in advance in case I've misrepresented your views.

[iwalkedaway]

Possibly because I have been self-employed for more than 40 years I cannot credit why anyone would choose to continue working for an employer they say they regard as untrustworthy, bullying, vindictive and 'evil' AND endure all the alleged pain and stress of 'fighting' against 'the system'. Surely the tenacity shown in clinging on to such a stressful job under such a dreadful employer can only indicate that the compensation for doing so offers enormous advantage - such as the best pay and perks in the aviation business? If BA is as awful an employer as the BASSA militants plainly find it, surely the simple answer is for them to find more congenial work elsewhere. Trust me. You're only here once, so why spend the limited time your God has given you by suffering so badly at BA's hands? Unless, of course, this relentless whingeing is merely cosmetic hot air, which seems quite possible. The phrase constantly springing to mind is 'get a life'... The most enjoyable flights I have ever experienced have been ones on which the CC as well are obviously enjoying life.

[ExSp33db1rd]

Llademos

........but I don't like people stirring when the facts show otherwise.

The fact is that Air New Zealand is no longer available for rebate travel to BA staff.

w.e.f. 28th February ANZ no longer features on the list of available airlines for selection. ( I've checked, and as you clearly have access to the Intranetsite, you can do the same )

ANZ is undoubtedly available for Interline travel amongst other airlines, it is only BA that have instituted this action against them, for BA's convenience.

........the following airlines will be terminated on 28 February 2010 and no travel will be permitted after this date regardless of the date of ticket issue or ticket expiry date.

Maybe ' kicked out ' was a bit emotive but the result is the same however you wrap it up or put a 'spin' on it.

[74woko]

Interesting remark from DaH apropos the (highly valued, if not much agreed-with) Miss M. If she isn't, she might as well be, given her resolutely immovable mental set. Mind you, 'if nobody had went to work' tends to me to suggest a Scots, rather than Irish, derivation.

[button44]

Miss M said....
I don't blindly accept or believe everything they say but I don't have enough faith in our management to give up my trust in our union.

Sorry to say this, but if the militant CC's are not removed from BA the company will never be allowed to move forward. I for one do not intend to fly on a plane with a divided CC, some of whom seem to live in a land of maybe/could happen, so we'll strike in case and with no trust in their employer....that's a two way street I would suggest!:ugh:

[just an observer]

Der absolute hammer wrote


With such a generous privilige available for friends, oneself, lovers, partners and retirees etc - is it any wonder now that so many are about to loose their fantastic freebies, that seat numbers will be down? This will surely benefit the airline. It will save BA fuel and free up seats for potential revenue passengers or perhaps even more profitable freight weight?


Staff on staff travel can never take up seats of potential revenue passengers. Staff use unsold seats. How many times does this have to be said?

[PAXboy]

This reply is long so do ignore if you wish but I am trying to clarify my points and this is an interesting discussion.
wiggyPAXboy What aspect of the contracts do you think is out of kilter?
1. Being able to afford to commute?
2. Having time to commute?Time. If I could afford to give up one or two or even three days to commute to work, then I must count those as, basically, work days. True, I might see friends along the way but flying and airports and one night crash pads are not that restful. So, I must be paid a lot of money to offset not having those days to be fully for myself and my family.

We're not talking about people ditching work or leaving work early on a Friday PM in order to be able to commute.Sure, I did not think that and I have seen countless office workers sloping off early to get home or on a Friday for a long weekend. I appreciate that CC cannot do that and they have to work full hours - that is the nature of the job and is clear at the time of application.

Personally over the years I've commuted both by road from within the UK and by air (shorthaul, Europe). I've only ever been late, once, when driving, due to traffic on the M4, I've always done standby at the airport when required, and I'm often as not up near the CAA legal limits for hours flown/days worked, and I'm not the only one. I certainly know of several pilots who commute to/from Long Haul destinations. They "block" their work together, commute maybe once a month, and work very close to the legal flying hours limit.In which case, they are being very well paid so that they can afford to give more time to commuting and jolly good luck to them. My point is that - if I were an employer and could see that many of my staff could afford that amount of time to commute, I would think I was paying them too much. If I was being paid that much, I would consider myself very lucky indeed and be looking around to see when it would come to an end.

Being self-employed, if I am asked to work 100 miles away, I have to ask more money to do the job. If they will not pay that, I have to decide if I am going to work for less money or not take the work. If I was taking a permanent job 100 miles away, exactly the same decision has to be made.

L337You are mixing financial reward with lifestyle choices.I don't think so as they are inextricably linked. My financial reward defines many of my lifestyle choices. If I earn enough money to commute to an office 250 miles away (irrespective of the method) then I am sacrificing some money to gain lifestyle at home and enduring a reduced quality of life during the commute, to offset the increased quality of time at home with family (or whatever the case may be).
Long distance commuting is almost always about family, and secondly lifestyle. Finance is at the bottom. For these people if you halved the salary, they would still do the commute. Some would, some would not. For some, halving the money would then swing the balance too far and they would move closer to work, or find work closer to home. Whilst there are some that can receive more money and not change their lifestyle, mostly, people more or less money does change people. Cutting someone's income by 50% would affect their lifestyle and their choice of where to work.

To quote another source, in the USA this time where it is a far greater problem.
[snip]
These people commute because they are so poorly paid, not because they are so well paid. Low cost sometimes does mean low standards.I can see that for pilots in the USA this is a real issue and the causes are complex. I have no doubt that the deregulations of the 1980s brought benefits and problems for all. Once enough people have died and the finger can be pointed firmly at this issue - then the rules will be changed. Then fares will go up but, hopefully, safety will improve again. I have no doubt that it is a real problem and that low cost can mean low standards. However, that is pilots in the US and I was making observations about CC, specifically in BA.

I accept that commuting (domestically, regionally, internationally) is an accepted part of life as airline crew (FC or CC) and that it has been supported by high fares to enable carriers to pay high salaries. BUT - I am suggesting that in the worst financial period for 80 years, it may not be possible for carriers to charge those fees to make their airline profitable and to pay the salary levels enjoyed in the past 30 years. In seeking to reduce costs, every single item will be up for grabs.

For what its worth: I have worked in major international corporations and am now self-employed. I have enjoyed a company car and supported mortgage yet, I have also been paid by the hour for working in a kitchen and as a labourer. When I was first married, I worked two jobs at the same time, which meant working three nights (Friday/Saturday/Sunday), finishing at 07:00 on Monday and starting again at the main job at 09:00. I have belonged to a trade union and on one occasion befitted from being a member and on another lost because I was. I have been made redundant and had a company dismiss me illegally. So I do understand something about working hours.

I am now responsible for every penny I earn and spend. If my costs increase, my profit goes down - just like it did when I worked in the City of London and had a department budget of £1.7m. Across my career in telecommunications, I worked for over 140 companies in various capacities from telephonist when I started to consultant when I stopped, these companies ranged across every aspect of commerce and government. I have seen something of employment and the changing fortunes of time since I first worked behind the counter of a department store aged 16 in the school holidays in 1972 (I am 53).

[ExSp33db1rd]

So, I must be paid a lot of money to offset not having those days to be fully for myself and my family.



Why should anyone be paid extra to live a long way from work ? - Unless ... the employer has moved you for their convenience, or it is deemed in their interest to have you live near your employment, e.g. there used to be something called a 'London Allowance paid by some employers - not BA, different issue.

The work pattern of BA aircrew make it possible to live a long way from Base, but it isn't mandatory -is it ?

It might be worth mentioning that 'normal' i.e. 9 - 5 workers by and large leave home after 7.oo am and are back home before 7.oo pm ( I know that is a generalisation, but it covers a lot of the population ) so they aren't even away from home for even half a day of the five that they work, then they get another 2 days off at the weekend !! Maybe they are away from home a max. of 2.5 days a week ? I used to be criticised by my neighbours for 'always' being at home - and I rarely achieved even 50/50 time away to time at home spread over a lifetime, i.e I achieved some 3.5 days a week at ' home v. my neighbours who enjoyed 4.5 days at home with their family. ( and I could never plan to be home for Christmas Day, Birthdays etc. - I knew I had been after the event ! Bidline rostering helped change that of course )

Just a thought when people complain about how much time off at home crew enjoy !

( I know, time away is spent lazing on some Caribbean beach - Yeah, right ! )

[Dawdler]

Jimd-F wrote:
if you are 1 of the 36% who voted no, or did not vote, then you are still bound by the rules of the union to follow the majority and strike.if you choose not to, then i feel that you have no other option than to resign from the union. that is the only honest decision that you can make.Some BASSA members seems to be taking your advice. On 1st April the Bassa membership stood at 10,450. Today, two weeks later it is 10,413! I have been watching his figure over the last few months, I only wish I had taken note of the actual figure on 1st November last, (I think it was around 10,800 but can't be sure). A loss of 37 in two weeks, is consistent with that sort of figure. This would equate to about £150,000 in lost subscriptions in a year, something like 8% of the total. Perhaps BASSA now understand lost revenue. BA have been trying to tell them about the consequences of this sort of thing for the last twelve months.

[wiggy]

In seeking to reduce costs, every single item will be up for grabs.


Ah well we can at least agree on something!

My final "shot" on this.
1. Staff Travel generates revenue for BA.
2. Under the current law of the land it's impossible for BA to squeeze much, if any, extra work for the majority of 's pilots, can't comment for Cabin Crew.
3. Commuting is done in people's off duty time.

So short of changing the national rules for the prevention of fatigue, and/or banning traveling by air when off duty the only way BA can stop staff members commuting is by cutting pay. Is that what you are suggesting?

[oggers]

A BASSA supporter on the other thread:

I can't say why other departments don't seem to be worried about what the company might do. Maybe those who volunteered to train as cabin crew should think about their own positions as there seemed to be enough time for their duties to be left unattended.

I thought that vcc were available because of the reduced business during the strike, and that other departments have already negotiated with management? It seems the pro-strikers are preaching to themselves and failing to look outside their little bubble and see what's going on in the rest of the company, and indeed the industry.

[emanresuym]

It might be worth mentioning that 'normal' i.e. 9 - 5 workers by and large leave home after 7.oo am and are back home before 7.oo pm ( I know that is a generalisation, but it covers a lot of the population ) so they aren't even away from home for even half a day of the five that they work, then they get another 2 days off at the weekend !! Maybe they are away from home a max. of 2.5 days a week ? I used to be criticised by my neighbours for 'always' being at home - and I rarely achieved even 50/50 time away to time at home spread over a lifetime, i.e I achieved some 3.5 days a week at ' home v. my neighbours who enjoyed 4.5 days at home with their family. ( and I could never plan to be home for Christmas Day, Birthdays etc. - I knew I had been after the event ! Bidline rostering helped change that of course )

ExSp33dB1rd: I understand your argument, but I'm not sure it is the full story. You are assuming that every hour at home is as valuable as any other. This just isn't the case. I suspect that most people would say that being at home during the day is more valuable than being at home during the night (when most people are asleep). In my case for example, I have chosen to work from home for many years. This has cost me some promotion opportunities, but I have always felt it was worthwhile, especially when my children were very young. It has meant that over my working life I have been able to spend much more time with my family. However, this has required me to be at home during the hours of daylight. Being at home at night, when my children (and wife) are asleep doesn't really provide me any benefit.

[Ancient Observer]

Dear ex-Speedbird,

Whilst your one-person campaign about BA's pensionner travel arrangements has been amusing for some time, I really do think that you should stop it for now on pprune. Use your energy for it spmewhere else, please.

I, along with many customers, also have a "grudge" with BA. Once we had been gold card holders for a number of years, they promised us "Silver (cards) for life".

BA lied to us.

Their promises were as honest as a Government's promise - as transient as "No more boom and bust" or "Tough on Crime".

So having conned us as customers, and gained our business on a lie, we are upset.

However, we don't keep on going on about it on pprune. If we did, we would bore the other contributors to death, make the pprune experience much worse, and the mods would remove us.

So please stay as a contributor, but take the pension issues somewhere else.

[MissM]

MPN11

How do you know that BASSA has a record of ignoring existing agreements?

As to your three other questions. BA has repeatably ignored agreements. We only have to go back a few years to see another example. BA and BASSA signed a settlement agreement in 2007. Why do you think we were in another dispute with them a year later? Because BA failed to honor it! They have also in the past imposed other practices without negotiations like the W2W system (willing to work) when we had enough rostering issues with the 900 hour regulation.

BA keeps doing this with the purpose to undermine agreements. This answers your two first questions. Why not leave BA? Because I am used to this lifestyle and work with some really good people. It also keeps me out of the UK for almost two weeks every month!

Stelton

Do you think I earn £42.000 a year? Not according to my payslips!

Mariner9

:)

I think it can be difficult to get the confidence back when you have had bad experiences in the past. It won't change overnight but BA to keep their word for once could be a beginning. By this I don't mean what they would do last year if we didn't reach an agreement with them.

button44

I think you will find that most of these "militant" crew are wanting what's best for the company. Nobody wants to stand in BA's way for progress and grow as an airline.

[Jarvy]

Miss M, if I recall you are on a part time contract so no you don't earn 42k but you could.
If I didn't trust my employer I couldn't work for them.
The important point here is how can BA move forward. It does seem that the two sides are still far apart.

[ChicoG]

I think you will find that most of these "militant" crew are wanting what's best for the company.

I think you'll find the perception of every other stakeholder, pax included is that the militant members of BASSA want what's best for themselves.

Nobody wants to stand in BA's way for progress and grow as an airline.

Yet this is precisely what BASSA did by refusing to negotiate once their "offer" to save money was shown to be hideously overstated.

Everything else that has been lost by cabin crew has been a result of the continued losses while BASSA stuck their fingers in their ears and refused to negotiate. Had they accepted the need to voluntarily remove a single staff member in the first place, it would not have got to this point. This dispute could have been finished a year ago. Instead of which BASSA are now 'negotiating' a much worse deal, knowing that BA have them over a barrel.

Again, why do the BASSA LHR diehards think it is OK for LGW staff to work a little harder but point blank refuse to accept this themselves when financial circumstances made it an easy option (bearing in mind no-one was forced out of their job)?

As an independent observer in all of this, I can only surmise what most others think: That the ancient CSDs who populate BASSA are so used to putting their feet up in the office having grudgingly said a few hellos and filled out a few forms, that they resented having to go back to doing some real work - and were willing to use the threat of wielding a very easily led membership to strike, just to avoid it.

Incredibly selfish, and they have represented their membership extremely poorly as a result. The only thing I find hard to understand is why the membership have put up with it for so long, when the reality is that BA are aware of the need to keep their existing staff happy, and the only other thing they asked was that future crew be recruited on more modern and industry-standard terms.

I fear your "lack of trust" in the company is borne out of BASSA's tub thumping and hysteria - and I've seen it first hand with some BA CC friends of mine who refuse to accept there are two sides to the issues that caused this dispute, and I don't just mean "BASSA are protecting us and BA are trying to :mad: us", which is churlish and naive at best.

And thank you for coming back to the thread, even if some of us may vehemently disagree with some of what you say; your presence here adds a worthwile facet to the discussion.

[R Knee]

Welcome back MissM, it was a bit dull without you.

Any comments on the socialist worker report re: Derek Simpson? I see there's another unite 4 labour meeting tonight with him and Prezza.

[Diplome]

Personally, I have to be rather cynical regarding this statement:


I think you will find that most of these "militant" crew are wanting what's best for the company. Nobody wants to stand in BA's way for progress and grow as an airline.


I've seen nothing out of BASSA in the last six weeks that any individual could interpret as being positive for BA. Quite the opposite.

As for the "trust" issue bandied about by every Cabin Crew member upset because their IA produced negative results for BASSA, hence negative results for their members, trust works both ways.

As a stockholder and customer do I "trust" BASSA to not obstruct any changes, no matter how minor, simply for the purpose of grandstanding? Absolutely not. Do I "trust" the militant cabin crew to behave like professionals and reasonable adults in the future after watching their behavior over the strike days and observing conduct such as developing a porn site to smear co-workers and BA with? That would be silly. Do I "trust" BASSA or militant cabin crew to not spread obvious misrepresentations for the purpose of negatively impacting their employer? No.

I was at the Grand National last saturday. There were five women at our table and to a person the lasting impression they came away with regarding the striking crew members was the vision of that drinking woman wearing the mens undergarment with Mr. Walsh's image on the seat. I had to remind my companions that the majority of Cabin Crew did not strike, in fact they did everything they could do keep the company flying and should not be smeared with the coarse behavior of others.

Is BASSA a group that I'm expecting great things out of in the future? Who would be so foolish. Thank goodness that the militants are in the minority and that BA has finally decided that they, and not BASSA, will run the airline.

..and as an aside, how can anyone allow themselves to be represented by a Union that will not even allow their members to vote on offers on the table? Does BASSA not "trust" their own members?

[MPN11]

Hi, MissM ... still trucking on here and on the other thread, I see.

How do you know that BASSA has a record of ignoring existing agreements? Because during the 'great snow' we were told by numerous people on the "other thread" that BASSA wouldn't agree to the Disruption Agreement being implemented.

I'll ignore some of your other questions, as you have a habit of ignoring those directed at you. However ...
Why not leave BA? Because I am used to this lifestyle and work with some really good people. It also keeps me out of the UK for almost two weeks every month!
Two weeks a month? I seem to recall you were a 25% worker ... I must spend some time searching your posts for that statement ;)

[MPN11]

From the Other Thread ...
Hot rumour today regarding the settlement & staff travel - the strikers will be offered ST on one route (a "get you to work" route) and an unlimited number of tickets at the equivalent of ID50. Genius - congratulations BASSA, another own goal.

I used to have my rail season ticket paid by my employer in Central London ... I was never offered another bunch of tickets for friends and family for travel all over the rail system :cool:

Perhaps a bit of reality is creeping into discussions? :ok:

[MissM]

ChicoG

There are always people wanting the very best for themselves. BASSA definitely doesn't want the company to go bankrupt or get smaller. I won't deny that they sometimes have to loosen up their control of the company because it does occasionally get out of hand.

BASSA is used to running the company and afraid of losing their control and this is one of their issues with this dispute. As I said in a previous reply they have always been used to getting what they want and our previous CEO's have backed down at any sight of a possible dispute with the cabin crew.

Why has the membership kept up with it for so long? I keep coming back to faith towards management and this is an issue. Many prefer to trust their union rather than their management because we have been let down on many occasions. BA has also caused a lot of worry in the past two years with planning their Columbus project and many have been extremely worried and scared about what it would mean to us.

Diplome

I don't always agree with BASSA and definitely not some of the behavior during the strike when they were marching down Bath Road and shouting outside the Arora Hotel or wearing underwear with WW's face on the back but that was the nasty side of the strike.

MPN11

Apparently our chairman didn't think the snowstorm was serious enough for our disruption agreement to be implemented. I didn't agree with it and I think BASSA acted out of sulkiness.

A 25% worker? There is no such thing! I work 75% so maybe you had it confused that I get 25% of every month.

[MPN11]

MissM - apologies. I remembered you were part-time, but forgot the detail.

YOUR Chairman [BASSA?] didn't think the weather disruption was enough? Excuse me - do CC Union Reps decide on aircraft operations as well as hot towels?
BASSA is used to running the company and afraid of losing their control and this is one of their issues with this dispute. As I said in a previous reply they have always been used to getting what they want and our previous CEO's have backed down at any sight of a possible dispute with the cabin crew.
You have summed up the issue in that one short paragraph - who runs BA?

That is the exact sort of problem that BASSA has created. Cabin Crew Union Reps are not, unless the World has started rotating in the opposite direction, experts on the realities of aircraft operations. Nor, having spent most of my working life in Ground Ops, would I tell what the FD crew can, or cannot do [well, I did, but that was my job :)], but at least I was closer to what they were interested in - SAFE Operations.

The Reps are seemingly experts on the various T&C, and the rest of the Company's problems are irrelevant.

[fincastle84]

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v479/flapsforty/1136134_f260.jpg

Thanks for the light relief from the other thread. The slide blowing was becoming mind blowing.:ok:

[binsleepen]

From the official thread Eddy (a Striker) chatted to Tiramisu (a non striker and founder of the PCC) in the crew room today. If the (some) strikers know some (at least one) of the founders of the PCC why don't they (the PCC) come out into the open and publicly give their side of the story?

Regards

[MissM]

MPN11

Apparently our union didn't find the weather situation to be severe enough to allow BA to activate the disruption agreement. Big mistake because if BASSA would ever use that as an example of BA breaching our agreements it would go against them as it was one of the severest snowstorm ever in the UK in a very long time. BASSA would have to come up with a very good explanation as to why they refused.

The hot towel issue is a bit more complicated. After 9/11 they agreed to temporary measurements including crewing level reductions. Handing out some hot towels doesn't take very long and is not a problem but there were to be no increase of workload without negotiation. When BA wanted to introduce a hot towel service in WT+ BASSA felt they were trying to get away with another imposition because BA didn't ask them first.

[binsleepen]

Miss M,

Thank you for staying and adding your views into the mix.

Regarding the hot towels in WT+ it beggers belief that crew (through BASSA) seem to have a veto on what ever the management ask. Can you imagine the pizza makers union getting het up if Pizza Express wanted to add a forth type of meat to the meat feast, or the amalgamated union of bar workers striking if All Bar One introduced Rose wine along side red and white. The union is there to represent crew and negotiate for crew NOT to micro-manage every decision. This is where the customs of the past have to change. If BA decide to change the service, for better or worse, it is none of the crews business. It is the crews business to get on and provide that service to the best of their ability, thats what they get paid for, just like any service job. If crew feel that the changes are not working I know you have means to feed that back and that at the end of the day the management will want the change to work so will react accordingly.

I know you already agree that BASSA were at fault over the disruption agreement this year but is it any surprise that BA feel free to ignore agreements when there union partner is so obstructive. BASSA have refused to implement the disruption agreement on numerous occasions prior to this year to the detriment of pax. If BASSA won't stick to agreements why should BA.

Lastly:O how do you feel being one of Mr Simpsons "deluded" being led by "clowns"

Regards

[Mariner9]

The hot towel issue is a bit more complicated. After 9/11 they agreed to temporary measurements including crewing level reductions.

Presumably therefore, that crew member reduction is not assumed to be an imposition as it was agreed with BASSA.

Handing out some hot towels doesn't take very long and is not a problem but there were to be no increase of workload without negotiation. When BA wanted to introduce a hot towel service in WT+ BASSA felt they were trying to get away with another imposition because BA didn't ask them first.

Setting aside the pettiness of this action (saying no because BASSA hadn't been asked first :rolleyes:), why was this considered another imposition if the crew member reduction had been agreed with BASSA and was not therefore "imposed"?

[LD12986]

The hot towel issue is a bit more complicated. After 9/11 they agreed to temporary measurements including crewing level reductions. Handing out some hot towels doesn't take very long and is not a problem but there were to be no increase of workload without negotiation. When BA wanted to introduce a hot towel service in WT+ BASSA felt they were trying to get away with another imposition because BA didn't ask them first.

Hasn't the soft product overall been reduced considerably in the past 10 or so years (Club World Sleeper Service, numerous other cuts to the soft product in all cabins), so the introduction of hot towels would not equal a net increase in workload? Also, the configuration of aircraft has changed over time with few pax overall.

[Landroger]

From the official thread Eddy (a Striker) chatted to Tiramisu (a non striker and founder of the PCC) in the crew room today. If the (some) strikers know some (at least one) of the founders of the PCC why don't they (the PCC) come out into the open and publicly give their side of the story?


Being the sad person I am and having read every post on three of the five 'official threads' and all of them on here, I seem to remember one of the PCCC originators saying something about this.

If memory serves accurately, then the PCCC view on this dispute was to maintain a watching - although interested - brief. I think they felt - probably rightly so - that any attempt to become involved at the point when the PCCC began, would simply confuse an already confused situation. Given the propensity of many hardliners to become vindictive, it makes a lot of sense for those involved to remain incognito.

What is interesting is the fact that it is clear WW and BA management are perfectly well aware of PCCC stated intentions of being a proactive and non-disputational crew organisation. Perhaps if BASSA implodes - and after the alledged remarks by Derek Simpson that wouldn't surprise me - BA might drop word to the PCCC that they might find a sympathetic ear should they want to formalise their council and make an approach in the future? To be in place for the next issue to arise. :ok:

If I am wide of the mark, then my apologies.

Roger.

[MissM]

binsleepen

The hot towel is an issue which I have never really supported and that's because of several reasons. Two of them that handing out a few towels doesn't take longer than two minutes and we do have enough time onboard to do it. We don't need a 16th crew member as BASSA was demanding. What's it all about? Temporary measurements agreed with the company years ago when it was said that there would be no increases onboard without talks.

How do I feel about being one of the deluded ones? Everyone is entitled to their opinion. I have been called worse things than that and as I have never cared about what other people think of me I can't say I'm too bothered with it!

Mariner9

From what I can remember it was said that there would be no added duties onto existing crewing levels without negotiations as long as these temporary measurements were in place.

LD12986

No, you are right and I have never agreed with the hot towel issue for the reasons above but because of the temporary measurements taken after 9/11 the union said there would be no added duties without their approval as it would be thought of as an imposition. That's where the problem lies.

[Mariner9]

Well that would make hot towels the first imposition not another imposition.

Based upon your posts, it would appear that BA have in all, imposed hot towels in WT+ (or tried to), and a slightly higher workload for a few CSD's.

Surely your stated fear of future imposition must stem from something more substantial than this?