BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions

[pencisely]

It is very interesting and appreciated that you have elected to return to this forum.

You express mostly a balanced view of this dispute but with an undertone that demonstrates a mindset of a bygone era.

Having read most of what you have said you make many good points but with an obvious ignorance of how the world has changed around you whilst protected in your BASSA negotiated BA bubble.

Look around you -

UK PLC is pretty much bankrupt and many of your fellow citizens are suffering
If you need closer evidence of how far it has gone just look at the ownership of many of our once great assets? LHR is a good starting point - owned by the Spanish; British Nuclear power generation - the French government; Jaguar - the Inidans; British steel - The same Indians- Thames Water - The Germans ....... etc .. etcBe realistic - you have had a good run but the game is over!

I fly regularly with Virgin and know very well what their CSD equivelants get paid, it is about 50% at best of a BA CSD.

If BA are actually offering a deal that protects your basics T's & C's then just be happy, bite their hands off but do not expect your succesors to receive the same benefits.

Also the notion that your pay level should be proportional to your length of service died in the late 80's.

I also know very well how ridculous some of the BASSA deals have been over the years, hot towels is recent but just continues a theme - BA flight deck crew from regional tell me how the CC were contracted not to move the Biz class curtain in turnaround meaning the flight deck crew had to do it whilc CC drank coffee watching! - get real! - its over!

But don't forget your real weak spot! - 21 days to train a person with no particular educational qualifications to do your job! - if I am incorrect here please advise what the entrance requirements for a CC actually are?

If you really distrust your employer to the extent you indicate isn't it just time to move on? - for the avoidance of doubt this means take your skills and experience and offer them on the market to the highest bidder - only this way will you learn whether or not your current employer is being unfair. Market forces will then ensure that they have to adjust their remuneration package to a level that fulfills their demand.

It may seem harsh but it is the basis of the capitalist economy that we live in - the same one that attracts £10,000 for a 1st class return LFR to SFO and the same one that dictates £350 for the same route economy. It is the world that your employer lives in and guess what? it has changed in a way that probably no one could have predicted when your t's & c's were negotiated.

Miss M - this is not a personal attack but are widely held opinions on this dispute from the business community. I welcome your response as someone who appears as a BASSA moderate.

[Snas]

I wonder if today’s disruption to flights will qualify as worthy in BASSA’s eyes to allow the disruption to have been applied?

Snow wasnt good enough, let's try a volcano now then.

[Ancient Observer]

As I've mentionned on here before I flew as a customer to Syd + back with VS in Jan., in their WT+ product.
I'm not sure that I actually wanted the hot towels when I was given them - 4 times, 1 in each leg, but I have to say that I was delighted to take them as I knoew that BA would not offer them, as it allows the few of its CC to dictate what product it should offer and how it should be offered.

As someone else has pointed out, would Domino Pizzas be so successful if it allowed its delivery riders to dictate what Pizzas they would carry?

I I were in bassa, I would be more worried about my pension - which is dependant on BA's success, than I would be about hot towels.

[Snas]

Without wishing to stay for too much longer on the hot towels issue, as important as it may be as an indicator as to the crazy world that BASSA dwell within...


...it isn’t always the case that you won’t get hot towels on each flight, they are loaded onboard each time and there are some CC that remember that they work for BA and will issue them regardless of BASSA’s small mind on this issue.

I know of one purser personally who says she can gauge how the service will be during the trip by the looks she gets from other crew when she reaches for the hot towels; it’s either expressions of relief or looks of horror which clearly identify which camp the particular CC member is in.

[button44]

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.


As said by others, it really beggars belief that Bassa has been allowed to call the shots in this way. The economic climate at the moment means that most companies are fighting for their continued existence. Bassa seems to think that nothing has changed since the sixties. Sadly no company is too big to fall and if the militants cannot see that they are delusional:=

[Ancient Observer]

Snas,
So the next time I fly with BA in WT+ I can simply tell the quality of the CSD by whether or not I get a hot towel?

[Snas]

Ancient Observer, I’d probably agree that it was an indication of a company / customer focused mindset over one that's more jobs-worth / union minded, if that also translates to a better quality I couldn’t say.

When it comes to quality of service within BA, for me, the issue is one of lack of consistency, it’s either excellent or dreadful (more often than not simply middle of the road).

I believe this is the inevitable result of a service company where its staff are not promoted on merit and generally have to break a law to lose their jobs. It isn’t easy to get fired from BA... sloppy or surly service wouldn’t do it that's for sure.

[PaddyMiguel]

AO
You can tell the quality of the CSD rightaway by the manner in which he/she greets you as you board the aircraft. Many SLF have said how they know how the rest of their flight is going to be within two minutes of stepping on board. Good CSDs create great atmosphere. It is the lack of consistency amongst CSDs that leads to the huge variation in the quality of inflight service you receive.


I believe this is the inevitable result of a service company where its staff are not promoted on merit and generally have to break a law to lose their jobs. It isn’t easy to get fired from BA... sloppy or surly service wouldn’t do it that's for sure.


That's right Snas. No CSD to my knowledge has ever been fired from BA for being a useless CSD though I can think of lots that should have been.

[MissM]

pencisely

I know exactly what is happening around the world and that many companies and people are suffering. Nobody, possibly with some exceptions, could be foolish enough to deny it.

Crew with VS have very poor union representation which is probably one of the reasons for their low salaries as well lower terms and conditions compared to BA. No doubt they want higher salaries and maybe this explains why crew are coming to BA and rarely the other way around. Poor union representation explains why their equivalent to our CSD earns 50% less and if you were in BA you would also know that none of us will not get anywhere near those salaries ever again. Those days are long gone by.

Contracted not to move curtains? I can't comment on it as I have never done shorthaul but it sounds a bit extraordinary.

I was recruited to certain terms and conditions which BA had agreed to with our unions. Nothing wrong with it despite what qualifications were required for the job or how long training was. There were set terms and conditions and a salary package and like you say nobody never could have predicted what would happen. BA is able to put through volunteers for 21 days and then they're all trained and good. Well done. When I was recruited it was a different mantra with a long and extensive recruitment process and training was definitely not 21 days. Why are they able to do it now by cutting back on the recruitment process and training? Because they need strikebreakers standing by to break our strike. That's the only reason.

[Diplome]

Because they need strikebreakers standing by to break our strike. That's the only reason.


Why wouldn't BA and its employees take whatever action necessary to maintain productivity while a minority of Cabin Crew attempt to harm the company and its operations?

BA's response has been reasonable, logical and relatively effective.

A bonus out of this entire fiasco may be increased understanding of the Cabin Crew's role in the airline's operation. A definite positive.

[MPN11]

A bonus out of this entire fiasco may be increased understanding of the Cabin Crew's role in the airline's operation. A definite positive.

I see both positives and negatives in that, but certainly the SLF now have a much deeper understanding of the CC World. ;)

[MissM]

Diplome

A minority of cabin crew? The turnout in our latest ballot was some 80% which is not really a minority.

[MPN11]

MissM - that was 80% of BASSA members, was it not?

NOT 80% of BA CC. ;)


You can't spin on PPRuNe, you know :)

[R Knee]

My post 987:
Any comments on the socialist worker report re: Derek Simpson? I see there's another unite 4 labour meeting tonight with him and Prezza.

I'm not the only one who asked this question MissM. I am sure that someone as erudite as you must have overlooked this. Please may I bring it to your attention?

[R Knee]

I've just been perusing the main thread and I'm very impressed with your arguments and commitment in recent posts MissM.

Many union reps have moved into management having displayed their leadership skills within the union. In 'taking the company shilling' it is not necessary to lose your general beliefs/politics, in fact management needs to have differing views in order to arrive at the best solution. (I suspect we would agree that BA needs to improve areas of management).

I believe once this dispute is over you should consider using your skills either as a rep for your fellow union members, or take a step to improve BA management by joining it.

'Red' Knee.

[MPN11]

Do they do 75% contracts for management? ;)

... sorry, MissM xxx

[R Knee]

MPN11 Going off thread a little...

Many are multiple non-executive directors so I suppose the answer is yes.

[Dawdler]

Further to my post on 14th April giving membership of BASSA at 10,413 (having been 10,450 at the start of the month). I see the latest figure is 10,029 which in a matter of only a day and half must be regarded as a pretty significant loss. it will surely be down to four figures by the weekend at this rate, .:ouch: so, the ratio of BASSA/ non members is shortening. Perhaps soon they will be in the minority.

80% of members voting for the strike may (possibly) be a figure to be repeated. But as a percentage of the workforce, their influence would appear to be dropping.

A loss of 1% in two weeks has accelerated to 4% in two days! Bear in mind also that in November the membership was about 10,800 the loss of nearly 800 members in less than six months????

[PAXboy]

wiggyMy 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?I do not dispute your three points. I am only saying that I find it remarkable that it continues to such an extent these days and that (of itself) shows the very extent to which the business still has to adjust to the 21st Century in western Europe. How it will change I do not know. But I know that it will change.

MissM Explains the hot towel issue well and binsleepen gave the logical reply. I realise that the issue was seen as 'the last straw' by some (or as a suitable 'last straw' by some) but the blame is not with BASSA. They simply did what any group of humans will do - which is to seek preferment for their own group, fair enough that is why they are there.

The blame lies with BA mgmt over an extended period of time. EVERY manager who gave in for a quite life is to blame. Every department boss, every senior manager, every BA CEO and all members of the board and their Chairmen across the last 20 years (since the last recession) - they are all to blame. Some will still be there but most will be on the golf course and with fat pensions. They should be ashamed that they had so lost control of their jobs that it could come to the point where pax who have paid a premium price may only get a hot towel depending on the mood of the CC.

If I have misjudged the situation - then please correct me.

[ChicoG]

From the "other" thread:

THIS IS OUR CHANCE TO BEAT HIM,,,,,TW SHOULD TELL WW THAT IF HE DOESN'T COMPROMISE WITH A DEAL TODAY OR LATEST TOMORROW WE WILL GO ON STRIKE AGAIN IN 7 DAYS TIME...THEY ARE NOT GOING TO BE ABLE TO PUT THE SERVICE BACK TO NORMAL BEFORE WE STRIKE AGAIN AND DISRUPT IT BADLY.....SO DON'T U THINK GUYS THIS IS THE TIME TO BACKFIRE???????
PLEASE BASSA DO SOMETHING TAKE THIS OPPORTUNITY TO BRING HIM DOWN TO THE REAL WORLD.
PLEASE
PLEASE

I can't see how BA can do anything but treat these feeble-minded oafs with anything but utter contempt.

These are just the kind of selfish, surly cabin crew members that as an SLF have put me off flying for BA. I doubt I'm alone in wishing BA would just get rid of people like this. Let them work stacking shelves at Tesco where they belong.

Not to mention the fact that the retarded individual that came out with this nonsense is too stupid to realise that BA have already won the war against their militancy.

[Final 3 Greens]

The blame lies with BA mgmt over an extended period of time. EVERY manager who gave in for a quite life is to blame. Every department boss, every senior manager, every BA CEO and all members of the board and their Chairmen across the last 20 years (since the last recession) - they are all to blame. Some will still be there but most will be on the golf course and with fat pensions. They should be ashamed that they had so lost control of their jobs that it could come to the point where pax who have paid a premium price may only get a hot towel depending on the mood of the CC.

This is absolutely cutting analysis :D

[ChicoG]

The blame lies with BA mgmt over an extended period of time. EVERY manager who gave in for a quite life is to blame. Every department boss, every senior manager, every BA CEO and all members of the board and their Chairmen across the last 20 years (since the last recession) - they are all to blame. Some will still be there but most will be on the golf course and with fat pensions. They should be ashamed that they had so lost control of their jobs that it could come to the point where pax who have paid a premium price may only get a hot towel depending on the mood of the CC.

This is overly simplistic. Yes, spineless management must take part of the blame, but the civil service culture that pervaded cabin crew meant the threat of IA was always there, and when the company was making buckets of cash, it was easier just to put up with it as long as the shareholders were making money.

Sadly, when they're not, it becomes time to trim the fat. The fact is that BASSA have still got that pre-privatisation mindset ("jobs for life") which simply cannot exist in the modern world. Earning more because you've been stumbling along doing the same average work for decades is ridiculous, and merit-based pay is by far the fairer approach, and more conducive to a productive workforce. Obviously the old guard don't like this because it means their work has to be measured, and I'm fairly certain that more than a few of them would not stand up to any form of scrutiny.

Plenty of the blame can be laid at the feet of the BASSA dinosaurs, who have tried to use their membership as the stick with which to beat BA into submission. Thankfully the current management team, board and shareholders have had enough of it.

The days of BASSA using the airline as their own little plaything are over.

Those CC who are willing to embrace a new era, including profit sharing, productivity bonuses, etc., are the ones that will benefit. This is why BASSA are so keen to make sure they are kept in the dark and their voices ignored or even shouted down.

[Diplome]

MissM:

Yes..a minority. BASSA can tout it's vote figures ad nauseum but the fact is that a majority of Cabin Crew voted with their feet and went to work.

The striking cabin crew are in the minority.

[Mariner9]

.....SO DON'T U THINK GUYS THIS IS THE TIME TO BACKFIRE???????

The whole approach of BASSA has indeed backfired :rolleyes:

Rhetorical question: Why do so many pro-BASSA supporters (Miss M, Eddy and Litebulbs excepted*) appear unable to construct a lucid post? Without exception, all BA CC I have ever spoken to (and I've had over 400 flights with BA so that's quite a few) can hold an intelligent conversation. So why the apparent failure to communicate their views? More importantly, why have they been so easily misled by BASSA?



*with apologies to anyone I've overlooked

[Final 3 Greens]

This is overly simplistic.

No it is not, with the very greatest of respect, it nails the core issue.

Senior executives are paid to take control of businesses and run them.

If necessary, that includes reshaping the organization and the culture.

Try reading 'From the Gut' by Jack Welch, the man who did exactly this at GE and you will get a sense of how he achieved this.

[ChicoG]

No it is not, with the very greatest of respect, it nails the core issue.

Senior executives are paid to take control of businesses and run them.

If necessary, that includes reshaping the organization and the culture.

Try reading 'From the Gut' by Jack Welch, the man who did exactly this at GE and you will get a sense of how he achieved this.

I see where you're coming from, but the "I'm alright Jack" culture predates privatisation and continued thereafter.

I fail to see how you can possibly justify BASSA's behaviour in this current dispute as being a direct result of poor management. After all, it's only a couple of years ago that BA made record profits and put a ton of cash into the pension scheme. This, after all, is a major goal for management, no?

I lay the blame squarely at BASSA's desperation to maintain the status quo in the face of an overwhelming need to adapt.

Yes, stronger management in years gone by may have meant less shock and awe now, but as it is, we know BASSA were not asked to make a major sacrifice - other than the old school CSDs getting off their arses and doing some work for a change.

[Final 3 Greens]

ChicoG

Postulating weak management at BA does not justify BASSA's actions and I have not said that.

IMHO they have acted very foolishly.

The line in my post, that you seem to have missed, is

If necessary, that includes reshaping the organization and the culture.

Note: my emboldening

[pwalhx]

Moving slightly away from the issue of the rights and wrongs on to the effect it has on customers.

I have just returned from a trip MAN/LHR/HKG/SGN/HKG/BJS/LHR/MAN

4 of the flights were on BA, 2 Cathay and 1 Dragonair. The HKG flights were in WT+.

The Cathay & Dragonair were in Economy.

The service from CX and KA and the comfort were superior in Economy to those on BA.

Both my colleague and myself commented 'why are we travelling BA still'.

That is the effect the strikes are having, it is causing regular passengers such as myself to re assess who we fly with.

Whoever is to blame Management or Staff, personally I believe neither can escape criticism. The end result is people such as myself will vote with their feet and won't come back.

If sufficient numbers take the view we have, and I suggest they may well do, the end game has started for BA and its staff and this whole argument may become pointless as there may be no airline to argue over.

So both sides need to get their act together for their own futures and that of a once proud airline.

[Final 3 Greens]

So both sides need to get their act together for their own futures and that of a once proud airline.

You are absolutely right :ok:

[MPN11]

@ pwalhx ... well said, and of course the core issue is the future of BA, not the bickering and allocation of blame for past events.

BA is still a good airline, but it can do better. I think we all hope that the aftermath of the current problem will see the beginning of a return to a better service.


FLYING BA ... on Tuesday and Wednesday [possibly] :ok:

[ExSp33db1rd]

Emanresuym $ 982

I don’t disagree with you comments, useable time at home is what really counts, but I developed my strategy to counter all those who kept telling me that I had the best job in the World ‘cos I was “ always home “. I did have the best job in the World, but that was located in the best seat in the house – top left corner of a 747, but that’s another story !

[ExSp33db1rd]

Ancient Observer # 983

..........but take the pension issues somewhere else.

Akcherly - not pensions, and let’s hope it never is !

and akcherly – not a "one man campaign" either, I’m only one of a group of angry and distressed retirees Worldwide who are hoping to change the BA corporate mind, which you would be aware of if you were affected, and cared – it would appear that few who subscribe to PPRuNe are, or do.

To paraphrase Napoleon ( ‘cos I can’t recall the precise quote ) “The sound of 10 people talking is louder then the 10,000 who are silent “

[Ancient Observer]

On the "awful managers of the past breed Bassa attitudes" debate, I would be interested in contributors' views on an appropriate rate of dismissal for CSDs who deliver poor customer service.

Clearly, BA need to deliver a more accurate measurement system of customers' perceptions - the current one is weak and capable of manipulation, (by CSDs them selves), but once it has done that, what % of poor CSDs should be fired each year?

In the IT sector, many of the big names (Cisco, Oracle and others) fire their worst 10% of performers each and every year. GE also fire their worst 10% every year.

A "normal" rate of firing of poor performers where I have worked is circa 5%.

Should BA seek to improve its customer experience by firing the weaker CSDs, and if it should, what % should be the annual target??

( ex-Spbd. I would reply, but I don't want to encourage your contributions on that matter. I note that you show no empathy for your ex-customers' complaint)

[ExSp33db1rd]

I note that you show no empathy for your ex-customers' complaint)

to each his own.

[Ancient Observer]

I'm just jealous of where you live.
I've never been there outside work trips, (hence know airport/hotel/office and sfa else) - would love to visit on a holiday basis, but she who must be obeyed isn't interested.

[ExSp33db1rd]

Ancient Observer

Don't get too carried away, not the Clean, Green, Safe image portrayed by the Popular Press, weather not Australian - but it's better than UK ( IMHO ) - but I agree, it's not all bad !

( and no, I don't miss the English Pubs, NZ beer is probably better than most outside Yorkshire, at least a change from the universal Lager brews that seem to be all you can get anywhere else in the World. )

PM for further details.

[Der absolute Hammer]

She who must be obeyed (with apologies to Rider Haggard) should be disobeyed.
Thread drift but...NZ is wonderful and it has a great national air line too with no Pommie moaners on board as cabin crew.

[Ancient Observer]

Oh, come on, boys and girls! I would very much appreciate a response to my question about what % of BA CSDs should be fired for poor customer service each year.

This is thread drift. - As to the NZ thing, we did Aus this Jan/Feb., (one of the sisters lives there) - but altho' one of her other sisters (yup, they're all part Irish) - went to NZ, we weren't allowed to go there.

[MPN11]

In the current Ash Crisis, this thread rather pales into the department of trivia, doesn't it?

Talks may [or may not] be happening. But all of a sudden, due to the forces of Nature, mankind's efforts to conquer the Planet have been put in perspective. What BASSA largely failed to do, Iceland has achieved [as it nearly did with my Kaupthing account, which I closed within the last hour of operations!].

To-morrow, and to-morrow, and to-morrow,
Creeps in this petty pace from day to day,
To the last syllable of recorded time;
And all our yesterdays have lighted fools
The way to dusty death. Out, out, brief candle!
Life's but a walking shadow, a poor player,
That struts and frets his hour upon the stage,
And then is heard no more. It is a tale
Told by an idiot, full of sound and fury,
Signifying nothing.
Macbeth Act 5, scene 5, 19–28

We all have much more to worry about than BASSA, it appears. :cool:

[Landroger]

In the IT sector, many of the big names (Cisco, Oracle and others) fire their worst 10% of performers each and every year. GE also fire their worst 10% every year.


Point of order sir - I work for GE Healthcare and they do not. := They may not have a logical staffing process, but there are no annual sackings in my part of ship. (I am delighted to say!) :)

Roger.

[PAXboy]

Ancient ObserverIn the IT sector, many of the big names (Cisco, Oracle and others) fire their worst 10% of performers each and every year. GE also fire their worst 10% every year.

A "normal" rate of firing of poor performers where I have worked is circa 5%.

Should BA seek to improve its customer experience by firing the weaker CSDs, and if it should, what % should be the annual target??An interesting question and I'll bite. One problem being that a very large part of the appreciation of CC work is subjective, but all of the duties and their attitude CAN be observed and noted. Before any percentage could be established, the mgmt would first have to benchmark their business and staff against their competitors.

This would involve mystery shopping and REAL customer surveys - the kind that cost real money by asking clients and ex clients a comprehensive evaluation of their views - face to face. You would have to ask at least 1% of your premium pax each month. Further, I would suggest that this whole process takes place across two years with the benchmarks established in a clear way, with each carrier set out with their pros and cons. You would have to have the same (reliable, honest and fair) people use the identical criteria to mystery shop you and the others. In other words, horribly expensive.

Then you can asses where your airline is on the global scale (not where you want it to be or where the advertising says it is) and THEN you can start to asses crews and staff for each route. You have to see if there are trends for certain routes to be less good than others and track the poor performers across the network. Here you have the problem that staff are spread across a myriad of routes. If they always plied the same route and NEVER changed, then it would be easier to monitor them fairly.

So all that is never going to happen because the whole process would take too long, would cost hideous amounts of money and show no positive return for anything up to two years. Even then, you would have enormous difficulty in using the action of dismissing a few staff to convince your clients that you are now better. Bear in mind also that, a considerable number of your pax don't think it such a problem and the numbers of staff that are poor performers are pretty small. So you are facing sledgehammer and nut.

There will be other ways of tackling the problem but the above is the 'high end' way but it is already far too late in the game for this to be done - even if the board were willing and the money available. If it is of interest, I was involved in a project to benchmark a major UK supplier of telecommunications services against their three competitors in 1998. It was a VERY difficult process to shape and, eventually, it collapsed without producing conclusive results in either direction. The scale of information required and it's fair gathering/assessment proved unworkable - because you never knew who was telling the truth, amongst other problems. The service being provided then was a fairly straight forward mechanical service - without the problems of human service delivery such as you need at the front door of, and in, the premium cabins.

How about starting a new fleet of staff with different contracts and slowly roll that out across the network as the old leave by natural causes? Then the only problem is that you will have the old and new staff groups managed by the same management. So ... what % of mgmt should you fire each year ...? :E

[Mr Optimistic]

In the IT sector, many of the big names (Cisco, Oracle and others) fire their worst 10% of performers each and every year. GE also fire their worst 10% every year.

A "normal" rate of firing of poor performers where I have worked is circa 5%.

- are you sure ? I have worked for numerous big high-tech companies and none had this policy. OK, the current lot make you set objectives and could mark you as a poor performer but it takes a couple of years plus a failed 'improvement plan' before anything might even start to happen.

[Jarvy]

Just noticed on the BA website that some flights from the US going into Scotland tomorrow morning. So 2 nights for CC in Scotland?

[Dawdler]

Might be forced to stay because of the ash. Some airlines (FR) have cancelled all flights until Monday. The airway between Glasgow and LHR may not be available anyway.

[MissM]

Just noticed on the BA website that some flights from the US going into Scotland tomorrow morning. So 2 nights for CC in Scotland?

2 local nights? No, because most flights from US are not long-range trips and don't require 2 local nights after a diversion.

Our diversion agreement is difficult to explain but even if a long-range trip diverts it can continue if crew get enough crew rest and are within their agreements without getting 2 local nights.

[Jarvy]

These 3 flights from NY are now stuck in Scotland. Point taken Miss M, but for us SLF all the agreements do seem very confusing.

[MissM]

Jarvy, don't worry about it :) I don't know if the crew will stay with the aircraft in Scotland or bussed down to LHR.

[ExecClubPax]

Given BA have lost at least 3 full days of operations and will have been financially damaged by the recent strikes, would anyone wish to hazard a guess whether the cabin crew current offer on the table will be pulled by the company and replaced with plans for compulsory redundancies and layoffs?

[MPN11]

Much amateur theorising going on about the "Great Eruption" ... I would suggest everyone takes a different stance and assumes that NO Civil Air Transport operations will take place in the UK, or the majority of Northern Europe, for the next few days.

Various Threads on various Boards are full of people talking about one flight here or there: that is irrelevant, and confuses everyone. The fact is that virtually NOTHING is going to fly until either the weather changes [to shift the plume] or the eruption stops.

I'm notionally flying to UK on Tue and then to USA on Wed. I'm not even bothering to get the cases down from the attic - it ain't gonna happen.

Stop dreaming, folks.

[binsleepen]

All gone very quiet. No posts for over 24 hours. Not even about ST for the retired ;).

Very coincidental that within an hour of A Lurker being banned for a foul post on the CC forum that Watersidewonker returns after an extended absence.

Regards

[ChicoG]

Unfortunately, you only have to read the hateful blood-spitting of the likes of "A Lurker", and the bland, juvenile snivelling of "Watersidewonker" to realise that these people are mentally incapable of understanding their situation, let alone looking at how they can improve it.

If and when the airspace ban is lifted, and BA need all hands on deck to get their passengers home or away, I would certainly not put it past the chumps that lead BASSA to try and call another strike. Why do you think Simpson is so obviously distancing himself from these idiots (and I include Charlie McChuckles in that)?

And the beauty of it from the board's point of view is that such a knee jerk action would, without a doubt, create such hostility from the British public that it would give BA carte blanche to do whatever is required to excise the BASSA tumour once and for all.

Go on BASSA, I dare you. Let's see you play the last card you've got in your hand. (Hint: It's a two and it's not a trump).

:E

[PAXboy]

ChicoGgive BA carte blanche to do whatever is required They already have carte blanche to do whatever is required within the law of the land.

[ExSp33db1rd]

.......Not even about ST for the retired ......


I can soon sort that, if you're bored !

Now, have I explained .............

[binsleepen]

They already have carte blanche to do whatever is required within the law of the land.
Agreed, but the law of the land is often not black and white and two laws may often conflict, which is why we have judges to give their opinions on how the law is to be made to work in practice. In extraordinary times extraordinary measures may be seen as reasonable, that at other times made be ruled unlawful. If BA takes some action that BASSA disagrees with, and BASSA takes this to a judge or unfair dismissal panel, it will be much harder to prove that BA were being unreasonable considering the state of the economy, the airline business, ash clouds and the 5th column inside BA trying to cause maximum damage to the company they occasionally work for.

regards

[Lucerne]

I too agree that it is such a shame that industrial action is taken to such lengths. Strike action is the most unproductive and juvenile strategy which acts against the best interest of the company involved. Inteligent employees act with the best interest of their employer in mind.

[PaddyMiguel]

PAXboy

......the numbers of staff that are poor performers are pretty small. So you are facing sledgehammer and nut.



Your excellent post sums up the dilemma of managing cabin crew from a distance.

"You can't manage what you can't measure" was drummed in to me on my management courses. However, introducing spurious KPI 'benchmarks' by which to measure the performance of crew, (or teachers or nurses for that matter) so that they can be 'managed' is never going to be effective.

I much preferred the advice to "catch them doing it right". As you say, very few of the thousands of BA crew are poor performers yet most of the management systems in place are to catch the tiny poor-performing minority rather than identify and reward the much larger "exceeded expectations" to "outstandingly brilliant" majority.

Cabin crew are in the service industry where empathy and compassion are pre-requisites. So many of the posts by crew on here refer to 'not trusting management' and 'management not caring' about crew, highly charged, emotional responses to the way they are managed. We are not talking about dockers or miners or, dare I say it, even pilots here.

Mystery shoppers catching them doing it wrong (or right) will always feel like the 'spy in the sky' and do little to engender trust between crew and managers.

What happens inside a silver tube 7 miles above the earth needs to be managed on the day by a skillful, trained, empathetic crew manager, not by a desk-bound suit with a PC in an office back at world headquarters a week later.

As I have posted before, BA has some brilliant on-board crew managers but 'some' isn't enough.

[Ancient Observer]

Thanks, all for the various replies. I'll have a go at commenting on your inputs.
Landroger.
Maybe your Amersham/Chalfont boss-man (I can't remember his name) managed to keep this particular bit of GE-ness out of GE Healthcare. I'm not sure the 10% number would work in your sector.
I worked for a while in AZ, and I saw only a limited application of dismissal thru' lack of delivery/capability. AZ were certainly not as rigorous as Cisco, but they did try. In the other thread on BA CC it has been made clear that NO CSDs have been fired for 20 years or more,, no matter how awful they are.
Paxboy.
I was thinking of something much simpler, and covering BA only, with no benchmarking of competitors. Also, I would not do it route by route due to the movement of CC. I would do it CSD by CSD. The ones that came in low after early "surveys" and a 3 month improvement programme, where they did not improve, would be fired. Make it very personal. It's the only way some of these dinosaurs will change, and even then, some would prefer to be fired rather than "work" for "customers".
Mr Optimistic
Yup, I'm sure about Cisco, Oracle and GE. You are right about the "improvement plan" but that could be done within 6 months. The process would be bad set of scores - improvement plan for 3 months - another bad set of scores - dismissed. Sounds harsh, but BA need this sort of action for the bad ones. See also response to Paddy
Paddy
You are, of course, spot on with the "catch someone doing something good" ideas. However, BA need both to do that - which they do try to do - AND they need to sack the worst of their CSDs and other CC. Their service is just too variable and too hit and miss. (As F3G and others on here keep pointing out).
Baggersup.
Pigs and Flying come to mind. Bassa are not capable of thinking, let alone the strategic thinking that your idea would require.

As an aside, it is nice and quiet down here near Lhr. I can hear the birds, not the planes. The worst planes - the 744s with RR engines, are by far the noisiest, so it is very nice that they aren't flying.

[ChicoG]

There seem to be plenty of aircraft flying through the ash....

RadarVirtuel.com with a Volcano Ashes Layer (http://www.radarvirtuel.com/)

Just heard Gulf Air are taking off for London (with pax) in an hour or so.

[Snas]

Aviation workers must not pay for volcano chaos with their jobs, says Unite (http://www.unitetheunion.com/news__events/latest_news/aviation_workers_must_not_pay.aspx)


Suspend the use casual and/or agency labour.
Make wider use of paid leave and the negotiated banking of hours.
Examine whether outstanding holiday entitlement can be brought forward.
Maintain the current rosters for all employees but use the available time for training and employee development that has fallen short during the recession.


All good ideas....
Asking your friends at BASSA not to strike would be a good suggestion also....

[PaddyMiguel]

'Blackleg' writes in this week's Private Eye

As the union Unite squares up against BA hard man Willie Walsh on behalf of the persecuted trolley-dollies, joint general-secretary Derek Simpson is keeping a low profile.

Perhaps it is felt that a man who was re-elected by less than 6% of the union's apathetic membership last year hardly has the right sort of mandate to take on BA's bosses.

Unite's preferred faces for the TV cameras have been Tony Woodley, Simpson's fellow joint general-secretary or Len McCluskey, the assistant gen-sec. McCluskey is tipped to become Unite's first solo gen-sec after Simpson stands down at the end of this year, followed by Woodley in December 2011.

Helping ease McCluskey's passage into the top job is the fact that - despite protestations to the contrary - Simpson and Woodley loathe one another. Nothing has changed since 2008, when Unison general-secretary Dave Prentis asked Simpson at the TUC conference what he would do if he saw Tony Woodley staggering down the road. Simpson replied: "Reload"

Unite? If only they would, say the BA workers

Then, just to rub salt into the wound, in the classifieds section under EYE NEED

Basingstoke common man standing at General Election to expose Tory sleaze in North Hants. Campaign funds required. Contributions from Belize ex-pats and BA cabin crew welcome.

[Lou Scannon]

I have asked this before but with no response from the BASSA supporter(s):

Have any of the BASSA leadership actually been on strike so that they lose their staff travel and have pay deducted. or have they left all the sacrifices to the poor rabbits that they claim to represent?

Did they notice the way their hated boss, Willie Walsh, demonstrated real leadership by being on the BA test flight the other day?

They should remember the old maxim of lead, follow or get the hell out of the way as they seem to be doing none of these things!

[Boy In Blue]

Bloody hell. Can Willy Walsh do any wrong at the moment! You have to hand it to him. Top bloke.

[Airclues]

Have any of the BASSA leadership actually been on strike so that they lose their staff travel?

They won't be able to use their staff travel. The cabin crew on their flights would recognise them and realise that they hadn't been on strike.

[Diplome]

This from the staff board. A posting from BASSA regarding a new offer:

The document outlined a potential proposal to settle the current dispute and a way forward for the future. The document covers the following areas.
Pay awards
Crewing levels
New fleet
Protections for existing crew
Monthly travel payment
Transfers
Promotions
Future relationship
Disruption
Part time
Contractual employment policy changes
Not all of the areas were clearly worded and subject to interpretation and therefore further clarity has been sought. When we have received that clarity and when the outstanding items are resolved, we shall publish the entire document for your review.
Two pivotal issues remain unresolved -
Reinstatement of staff travel and the dispute related disciplinaries.
We know this is incredibly frustrating for you, as it is for us. But be assured, any next step will rest with you.
You as the members will have the final say

Is BASSA truly going to recommend rejecting an offer or hesitate to put it to a vote of its members because of the disciplinary procedures? Why not simply let those go through the normal channels and if wrongdoing is found it will have to be answered for and if the individual who's conduct is being questioned is found to be not at fault they will simply be reinstated.

It is unreasonable to request that the entire membership pay for the poor conduct of a few individuals.

[ChicoG]

If the identity of the registrar of the "fake" PCCC site with digusting porn links on it was confirmed, then that person will undoubtedly be fired.

And if it is the person to whom the evidence pointed, quite near the top of the BASSA food chain, then BASSA members should be made aware of this fact.

If the BASSA politburo choose to stall the chance for a settlement to protect this worthless little :mad: , then it really is time for them to go.

[Diplome]

ChicoG:

I couldn't agree more.

That particular event was simply beyond the pale and no employer should be asked to condone such conduct.

BASSA surely won't smear the rest of their membership by making an endorsement contingent upon approval of that action.

[PaddyMiguel]

When we have received that clarity and when the outstanding items are resolved, we shall publish the entire document for your review.
Two pivotal issues remain unresolved -
Reinstatement of staff travel and the dispute related disciplinaries.
We know this is incredibly frustrating for you, as it is for us. But be assured, any next step will rest with you.
You as the members will have the final say


errr, why didn't BASSA publish the original document for their members review before any of this strike business kicked off?

Why did the members, by a show of hands at a race course, vote not to negotiate when they hadn't had a chance to see what BA was proposing?

Why weren't the members given 'the final say' before the second strike?

Why did BASSA announce a further strike instead of publishing BA's last offer?

What has the second strike achieved?

[Diplome]

Paddy:

There you go asking inconvenient questions :)

It is amazing that BASSA membership have had been given NO opportunity as of this date to vote on any of the proposals put forth by BA.

It makes the last statement in their recent missive bizarre in the extreme.

My personal view is that this strike has managed to weaken BASSA, marginalize the more militant members, strengthen BA's management of its airline and BASSA are right now in the pathetic position of scrambling to defend the loss of staff travel and disciplinary procedures that only exist because of their poor leadership.

..and most amusingly, Mr. Walsh is now very much admired by the public.

One has to laugh or you cry.

[MPN11]

Amidst all the excitement of volcanic ash, I thought Unite or someone was supposed to making statement on Tuesday [yesterday].

Or is that nebulous statement on the CC Thread it for now?

[PaddyMiguel]

Paddy:

There you go asking inconvenient questions :)

It is amazing that BASSA membership have had been given NO opportunity as of this date to vote on any of the proposals put forth by BA.

It makes the last statement in their recent missive bizarre in the extreme.

My personal view is that this strike has managed to weaken BASSA, marginalize the more militant members, strengthen BA's management of its airline and BASSA are right now in the pathetic position of scrambling to defend the loss of staff travel and disciplinary procedures that only exist because of their poor leadership.

..and most amusingly, Mr. Walsh is now very much admired by the public.

One has to laugh or you cry.

But why is BASSA letting the members decide now and not before? What's changed? OK that's two more.

[Diplome]

Paddy:

I'm not ready to concede that BASSA is letting its members decide now.

We've all heard a lot rhetoric coming out of BASSA and Unite about this being about what Cabin Crew want, their concerns, their support, and not one offer has gone to the members.

They haven't even put the latest offer up for members to examine.

Lots has changed, but I'm not sure BASSA has :)

[Ancient Observer]

One simple I.R. technique that BA and bassa can use to get over the ST and Disciplinaries issues is simply to register a "failure to agree" with each other. Both parties then reserve the right to do whatever they decide to do at some later stage.
They could also go down the mediation/arbitration track on the Disciplinaries and ST.

BA must avoid these options like the plague.
Mediation and arbitration look for "middle ground". There is no middle ground. The only way that such a process might work is via "pendulum" arbitration, but Unite hate that.
As to the "fail to agree" solution, it leaves too much open. BA must insist on "total" closure of the isses, and not leave unresolved issues lying around. If they do not get total closure, the old BA weak managing style will soon be back in play.

One issue from the "seductive" world of negotiation will be the ploy of "When will you re-instate ST for staff?" - after 20 years of further good service? After 10 years of further good service?

BA must be very wary of going down that track. 20 years becomes 10, then 5, then 2, and then 12 months. ..................and BAs preferred weak management style will then be back in play....................

[Diplome]

I can't see BA agreeing to any sort of binding arbitration. Its simply doesn't serve their purposes.

Even a non-binding arbitration procedure will only serve a purpose if they decide to choose the nuclear option and dismiss all cabin crew and have them reapply for their position. It would show they participated in a good faith effort to obtain an acceptable settlement so that requirement gets met..but that's the only reason I can see BA sitting down at that table.

I'm relatively comfortable with BA's approach. Submit reasonable offers, stand by your words, and watch the other side disassemble.

[Diplome]

A portion of HiFlyer14's post on the restricted thread:


Therefore I would add to Beagle's eloquent message to BASSA:

Please note that by insisting on putting crew back on planes, you are bringing New Fleet upon us faster than necessary. You have secured little or nothing to protect us against New Fleet and you are causing us to lose money in the form of additional allowances being removed.

The Professional Cabin Crew Council believes that cabin crew don't want or need more crew back on planes. The money saved by not putting crew back on could then be negotiated to reinstate some of the following:
a. MTP at 2008/9 rates instead of current
b. The lost bonus and 3 year pay deal
c. The lost share option

And most importantly, it would possibly delay the start-up of New Fleet.

If you want security against New Fleet rather than an additional crew member back on a few select routes you need to email the Professional Cabin Crew Council now.


I believe that it is now time for the PCCC leaders to come forth, identify themselves, and take some control of the message to the media and to their fellow cabin crew.

While I understand, and agree, that their identities could not be revealed during the early stages of their development, at some point, if they are to be taken seriously as a potential alternative, they will have to step forth.

[Entaxei]

Diplome,

Given the amount of threats and general screaming by the militant faction, I would suggest that the identity and structure of PCCC is left until all the disciplinary actions have taken place, BASSA/Unite have agreed a closure with BA and, by that time all those that have lost their ST will have made a choice to leave or stay at BA.

This will achieve two things, first the simmering background hate level should be reduced to managable proportions. Secondly, this will allow time for setting into place the structure for PCCC, including specifically the security setup to ensure the integrity of the members database, fees collection system, bank accounts, etc.. Planning for facilities, reps, elections, etc..

Also by this time the ongoing position of BASSA with BA and Unite will be clearer. PCCC will have had the chance to develop a strategy and ongoing position plan and, probably some informal contact with BA - if only for representation on New Fleet!! - who knows.

But at this point in time I would suggest that if the sapling PCCC is exposed, the amount of destruction bought to bear would destroy it - remember you cannot fight a nebulous enemy that has no focus. :ok:

[Snas]

I note the following from Unite’s latest communication...


Whether your union is able to recommend rejection or acceptance of this offer depends not only on these points being clarified, but also alongside these, there remain the two main issues of contention - which are staff travel and the fifty plus disciplinary cases related to the industrial action which remain unresolved.

Ultimately the decision is yours, but we need the facts to answer your questions honestly and fully. As has been stated many times, we cannot accept that people that participated in lawful and legal action are singled out and victimised. We trust that you would support the position.


Union members will be asked to vote and the recommendation to vote to accept or not from the union leaders is going to be governed on the disciplinary in progress.

50+, has that number gone up by the way?

Members are considered therefore to be voting on the guilt or not of those in the disciplinary process without the benefit of any knowledge whatsoever as to what they are accused of. You could well be voting to support someone who threatened to poison a pilot, threatened a fellow member of cabin crew or anything at all for that matter, you have no details at all on which to make this decision, not that you should be making such a choice at all anyway.

Very odd in my view.

[Diplome]

Snas:

I agree, it is odd.

Perhaps BASSA is being deliberately obtuse with its members because BASSA realizes that the membership, already rather battered, may not be inclined to go on strike to defend someone who's "victimization" was being called to account for threatening the safety of fellow cabin crew, developing porn filled websites, etc., etc..

[call100]

I note the following from Unite’s latest communication...



Union members will be asked to vote and the recommendation to vote to accept or not from the union leaders is going to be governed on the disciplinary in progress.

50+, has that number gone up by the way?

Members are considered therefore to be voting on the guilt or not of those in the disciplinary process without the benefit of any knowledge whatsoever as to what they are accused of. You could well be voting to support someone who threatened to poison a pilot, threatened a fellow member of cabin crew or anything at all for that matter, you have no details at all on which to make this decision, not that you should be making such a choice at all anyway.

Very odd in my view.

I think you will find the words 'related to the industrial action' to be the key phrase.
Your examples would not be considered such and are just put there to inflame the situation.
It's time this was put to bed and the only way is for both sides to act like grown ups and get it sorted. All the Macho bull, from both sets of 'supporters' just shows how difficult the whole thing is.

[Snas]

Your examples would not be considered such and are just put there to inflame the situation.


Thats rather my point, we dont know know that, at all.

Call100, I take your point, but alas I don't agree and certainly not with your suggestion that inflammation is my motivation, it really isn’t. Indeed I’m suggesting, possibly cack handed on my part, that to include 50+ disciplinary processes into a settlement without any idea whatsoever as to what they actually relate to is not reasonable and serves to make a settlement less likely.

BA isn’t going to release any details as to the nature of the allegations, as they rightly shouldn’t. My examples come from the communications from BASSA who detailed (in brief) a whole bunch of them, most of which I considered worthy of disciplinary action personally. My favourite was the cabin crew member that threatened (joked) to blow a slide. Do PAX get to make such jokes when on board, I don't think they do.

If these disciplinary matters are made part of the settlement then cabin crew are being asked to vote based on at least 50+ unknown points – yet Unite are seeking clarification on the points that relate to T’s&C’s – detail is important in some areas and not in others it would appear.

ST is different, staff know what they are voting on in that respect, they have the information to allow a decision to be made.

Those in the process can/will/should be represented by the reps, not by popular vote, thats the bit I find odd.

[Ancient Observer]

The ST issue is rather specific to Aviation. However, on the Disciplinaries, I cannot think of a single decent senior manager in the UK who would include them in any IR/ER negotiation.

To include them would probably be unlawful anyway, but that aside, the real issue is that to duck the disciplinaries would be a return to the old, soft, useless, and in the end deceitful BA CC management.

BA CC managers must be honest and carry through what they say they are going to do. To allow CC to avoid B & H charges as a result of a "negotiation" would be entirely dishonest.

Unite hate these Disciplinaries being included, - they are only there because bassa wants them to be there. As has been said before - Completely daft.

[Diplome]

Call100:

The phrase 'related to the industrial action' can mean many things to many individuals.

I would expect that BASSA is trying to get ALL disciplinary actions against individuals who were participating in communications and/or conduct arising out of the threat or actual taking of IA dismissed.

This would include those individuals making comments on Facebook, attempts to discredit non-striking Cabin Crew and BA through the use of misleading websites, etc., etc.. All can be pitched by BASSA as arising out of and/or related to IA.

That is not a "Macho" opinion to have (heaven's I am tired of that word), its just the reality of the situation.

[Diplome]

The disciplinary procedures and loss of ST are fair game for BASSA to request be addressed, though BA can say "No" and simply put forth their offer excluding those issues.

[MPN11]

I honestly can't see how BASSA can fight this.

1. Staff Travel. Everyone was told what would happen. And it did. It's a concession, not a right.

2. Disciplinary. Normal procedures would be followed. And they are. Normal Admin processes.


It is childish to suggest that introducing these aspects into the IA debate will lead anywhere. But that's BASSA's mindset. :ugh:

[MissM]

ST should be given back as it's plain discriminatory and their way of punishing crew who took part of the strike.

[TrakBall]

MissM

All actions have consequences. Cabin crew took legal industrial action that cost BA millions. It was a known and intended consequence. BA warned striking crew that a consequence of taking industrial action was that staff travel - a concessionary perk - would be permanently withdrawn. Again, a known consequence.

Is BASSA planning to repay the millions they cost BA? No. Should BA return staff travel to strikers? No again.

TB

[MissM]

Everybody knew of the consequences but it's still discriminatory and nothing but punishment. I can't remember that they have ever threatened any other group within the company that they would lose staff travel should they go on a strike.

[TrakBall]

I am sure you are correct that this has not happened before to any other work group at BA. But then again, BA has never faced the economic conditions that are prevelant in the world economy. And of course, they have not had a CEO like Walsh that laid out what would happen and then - shock / horror - kept his word.

To discriminate, actions have to be imposed unfairly. Since this whole IA is supposed to be about imposition, I put it to you that withdrawl of staff travel was not imposed, it was self inflicted.

TB

[MPN11]

MissM .. of course it's a form of punishment. That's what happens in the real world.

Children and dogs [and cats] get smacked. People who misbehave get ASBOs, or speeding tickets, or parking fines, or worse. Some people even become unemployed.

It's what happens when people pi66 about. Simples.

If you don't want the consequences, think about what might happen before you do something. In my career, I knew the consequences of being stupid. I watched too many colleagues do it, and suffer the inevitable result.

It's not a bloody game. It's called Life. Learn to enjoy it ;)

[JEM60]

Surely if consequences of striking are known beforehand, how on earth can you complain when they are implemented.!!.Strikers ignored the constant warnings, and are now complaining?? Strange thinking.
MPN11. Sorry,Posts must have been about same time. I wouldn't have posted if I'd seen yours.
Miss M Sorry to sound vindictive, but your strike VERY NEARLY cost me thousands of pounds. No sympathy from me, I'm afraid.!!

[just an observer]

Other staff have been threatened with loss of staff travel in the past, but getting it back was part of the back to work agreement.

[MissM]

MPN11

That's not the issue. The issue is that people, myself included, are being punished for taking part of a legal strike regardless that we were informed of what would happen.

Well done to you for not being stupid.

It should be interesting to see what will happen. BASSA will accept a deal without these issues resolved.

Learn to enjoy life? No need. I'm already enjoying life.

JEM60

My apologies to you that you had your travel plans interrupted but I'm not after any sympathy whatsoever.

[MPN11]

Other staff have been threatened with loss of staff travel in the past, but getting it back was part of the back to work agreement.

That was, I assume, before WW. This was not a threat, it was a promise from a CEO who isn't playing games.

WW made it clear, on several occasions ... loss of ST WILL be the result of strike action.

Are you a manager at any level? How do you retain any credibility as a manager if you reverse your policy statements?

WW had made it perfectly [and legally] clear what would happen. Endex.

[MPN11]

Dear MissM, and I say that because you are a very valuable contributor to these forums ....

That's not the issue. The issue is that people, myself included, are being punished for taking part of a legal strike regardless that we were informed of what would happen.


OK - you are being 'punished'. Or, more realistically, you have caused the Company considerable inconvenience and expense by your actions.

Do you honestly expect them to allow you to retain extra-regulationary privileges in consequence?

Obviously you do. I don't.

[MissM]

MPN11

Removing staff travel because you are going on a strike is punishment.

WW is aiming for cabin crew specifically. Did management threaten to remove ST for pilots when they were threatening to go on a strike some years ago? No, of course not and this is probably why they got away with their sweetheart deal. When ground staff said they were going on a strike, what did management do? They said they would get further staff travel benefits if they came into work.

I, and many others, expect staff travel to be reinstated because this is discrimination and punishment. I will at least read through the proposal, if put forward by our union, but there are many many who won't even look at it if reinstatement of staff travel is included.

[Boy In Blue]

Willie Walsh told me I would be able to fly during the strike - I did. my flight left BOM without a hitch.

Willie Walsh told my family he would look after them when they were stranded in BOM due to the volcano - they have spent the last week in a five star hotel with most expenses covered.

Willie Walsh tarvelled in his aircraft that flew to test the effects of ash.

Willie Walsh brought the flight ban to an end with his brave decision to launch flights towards the UK.

Doing a Willie Walsh is becoming a metaphor for honest, positive and brave management.

I dont fancy BASSA's chances.

[MissM]

Willie Walsh must be a hero. Is that why over 50 crew have been suspended for raising their opinion?

[Boy In Blue]

I didn't say he was a hero. I'm simply pointing out he appears to be honest.

In terms of being a hero. Well I heard many people saying lots of positive things about him in the last 24hrs. I have to agree with them. Top bloke.

[Snas]

Is that why over 50 crew have been suspended for raising their opinion?

Ahem, I read the list of reasons for suspension that BASSA put out and the above is not a very fair description of why they (some / most ?) were suspended. Let's keep it real MissM

Removal of ST is punishment, if you never thought it would happen or indeed believed that you would get it back.

I also think it was reasonable to remove it, as warned. I could not imagine a striking Tesco employee walking into the store and using the staff discount card after going on strike, perhaps....

[Snas]

On ST I’ll add, as a trade unionist, that I don't particularly like the idea of “consequences” being levied at potential strikers, it does just feel wrong on a fair few levels.

However, trying to see it from the companies view point, I do fully understand that it feels equally wrong to continue to provide such a perk (which it is) to staff that attempted to damage the company.

Had it have been me I think I would have stopped short of using the “permanent” word, to at least give me some wriggle room post IA. I would have then at least had options, no ST for 12-24 months, restrict to one route, no family, whatever....

As it is now I really don't see it coming back, not via any legal challenge and not via union pressure – I would suggest it’s gone for at least as Mr Walsh is in the top seat, thereafter, who knows?

[Final 3 Greens]

Removing staff travel because you are going on a strike is punishment.

No it is not MissM and you need to educate yourself a little.

The CEO of your company made it clear that the staff travel concession would be withdrawn from people who withdrew their labour.

It is called a positive subtraction (something good is removed) and it would no doubt persuade a number of people to change their intended behaviour and go to work, thus protecting the business, which is one of your company CEO's accountabilities.

A punishment is called a negative addition. This means that something unpleasant is introduced as a consequence of going on strike.

Nothing bad has been added, but something good has been lost to people who chose to strike.

You have a lawful right to strike, your company has a lawful right to withdraw concessions.

It isn't punishment, move on......

[west lakes]

As an alternate view I see it as a matter of timing

BA warned cabin crew what would happen to ST if they went on strike, and carried out it's warning.
CC had a choice (catch 22 perhaps) go on strike and lose ST or stay at work and keep it.
If staff chose to be on strike the loss of ST could be seen as their choice

If, however, BA had removed ST without warning after the strike it would be a totally different matter and could be seen as discriminatory.

As regards other staff groups they threatened to go on strike, but didn't, so why should BA remove a consession?

So BA is taking discliplinary action against CC who, in some cases, were perceived as making threats to other staff.
If these actions were stopped it could be seen as BA and the union condoning such action.
If in the future a member of staff was perceived to issue threats against another the accused could use the fact of that "condoning of action" as a defence
So, Miss M, that could mean that if someone threatened you at work BA could take no action, nor could the union do anything about it. Is that what union members want?

[Hipennine]

A few observations:

1/ ST is a concession, not a benefit. Making an issue of it will only attract the attention of HMRC. Following a legal route to prove it is contractual only opens the door to retrospective tax assessment. Even making HMRC aware of it may cause more investigation of its tax status. Outside of the airline industry, within the UK, HMRC seeks to ensure that any subsidy for commuting is a taxable BIK.

2/ To suggest that any case within a disciplinary procedure should be set aside (assuming that such a disciplinary procedure complies with the ACAS code of practice) as part of any IA settlement is nonsense. justice must be seen to be done - if there is no case to answer, or unprovable, the "accused" walk free. If there is a case and the accused aren't satisfied with the result, there is a statutory framework to deal with it.

3/ The nominal reason for the IA is imposition. I understand that any further IA based on the above two issues would require a new ballot to be instigated (not an online poll as suggested by BASSA)

[Mariner9]

I note from the recent Unite communication that the latest BA offer, which has no compromise on either ST or disciplinaries, will be put to the vote of their members.

Given the percentages that went to work during the strike, it appears likely to me that the vote will be to accept the deal.

If the vote does go that way, then the mandate to the Union from their members will be to accept the loss of ST and the continuance of disciplinary action. They could then choose to either abandon attempts to return ST/cancel disciplinaries, or ignore their members wishes. Not an easy choice.

Unite/BASSA seem to be digging their way ever deeper into their hole.

[Snas]

Given the percentages that went to work during the strike, it appears likely to me that the vote will be to accept the deal.



Perhaps, but bear in mind only Union members will be voting (I understand) and I know personally of a fair few that have resigned their membership and if I believe other sources this number may be significant.

A vote to reject would not surprise me at all.

[Mariner9]

We can probably take it as read that those who did strike will vote against*.

I accept there's likely been a reduction in Unite's non-striking membership, but I suspect that they still are the significant majority. I can't see them voting for futher strikes.

No doubt, all will be revealed in due course.


*Perhaps MissM could confirm her views?

[Ancient Observer]

Just a quick point about the "loss" of ST.

Whilst I'm not convinced that psychology has added a lot to the sum of human knowledge, one thing it has made very clear. We in the West are VERY averse to the perceived loss of something. That is why many adverts are couched in a "do not miss out" sort of way. That is why many salesmen use the "only available to-day" sort of phrases. "Don't miss out" type of sales pitches are an example of this psychology.
We hate to lose something. We hate the perception of loss. (Even if the loss is minor/not real)

The strength of feeling about the loss of ST - which only becomes real when the letter is in your hand - will be much higher than some commentators think. Not because striking crew are belligerent, etc., but simply due to (Western) "human nature".

[MissM]

Final 3 Greens

I don't need to educate myself to see that removal of staff travel is a punishment because that's what it is, like it or not. WW might have informed us before the strike took place that this would happen. Directly, or indirectly, it was a threat to make people come into work, especially our commuters.

Nothing bad has been added but something good has been lost to people who chose to strike? That's a statement you can twist to your own benefit.

Snas

The point is that BA has suspended a huge amount of crew and some allegations are nothing but ridiculous. One particular pilot is also responsible for many of them. He should be proud of himself.

Mariner9

I don't know if I will vote for or against the proposal but be rest assured that many won't bother reading it if ST and the issue of our suspended crew are included. Unfortunately many crew, myself included, are tired of this dispute and will probably vote for it to get this over with.

[Final 3 Greens]

MissM

You are demonstrating your own lack of education in arguing that the removal of staff travel was a punishment.

It was a positive subtraction designed to induce behavioural change in a completely lawful way.

It was not a threat, but a pre-announced policy, which was implemented.

You can argue that black is white, if you wish, but it does not make it the case.

[MissM]

A pre-announced policy?

Let's put it this way. If you decide to go on a strike and your manager says, before the strike, that if you do it they will remove your vending machine. You go on strike and they they remove it. Is it still a pre-announced policy because they keep their word?

Firstly, they are threatening you to remove something dearly to you with the purpose of hopefully making you come into work. Secondly, they are punishing you for being naughty.

Never ever in the history of this company has a particular group ever been punished in this manner for withdrawing their labour. Pilots were never exposed to such threats. Neither were ground staff. I remember they were being awarded for coming into work by being given further staff travel benefits. Why cabin crew?

It makes me look rather dim? Spare me such personal comments.

[Snas]

Snas
The point is that BA has suspended a huge amount of crew and some allegations are nothing but ridiculous. One particular pilot is also responsible for many of them. He should be proud of himself.

MissM - that may well be correct, I dont know, and with respect I would suggest that the majority of CC dont know the details either.

I just think that being asked to vote (to accept a proposal that includes, or not, these matters) is very far from ideal.

To insist disciplinary matters are included makes it designed to fail I suggest. There are processes for such matters and they will be followed, with reps ensuring this is so I would hope.

MissM, whilst I disagree with your position, generally, you do at least seem to be informed to a degree that most CC are not. BASSA will perhaps paint the members in the discp process as some type of freedom fighter, perhaps some are, but in with the 50+ are there not some, or one even, that deserves to be exactly where he/she is - voting that process away is not right.

Edit - for clarity, I'm not discussing ST, that is something that I think can and is reasonable to vote on being included in a new offer. The discp hearings are the part that I think will stall an end to this IA.

[Final 3 Greens]

MissM

The CEO of a public company made a policy announcement about the withdrawal of staff travel.

Can you seriously equate that to a manager taking away a vending machine? I would say that you lack judgement if the answer is yes.

Companies can and do remove concessions at their discretion. It does not matter if it is dear to you or not.

In this instance, the CEO explained the policy and gave everyone the opportunity to retain staff travel.

No-one was punished, some decided to self apply the policy and now they do not have staff travel.

That was their free choice, as it was to strike.

Never ever in the history of this company has a particular group ever been punished in this manner for withdrawing their labour. Pilots were never exposed to such threats. Neither were ground staff. I remember they were being awarded for coming into work by being given further staff travel benefits. Why cabin crew?

And your point is?

Your community was told the way to was going to be and you all made your own decisions, now the policy has been applied.

You may feel that this is unfair, in which case you are at liberty to change your employer.

[just an observer]

To be fair to MissM and the average cabin crew, withdrawal of Staff Travel for IA has been BA standard procedure for years, decades even. It has so far always been restored when the IA was over. So one can see why cabin crew would assume the same would happen this time, even though WW was far more public, positive and specific about it being permanent than any CEO I can recall. Especially as BASSA no doubt convinced themselves they would ground BA, as again they always have been able to in the past.

From something WW was quoted as saying by a non striking CC during the strike, over on the other thread, WW feels the loss should remain, as the non strikers, non union members and 'no' voters, are all going to get lumbered with whatever the final lesser deal is that BASSA have caused by not negotiating etc. So it seemed to WW fair that the strikers should lose something extra, given that they have caused the non militants to lose something, ie a better deal.

[MissM]

Snas

For WW to say that there is a process for disciplinary matters and will be dealt with accordingly is nothing but taking a distance from it. No doubt there are crew who deserve to be suspended for their behavior but BA has been very harsh on this matter.

I don't doubt for a second either that the sole reason as to why BASSA insists everyone is reinstated is because many of them are representatives, including the Branch Secretary.

Final 3 Greens

Glad to see you have removed your personal comment about me.

We can argue for a lifetime about punishment versus policy. WW informed us of what would happen if we went on strike. There would be consequences for being naughty. That's nothing but a punishment.

My point is? Management has taken a very harsh stand on cabin crew. That's my point. Why didn't they threaten our pilots in this manner not too long when they were going on a strike?

[PAXboy]

MissM I do not ask this in a confrontational way - simply as a plain set of questions. Help me understand. Yes, I know that BA has been lowering the quality of it's product but IA ain't going to change that and if the mgmt decide to ruin their product - that is for their customers to vote on.

Never ever in the history of this company has a particular group ever been punished in this manner for withdrawing their labour. Pilots were never exposed to such threats. Neither were ground staff. I remember they were being awarded for coming into work by being given further staff travel benefits. Why cabin crew? Because:
You are going on strike in the depths of a recession
You are well paid people when the unemployment trend is steadily up
Your jobs are (we are told) safe with no enforced redundancies
Your colleagues at Gatwick accepted these changes to protect their jobs - why not Heathrow staff?
Other groups of staff in BA have(we are told) agreed revisions to Ts&Cs
We know that all folks across the country have had to accept changes to their living and working conditions ever since the recession of 1989/92. (some earlier, some later than that)
Why not cabin crew?

[jethrobee]

Miss M, I see your point about CC being treated differently, but surely that is because you are the only group in BA who have not yet negotiated a settlement.

IMHO Mr Walsh has backed himself into a corner by making the removal of ST permanent, he now cannot back down for the sake of the other CC who turned up and put customers first.

As an outside, I personally feel that Bassa are giving very little value to their members, and leading them down a route in which there are no winners in the long term. I wish someone would just bang both parties heads together to be honest, but then the labour government cant put pressure on their largest donor unite can they.........

[Final 3 Greens]

MissM

We can argue for a lifetime about punishment versus policy

No, we can't. With all due respect I am a management consultant specialising in organizational development and change management for 20 years, before that a line manager in industry and with several qualifications in the field of psychology and social science. This type of stuff is my day job.

You patently do not understand what you are talking about and are literally spouting irrational nonsense, apparently driven by emotion.

Why didn't they threaten our pilots in this manner not too long when they were going on a strike?

Have you considered that the pilots may be a more valuable resource to the company and therefore have more leverage with senior management?

jethrobee

IMHO Mr Walsh has backed himself into a corner by making the removal of ST permanent, he now cannot back down for the sake of the other CC who turned up and put customers first.

I don't think he has backed himself into a corner, he has implemented a policy using his legitimate authority as CEO and that policy is not up for negotiation.

BASSA have backed themselves into a corner and are now in deep trouble.

[Basil]

Management has taken a very harsh stand on cabin crew.
I worked for four years for a Persian Gulf company, five years for a SE Asian company and twenty four years for BA.
Trust me when I say 'If you work for BA you don't know harsh'

[Final 3 Greens]

Basil
You summarise this succintly.

Unfortunately, one sometimes wonders how connected to the outside world some of the BA cabin crew community are.

[button44]

Miss M.

Not to be too harsh, but it does seem that a lot of striking CC's have rather an inflated idea of their importance in the scheme of things! I would suggest Bassa should have realised that in a world where the ecomomy was rocky, that now was not the time to strike, especially as the reasons for said strike seemed to change from week to week. So it should have come as no surprise that BA would reward those who worked to keep the airline aloft.http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/yeees.gif

[ExecClubPax]

MissM

I suspect those cabin crew that took strike action did so in the full knowledge their pay and allowances for strikes dates would be withheld. By going on strike, they effectively accepted this loss as the price for their militancy/moral stand what ever you choose to call it.

Similarly, they knew that staff travel concessions were in jeopardy if they withheld their labour. That was flagged up clearly both in writing and verbally well before the first strike date. In effect, cabin crew who went on strike voted for loss of their concessions. This is not punishment, it's a self inflicted loss.

Now, I suspect most thought that like on previous occasions, BA would reinstate them as part of a negotiated settlement. If Mr Walsh is to be believed, that won't happen this time around. Consequently, I can understand the shock the failed gamble has created among your striking colleagues.

Who knows whether BASSA membership will vote for or against the current proposals where there is no prospect of reinstatement of staff travel or cessation of disciplinary action. If they vote yes then the status quo remains. If they vote no, BA will continue training volunteer cabin crew, the militant BASSA membership will be allowed to wither on the vine and Mr Walsh is gifted a heaven sent opportunity to "clear out the Augean Stables" once and for all.

Who would have thought a man of his statue could take on the role of Heracles (Hercules). Funny old world, as someone once said.

[call100]

MissM



No, we can't. With all due respect I am a management consultant specialising in organizational development and change management for 20 years, before that a line manager in industry and with several qualifications in the field of psychology and social science. This type of stuff is my day job.

You patently do not understand what you are talking about and are literally spouting irrational nonsense, apparently driven by emotion.



Have you considered that the pilots may be a more valuable resource to the company and therefore have more leverage with senior management?

jethrobee



I don't think he has backed himself into a corner, he has implemented a policy using his legitimate authority as CEO and that policy is not up for negotiation.

BASSA have backed themselves into a corner and are now in deep trouble.
Solipsism personified;)

[Final 3 Greens]

ExecClub Pax

What MissM is displaying is a classic external locus of control, i.e. it is always someone elses's fault and it was not my choice that caused the outcome.

Therefore BA is 'punishing us for acting like naughty children', not 'we were given a choice and I chose to stand up for what I believe in.'

[ExecClubPax]

Solipsism personified

Solipsism = view that the self is the only knowable, or the only existent thing.

A bit like BASSA feeling it is the only entity capable of managing BA's cabin crew operations and therefore entitled to put every other BA worker's livelihood at risk by inflicting huge financial damage on the company and disrupting countless thousand's of customers' travel plans.

[Final 3 Greens]

Solipsism personified

In the context of dealing with MissM, I could argue the epistomology of such a stance, if I wanted to.

[MissM]

PAXboy

Not even the union is against changes but it should be done through negotiation and not imposition. We have offered BA generous offers and our last proposal was only £10 million from what they are asking for. They refused it and to be honest I don't even believe WW has ever been looking for a settlement because he has had his mind set for a strike.

Final 3 Greens

You patently do not understand what you are talking about and are literally spouting irrational nonsense, apparently driven by emotion.

Fine.

button44

An inflated idea of their importance in the scheme of things?

ExecClubPax

Everybody knew what would happen if they went on strike. Nobody would argue this. They announced before the strike that staff travel would be removed permanently and they were hoping that it would change the mind of some because staff travel is prescious to many. Surprisingly many of the striking crew were commuters.

It's interesting to see that many don't think of this as a punishment because that's exactly what it is.

[call100]

In the context of dealing with MissM, I could argue the epistomology of such a stance, if I wanted to.
I'm sure you could but the thread is long enough already!!:8
Your post actually made me chuckle, not because of it's content, I could just imagine the scene as you were typing it with indignation....Not meant as an insult and probably says more about me than yourself..:O:)

[Mariner9]

We have offered BA generous offers and our last proposal was only £10 million from what they are asking for. They refused it and to be honest I don't even believe WW has ever been looking for a settlement because he has had his mind set for a strike.

MissM, do you not see that the same accusation could be levelled at BASSA? Why strike if you if all you had to do was offer a further £10M savings (or accept an offer only £10m worse)?

[kappa]

Since the above seems to be the prevailing opinion of the non-BA cabin crew posting here I don't think they can all be called "soliphists".

And Miss M, the pilots threatened to, but did not, strike. Therefore any comparison as to ST is inapplicable.

[ChicoG]

They refused it and to be honest I don't even believe WW has ever been looking for a settlement because he has had his mind set for a strike.

I'm sorry, but this is hysterical, and it's right up there with MCluskey's "macho" bullsh*t.

BA ask for reasonable changes and BASSA at first tried to squirm out of it with a ludicrously over-valued "offer" and then stuck two fingers up when it was exposed as such. WW has stated all along that the changes are needed to keep the airline flying, and all these BASSA "reps" have done is stamp their feet and have a tantrum. And now, when they finally go on strike, they are moaning about losing a benefit they don't even deserve as far as I'm concerned.

I don't think Walsh or any of the BA board wanted a strike. I think they expected it from the juvenile freeloaders that run BASSA, and properly (and expertly) prepared for it.

If BASSA have half a brain cell between them they'd accept what ever offer they can get before Walsh takes advantage of the fact that they have been completely emasculated, and does what you keep saying he'll do, and "come back for more". I wouldn't blame him if he did, it's about time cabin crew realised where they sit in the BA food chain.

BASSA picked this fight, so don't come running asking for sympathy because they got a pasting for their trouble.

:=

[Final 3 Greens]

Your post actually made me chuckle, not because of it's content, I could just imagine the scene as you were typing it with indignation

Not indignant at all call, it's only a thread on a bulletin board.

Just thought it was time for reality check.

[Diplome]

Management has taken a very harsh stand on cabin crew.


My impression is quite the opposite.

BASSA and Cabin Crew have received repeated offers from BA. Absolutely none has been delivered to the membership for a vote.

BA has given clear notice of each and every action they have taken and have followed through.

For BASSA and Cabin Crew to insist that, as part of any settlement, disciplinary procedures be cleared is unusual and unsafe in the extreme. The rules and procedures are in place for a reason..the health and safety of both BA employees and their passengers.

IA is not something that should be entered into lightly, it is not a game, it is serious business with potential for gain or loss by both sides. BASSA and its more militant members act as if they should be able to say "Oh never mind, let's pretend it didn't happen" because they are on the losing side of this episode. It doesn't work that way.

Why so many striking cabin crew have such a hard time understanding there are consequences to their actions simply has me stunned.

[pwalhx]

Having read this thread with interest after a few days away MissM can I suggest that despite several contrary opinions you still insist the remove of ST is a punishment not a consequence.

Your unwillingness to accept a contrary view is symptomatic of the position of your union i.e. we are right every body else is wrong.

Whilst I am not knowlegdeable enough on the finer points of the negotiations I would suggest there are those on the management side who think the same way.

I have said it before and, at the risk of repeating myself, what needs to happen is both sides to open their eyes to the reality of the situation, if you dont sort it out and sort it out soon there may well be no airline and no jobs to argue over.

The rest of us have had to compromise to keep our jobs, maybe it's time you thought the same way. But who am I other than a simple freight dog and a regular flyer who has voted with his feet and flying on other carriers now.

[vanHorck]

I think that the reinstatement of ST is so important to Bassa because it would upset those who did not strike and that way Bassa would get back at the strike breakers.

All the more reason for WW to keep his back straight and not push away those people who helped him.

Respect to MissM for being willing to enter into the debate. I disagree with her but respect her position.

One thing though... Miss M, you keep saying that things can change through negotiations not impositions yet for more than 6 months the union failed to negotiate over the needed cuts and when they finally put forward proposals these were (PWC comments) far insufficient. Why is it wrong for WW to then impose the cuts, given the urgency of the needed cutbacks?

Or should the union not only represent staff but also be the one managing the business and decide the cut levels? Id the latter is what you think, then you are wrong.

Let management manage...

[R Knee]

vH I think that the reinstatement of ST is so important to Bassa because it would upset those who did not strike and that way Bassa would get back at the strike breakers.
Best comment I have seen for some time.

MissM.
LuvYa. Thoroughly enjoyed your posts, and hoped you would develop your reasoning. I have to thank you for your contributions, it's a close run thing (the argument). Without being patronising I'm sorry you've not risen above some of the pettiness, I always felt you had the capacity to help us understand.

sincerely, best wishes.
RK

[harrypic]

"Without being patronising I'm sorry you've not risen above some of the pettiness, I always felt you had the capacity to help us understand"

I think it's us who are lacking understanding.....lacking a full understanding of how much BASSA have brainwashed their members into believing their, and only their, message. We think we can immediatley change this and get her to see the light with a reasoned arguement, but we cant.

Miss M beleives removal of ST is a punishment, which I agree it isn't, but thats been driven into her by BASSA - we see ourselves as being reasonable and objective - she sees us has another entity trying to influence her.....give her some slack - it can't be easy coming out with your own opinion after years of being told what you should think....

[Winch-control]

harrypic
she sees us as another entity trying to influence her.....give her some slack - it can't be easy coming out with your own opinion after years of being told what you should think....

Got me thinking....

One definition of a cult:
"a religion or sect that is generally considered to be unorthodox, extremist, or false"
"followers of an unorthodox, extremist, or false religion or sect who often live outside of conventional society under the direction of a charismatic leader"

Let's not forget though that whilst some follow their leader, like those in Jonestown in Guyana led by Jim Jones....(beggars belief as to why, but they did), others did manage to see sense eventually and escaped before the mass suicide!:rolleyes:

[PAXboy]

Concise Oxford Tenth Edition:
cult
· n.
1 a system of religious devotion directed towards a particular figure or object. Ø a relatively small religious group regarded by others as strange or as imposing excessive control over members.
2 something popular or fashionable among a particular section of society.
– DERIVATIVES cultic adj. cultish adj. cultishness n. cultism n. cultist n.
– ORIGIN C17: from Fr. culte or L. cultus ‘worship’.

[Final 3 Greens]

BASSA was used to running its own world and having the final say in all types of decision.

This has strong parallels with the definition of an autopoetic organization, see AUTOPOIESIS (http://pespmc1.vub.ac.be/ASC/autopoiesis.html)

It is painfully obvious to outsiders that BASSA is no longer autopoetic, but some people don't seem to have grasped that and are living in denial.

This represents classic resistance to change and the question is whether this resistance will be tolerated by BA.

If ST is reinstated, the answer is yes and the autopoiesis may return.

Just my two cents and opinion.

[dubh12000]

Hee Hee.

I see on the CC thread they are talking about performance measurement......welcome to the real world guys.

[BOAC]

Not sure if this has been aired, but Unite are going out of their way to foster support from the travelling public.

From a BA release 23/4, regarding the 'recovery' plan for stranded pax:

Our preference is to use Heathrow and Gatwick cabin crew to operate
these extra flights when we can. Where there is a need for us to alter
normal industrial arrangements, for example to reduce the rest time
downroute in order to bring our customers and colleagues home quickly, we
are asking Unite to agree. Where the union declines our requests, and
unfortunately this has happened today, we will use volunteer cabin crew. The
first example of this will be a Hong Kong to Heathrow flight this afternoon.

Nice one, boys and girls!:ugh:
:

[Entaxei]

I totally fail to understand the mindset that thinks that it is being, in any manner, sensible, to refuse a unique opportunity to seek to regain the public confidence in BA, (who fund its income), or in the union itself, after the effect on the public during the strike, and the various threats made.

If I were a union member, I would be demanding to know who was involved in this decision and what the voting was by name.

And the union is worried about a performance evaluation scheme!! - no need - it will have died a suicidal death long before then - its called evolution of the fittest.

For background union edification, performance evaluation programmes have been in use in the computer industry since the early 1970's - and they work to the benefit of both staff and supervisors/managers - it certainly improves the quality of the managers!.

Now where did I see that Turkey - Independance day draws near (I can't wait for Christmas)!. :ok:

[ranger07]

So, seems BASSA/UNITE continue to show such arrogance. We hear of extraordinary selfless acts of humanity towards stranded passengers from many. When UNITE/BASSA are asked to show such compassion, we get the answer that we have now come to expect.
I truly believe that all these years of militancy and, more to the point, the past acts of holding the company to ransom, remain a nebulous judgement to all that's compasionate and moral. They,the militants, unlike the rest of us mere mortals, will never adapt to change.
I wonder if they really are aware of the anger amongst the rest of the workforce.
The workforce that has had to adapt, have gone the extra mile and 'worked for free' amongst many other examples in order for our airline to survive.
Yes, as I'm typing, I'm becoming angry. Angry towards those who believe that they have the right to undo OUR hard work, have the right to jeopardize our careers. I have worked dammed hard to get where I am, like many. And, as I have noted that some of them have posted on certain websites that they'd rather the company 'went down' than to accept inferior offers. They are totally deluded if they think that any airline will employ them as cabin crew. NO WAY.
I'm keeping my fingers crossed that more volunteers will be trained up and make them irrelevant. I, amongst others are ready and willing to help.
Right will prevail!.:ok:

[MPN11]

@ BOAC ...

'Travelling Public' 45, 'Unite/BASSA' 0.
Unite/BASSA are now relegated to the 4th Division.
'Travelling Public' will meet 'British Airways' in the play-offs, once the Icelandic Aftermath has been resolved ;)


I cannot believe that this sort of nonsense is still happening in the 21st Century.

[winstonsmith]

BASSA could not care less about BA and its customers - as presented by their recent behaviour of not approving rest time downroute to be brought back.

BA forwarded a request to BASSA and asked if they would allow crew to stay shorter in HKG instead of 2½ days - as under normal circumstances - BASSA did not agree and insisted that crew should have 2 local nights rest before operating back to base - taking no consideration whatsoever to the fact they would be bringing out empty aircraft from LHR.

Bringing out an empty aircraft with crew is regarded as being an operating crew - as they need to perform some duties onboard.

There is a word circulating that BASSA would have approved this request if crew had been "positioned" out to HKG on an aircraft with passengers - as these "duties" then would have been performed by the operating crew - but this would have resulted in 30 paying passengers being offloaded to accommodate 2 sets of crew.

Good on you BASSA and Miss Malone - you really care!

[MPN11]

Simply shameful.

How do these people sleep at night? :ugh:

[wet vee two]

Dont blame the cabin crew, blame the small man syndrome manager that has killed a brand!

[ranger07]

Dont blame the cabin crew, blame the small man syndrome manager that has killed a brand!

I'm blaming the minority cabin crew. Don't tell me their actions are anything to do with the brand whatsoever...they are serving themselves with zero respect and care for anyone and anything but themselves!!:=

[jethrobee]

I may sound like I am supporting the CC here, but you do have to ask whether the union actually asked any working crew....

I just think it goes from bad to worse, what will it take for the average cc to realise that they are being led over a cliff by a bunch of politically motivated trade unionists....

[harrypic]

"I may sound like I am supporting the CC here, but you do have to ask whether the union actually asked any working crew...."

You would assume that they had, but from BASSA's no response to BA I would hope that they hadn't asked - otherwise I'd be very worried and thinking rank and file BASSA members would be vindictive and selfish enough to prevent BA ferrying desperate, worried and stranded passengers home as quickly as possible.....:=

[Diplome]

Dont blame the cabin crew, blame the small man syndrome manager that has killed a brand!


With all due respect BA is now reclaiming their brand.

The idea of passengers and stockholders being held hostage by the likes of individuals wearing men's undergarments branded with the CEO's image while yelling outside of a hotel is simply not acceptable.

BA is fighting to retain its "brand" against a militant group who can't be bothered with customer service.

If BASSA was so sure of its position don't you think they would let at least ONE offer to a membership vote? Haven't seen that yet.

[pencisely]

Miss M


Crew with VS have very poor union representation which is probably one of the reasons for their low salaries as well lower terms and conditions compared to BA. No doubt they want higher salaries and maybe this explains why crew are coming to BA and rarely the other way around.


No doubt the waitress in my local cafe would "like" more money the problem she has is that she is easily replaced (like you) and the law of supply and demand dictates the pay level for this role. CC have the same problem, the reason you are currently earning above your market rate is indeed the result of strong union represenation over recent decades - this is effectively what has caused the current problems you all have. The girl in the cafe has no union representation so guess what? - she is paid the market rate for the job. If suddenly the "cafe waitress union" managed to win for their members a doubling of her wage the likelihood is the cafe would need to increase its prices and the local competition would thrive. Meanwhile her employer would whither and die unless it took drastic action - sound familiar?


Poor union representation explains why their equivalent to our CSD earns 50% less and if you were in BA you would also know that none of us will not get anywhere near those salaries ever again. Those days are long gone by.



It also explains why this dispute has come about, it is about an adjustment back to a sustainable market rate. If others are willing and able to come in and do your job at half your current rate and allowances then I am afraid that is the new market rate.

Miss your postings are educational in that they help many of us SLF see where the root of the problem really lies.

I have recently booked more flights with BA to the detriment of VS who we normally travel with. The flights during the strike period were so invigorating in terms of the attitude and obvious commitment from the on-board staff it ill be hard to match in VS Upper Class. Hopefully soon BASSA will call an all out indefinate IA which will re-create this experience. I truly hope that all my future flights with BA will be during IA periods, it was a great experience that will be hard to repeat. On an IA period flight you can be assured that the service is delivered by passionate employees focused on customer service, on a Non IA flight we can expect some service by the militants. Be assured that some of us will be on the look out for some of the neagtive attitudes threatened on this forum. Direct input to the BA CC exit managment programme will be supplied. Personally speaking I will make time to attend any pre or post sacking disciplinary hearings.

Time to get real - there are many overstated comments by BASSA CC on here about the importance of CC towards fligh safety.

Us SLF have a good idea what contributes to flight safety -

1) The Wright brothers for inventing flying - just brilliant people
2) Boeing and airbus engineers for designimg and building safe aircraft - graduates/ Phd's - minimum entrance level
3) Air Traffic controllers - smart people - graduates and above
4) Pilots - a requirement of aptitude, intelligence and character such that only .0001 % of the working population could undertake the role.

Aspects not so critical to safety? - maybe the coffee servers/door closers? - 99.9 of the population able to undertake this job.

A lot has been made of CC's role in saving PAX in a crash - fact - it has almost never happened. Before we hear about the heathrow 777 lets conisder the difference in injury/death rate between staying in that aircraft and exiting from it - answer 0 thanks very much to the skill of the pilots in getting it across the fence.

[binsleepen]

An article in the Sunday Times about the volcano disruption says:
The chaos is set to continue. British Airways (BA) is facing a new strike threat from cabin crew, with Bassa, a branch of the Unite union, planning to ballot members this week for possible industrial action to be announced days before the election as part of its long-running dispute with the airline. Regards

[tomkins]

Pencisley
beg to differ with you,re rather biased view on relative intelligence of people who work within the flying world and their roles related to security.
From where did you pull the figure of 0.0001 % of the population only being able to become flight crew ,I would have to rubbish this.
Cabin crew do have safety and medical training which although not often put into practise could be useful in an emergency situation,(like flight crew ,most of whom will go through their entire career without ever experiencing a real emergency).Day to day they serve tea and coffee,day to day planes are mostly flown by computers,however its when things go tits up that as a passenger ,you WOULD be happy to have a competant pilot and WOULD be happy to have a trained up crew who may just do something that saves you're life.

[pencisely]

Tomkins


From where did you pull the figure of 0.0001 % of the population only being able to become flight crew ,I would have to rubbish this.



Ok maybe overstated to make a point but BA used to receive 10,000 applicants for about 100 ab-initio flight crew training places annually. Given these 10,000 by virtue of the academic entrance requirements are already in the top 10% academically I think you will find my figures are not to far from reality.

It is the reason WW has already done the deal with the pilots, he does not have the same options their with being able to train up volunteers to do the job in 21 days. You simply cannot train someone from the office to fly a 747 in 21 days whereas you can probably expect to produce pretty acceptable cc in the same time from almost the whole of the Non flying BA community.

Your comments about planes being mostly flown by computers is amusing and shows much ignorance as to the role of the flight crew but also re-inforces the point about where the cc sit in the order of safety criticality on the aircraft. The fact that you are ranking the role of the cc along with the flight crew is just another illustration of the unrealistic roots of this dispute.

If I learnt that I was about to get on a flight with an incompetent flight crew then I would very likely refuse to board - on the other hand I would not take the same action on learning that the cc are incompetent as it simply does not have the same impact.

My comments are not aimed at the intelligence of cc it is simply a fact of life that the laws of supply and demand are not in your/their favour.

It sounds like any future IA will have an ever decreasing impact on the BA schedule largely because of the reasons outlined above. I am sure WW is quietly thinking "bring it on" which will allow him to once and for all treat this cancer within his organisation.

[Diplome]

Dawdler:

There is enough critical commentary regarding BASSA/Unite on the CC thread that I hardly think there is a plan to keep another mistake by Unite a secret.

I can see where BASSA supporters may not wish to publicize the latest gaffe but they are not the entire CC board participants.

[tomkins]

Pencisely
of course you are right,I am largely ignorant of what the job of being a pilot involves,and I was in no way trying to compare the relative safety and security responsibilities of the two jobs,however I was a little surprised by the way you seemed to rubbish the role of cabin crew.
Of course it only takes a few weeks to train cabincrew ,and many months/years to train as flight crew however there is a selection process for crew which is designed to recruit the best candidates in the eyes of BA ,like there is for flight crew ,so only a small percentage are taken on.
I get the impression that you would like to see all crew working for a market rate ,but how do you work out a market rate for someone who has been working for the company for 30 years and has achieved a position of responsibilty onboard.
Sure ,it would be fantastic for the shareholders if WW could sack all high earning crew and replace them with waitresses on the minimum wage
,but if profitability was the only word ,the same would be done to flight crew who would be replaced with far cheaper versions ,who,having read other threads on this forum ,seem to be very numerous.

[Der absolute Hammer]

The business of UNITE refusing to cooperate with the government and get stranded Britons home......interesting that the ruling party says nothing. Could there be a Harriet Harman, next leader of Labour, connection there perhaps?

[Der absolute Hammer]

That is perhaps part of the BA problem all along. Just scrolled through an Independent article from 2007 about the vitriol and poison thrown by BASSA then. Article says that out of 14,000 cabin crew, 700 call in sick on any given day. I would think, sotto voce, that 5% of the work force calling sick on a permanent rolling basis means that a large percentage of that work force are in it for the rip off?

BA cabin crew accuse T&G union boss of 'selling out' over strike - Business News, Business - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/business/news/ba-cabin-crew-accuse-tampg-union-boss-of-selling-out-over-strike-435153.html)

[Diplome]

When you get yourself into a position where your company simply says "Oh never MIND, we can't be bothered with you and we'll get somebody else" to do your job when you are being recalcitrant....you are in BIG TROUBLE! Yikes!!!



Baggersup:

Your comment is accurate in the extreme.

BASSA has seems to be incapable of any reasonable and serious leadership at this point. It just seems beyond them.

The CC thread has this missive, represented as being from Duncan Holley:


I have just heard something which may explain why WW is prepared to give staff travel back to strikers but not with their original seniority.

This is 100% reliable information and not gossip -

the pilots have told Walsh they will "withdraw all co-operation" (ie assist in any further strike breaking) if BA fully reinstates our staff travel.

So the pilots are holding Walsh to ransom, probably so they get their reward by moving up the staff travel seniority ladder. Makes you wonder who is actually running this airline at present.

Nothing ceases to amaze me any more concerning our so-called colleagues in the cockpit. There may be some "good ones" out there but if they are standing by and letting this happen then they are at least guilty by association.


Is this the best BASSA can do? Their membership needs negotiation and diplomacy, and their Reps are still posting about rumours and "he said, she said" pablum.

Its like watching a union being run by Benny Hill.

[tomkins]

Although some crew may abuse the system , there are certain conditions where crew are forbidden to fly (and before clocking in to work, they must confirm that they are fit to fly)ie contagious conitions,after certain dental treatments ,even head colds where the ears are blocked and could rupture .These may not stop you in a normal job from going to work ,however they do bump the sick rate to above normal levels.

[Entaxei]

Preferably when outside the job centre, alongside the disciplined and sacked and those without ST to get to work (who were brainless enough to go on strike despite being so vulnerable!!).

This will leave the rest of CC without any form of agreed union representation, (as whom can BA trust to negotiate with). Probably therefore looking at a new standard form of CC employment contract issued direct by BA, under which ALL of the crazy old provisions have been removed and replaced with new, simplified and better rates covering the exceptional situations. Issued by BA because this current situation cannot be allowed to go any further and backed by the majority of all other staff, who wish to continue to have a job to go to. Its getting to "make your mind up time"!!! :E

[Diplome]

When reading commentary from Mr. Holley its important to remember this:


Yet although he joined banner-waving stewardesses outside Heathrow, the pinkjacketed militant is a much less familiar face on many of their flights.

For the cabin services director has clocked up fewer than 20 hours flying time in the past 18 months - despite drawing an annual salary of at least £50,000 from his BA and union work.

With a £465,000 home in the Hampshire countryside, it seems Mr Holley must be doing something right. But pushing a trolley along an aircraft aisle does not seem to be it.



Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1259684/BA-Unite-strikes-Willie-Walsh-vows-win-war-attrition.html#ixzz0m7mCLaTw (http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1259684/BA-Unite-strikes-Willie-Walsh-vows-win-war-attrition.html#ixzz0m7mCLaTw)



Mr. Holley has money issues at stake that have nothing to do with pilots, but have everything to do with his wish to continue to draw a BA salary while NOT working at BA's business.

He may be feeling a tad nervous about his personal finances at the moment as I don't think BASSA's performance will have inspired Unite to rescue any BASSA casualties arising from this IA.

[pencisely]

The market rate is determined by the laws of supply and demand and an individuals point on a scale should be determined by a combination of merit and responsibility. The days of just earning more for having been there a long time have long since gone in the real world.

I can however understand with fligh crew why the airline might be prepared to pay for experience.

It just seems to me that this whole dispute is based on a vastly over stated view of the importance of the cc within the overall team. Yes they clearly have a an important role but historically the union has exploited the situation and bullied weak management into ever more unaffordable deals. Also from what i have heard BA have been more than fair with the offers put on the table.

The reecent news about BASSA refusing to co-operate with the re-patriation flights says so much - surely the reaction from BA on this must tell thinking people on the prospects of BASSA winning any ongoing IA.

[harrypic]

From what I am reading over the last week and the new offer, the resolution, from BASSA's perspective to this IA, is not about CC, Imposition or New Fleet - it's about re-instatement of staff travel with seniority and cessation of disiplinary's for BASSA reps.

How well represented do you strike warriors feel now?

You've been pawns played by not very clever people and you, not they, will be paying the price.

[TightSlot]

ExSp33db1rd - is now an EX-ExSp33db1rd - Moving On!

[ChicoG]

British Airways cabin crew are set to take part in an online consultative ballot over whether to back a peace deal in the dispute or to push for further strike action, it has been reported.

12,000 staff affiliated to the Unite union will be able to fill in the web ballot when it opens for five days from Tuesday (April 27). They will have a straight choice whether to back a deal proposed by the airline or to move to announce further strike dates.

An e-mail sent to members by Bassa, the branch of Unite that includes British Airways crew, "It is our intention to seek your views in the form of an online ballot, which will run for a period of five days. You will then either choose to accept the deal or give notice for further strike dates."

The details of the deal have not been made public, but significant progress was said to have been made in the latest talks between management and joint general secretary of Unite, Tony Woodley. However, in order to recommend the deal to its members, the union wants reassurances on the treatment of staff who had their perks removed, or faced individual disciplinary action, for taking part in the strike. There are around 50 staff facing such disciplinary cases and the deal could yet founder if management do not offer these reassurances.

A BA spokesman said: “We continue to have conversations with Unite but have received no official communication from Bassa in regard to any ballot. We have said for several weeks that it is time to put this dispute behind us.”

What really gets my goat is this utter bullsh*t about the fact that staff are facing disciplinary cases for "taking part in the strike".

UTTER GARBAGE.

Otherwise several thousand would be facing disciplinary action.

They are facing disciplinary action for a number of reasons, and there is a legitimate process in place to deal with this. This is just more BASSA blackmail.

Well :mad: them, Willie.

[Basil]

ExSp33db1rd - is now an EX-ExSp33db1rd - Moving On!
Rats! I missed that :}

[Mariner9]

Otherwise several thousand would be facing disciplinary action.

I've not seen any reliable estimate of the number of strikers. On the other thread, it is said that only 2000 have lost staff travel. If correct, there were 2000 strikers.

On another note, (and assuming the media reports are accurate) how can Duncan Holley only fly 18 hours in 18 months and Lizanne Malone 18 hours fewer than that, yet still be employed by BA?

[Diplome]

Basil:

Its rather frustrating because its always more pleasurable when there is a diversity of ideas, etc., on a forum, but it just seems difficult for some to believe that the Moderators here mean what they say and participants will be bound by their rules.

If TightSlot decides that in order to post on this forum we are required to send in a photo of ourselves balancing a pie on top of our heads then, like it or not, if I want to participate, I'd better get out my camera and start baking :)

Thankfully, they are much more reasonable than that.

Mariner9, as I understand it, and as usual anyone correct me if I'm wrong, Ms. Malone is on leave due to health issues and regarding Holley in the past BA has allowed BASSA Reps to perform their Union duties while on BA time. That policy has now changed.

It seems obvious given Mr. Holley's work record that there is a good chance this generous position by BA was being abused by BASSA.

[Snas]

regarding Holley in the past BA has allowed BASSA Reps to perform their Union duties while on BA time.


Perhaps BA were happy not to have him too close to the customers :)

[Diplome]

Snas:

As a passenger I certainly would be uncomfortable having him on crew.

For the non-militant Cabin Crew it may be less than a joyous experience. It must be very frustrating for Crew that want to truly excel to work alongside those that believe the bare minimum is almost too much.

It is interesting that Mr. Holley and BASSA are withholding the offer from their members for this length of time. Surely they realize that the more time their members have to reasonably examine and debate the contents the more capable they will be of making an informed decision.

I'm feeling some sympathy for Unite in this situation. My husband's business has Unite members and their representatives have never behaved like BASSA's representatives. Will have to ask them over a glass of wine some time what their thoughts are about BASSA's leadership through this scenario. They probably have some worthy insight.

[Diplome]

...and arriving back to my computer I read this fun post by a new member on the CC thread:


Long time reader , first time poster ! http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/wink2.gif

The Rep concerned is highly respected and is very well loved by Bassa members , he has always been forthright and honest in both his postings and Emails , i trust him , i believe him and perhaps you flyboys need to ask yourselves if you are the ones being lied to ... because a senior rep , backed by an undisclosed senior manager says you are ... maybe just think about it before you dimiss it outright !! Cheers :D

[Ancient Observer]

Diplome,
as I've said before, I think you have a good perspective on this dispute.
One comment that I would make, though, (and I made it many pages ago), you have to have been in a major/nasty dispute as a participant to realise how one's perspective becomes very, very altered by the dynamics of the dispute itself. Holley et al might well believe in everything they say/do.

The fact that the rest of the world thinks that they are extremely peculiar is irrelevant to them during the dispute. They honestly believe that they are doing the right thing. It's the same syndrome that had perfectly normal and reasonable Germans manning concentration camps. Going back further, the Brits in S Africa manned concentration camps where many, many people died. The "abnormal" becomes "normal".

Thus, people that you and I might well want to lock up due to their apparent lack of connection with the world around them become "respected and very well loved".

Of course, Thatcher and Scargill, and the Brits in S Africa, were "respected and very well loved".

[ChicoG]

Ancient Observer,

It beggars belief that *any* of the reps are "very well loved" by BASSA members after :mad: up so badly.

I wonder how "very well loved" are the ones who managed to wheedle out of going on strike!

[Python21]

Diplome,

I also found 'Long time reader, first time poster's' posting amusing but query how he can post on the CC thread (Airline Staff only) aged 77 ?

P21

[jethrobee]

I must admit, I am more than a little suspicious about the "long time reader, first time poster"'s post....

Perhaps its another attempt at rabble rousing by the reps, its not our fault you are in this situation - blame the evil pilots and their union....

Isnt the pilots union also affiliated to unite? one would expect words to be had if that were the case.

[AlpineSkier]

Apparently the head of BASSA - Liz Malone - has been on sick-leave for 12 months.

Undoubtedly companies have different internal rulings, but can somebody tell me what the basic employment law is on this i.e. when can an employer say "enough" and on what terms does the employee then depart ?

[Snas]

...you are correct, BA do have their own procedure.

The link below will give you a good idea as to what UK law requires, without actually having to read the law, which is a horrible task.

Acas - Advisory booklet - Managing attendance and employee turnover (http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=1183)

[Diplome]

Ancient Observer:

Interesting comments. Thank you.

I'm not inclined to believe that BASSA and its Reps truly believe the majority of their representations..though I do believe they WANT to believe which can produce the same poor result.

I understand that part of the nature of Union business is drawing together your membership by identifying a perceived shared injustice. You can't have a strike without some of that occurring.

However you can take it so far as to be detrimental to your cause.

My personal suspicion is that BASSA Representatives lack the knowledge or sophistication to understand the basics of negotiation or the ability to recognize the nuanced messages that will occur in the process.

Therefore, as they have to have SOMETHING to represent to their members, we see the constant inaccurate and overblown rhetoric coming from their side as they talk AT their members. I truly believe they have enough self-awareness to know what they are doing is ineffective and having a negative impact on their membership, but its rather a case of not being able to stop themselves from singing off-key to an ever diminishing choir.

As time winds down to the next milestone I expect to hear even more of the same.

[Diplome]

Python21:


I also found 'Long time reader, first time poster's' posting amusing but query how he can post on the CC thread (Airline Staff only) aged 77 ?



Must be one of those very early contracts :)

[MPN11]

Damn - beat me to that one!!

It may be watersidewonker's father or grandfather, of course. The spelling is familiar :=

How these people believe they gain any credibility or support with such dribble is beyond me. There are massive flaws in everything they type.

Please, BA, clean the Augean Stable, however long it takes :)

[AlpineSkier]

@Snas

Thanks for the info on sickness.

Speaking personally, I can't see why BA has not chosen to shoot this employee out into deep space unless they have multiple other employees on similar terms in which case it would be discriminatory with unlimited fines.

If they do not , then I ( admittedly not a friend of militant unions ) would say

"Stand clear of the Doors "

[jethrobee]

The difficult part is managing these people out of the business, im sure it would just cause more strikes and kill the company if they tried, so I guess for the airline it must be cheaper just to stomach the militants.......

I would say BA are in a difficult position, for me as an employer I would find it very difficult to have staff working in my company who behaved like this.

I also cant get my head around the mentality that says I hate working here so much I am going to try and kill the company. The real problem is that all of this quite frankly schoolyard behaviour is causing the very people that keep them in jobs to go elsewhere!!! :ugh:

[AlpineSkier]

@jethrobee

I understand that expressions like " managing someone out .."

may (possibly ) equal sacking them but am unsure.

Why do you find it difficult to use unequivocal language ?

[LD12986]

AlpineSkier - "Managing Out" is part of the HR lexicon of many companies. It doesn't necessarily mean sacking, but pushing someone to make the decision to move on elsewhere.

In other developments, here is the first edition of "Scabbin' Crew News". It is not even remotely funny, just over-flowing with bile.

Cover Page (http://web.me.com/delankev/Site/Cover_Page.html)

[Diplome]

Seriously, with what we have seen in the past from BASSA and its militant members... the porn-filled pages, the chav dressed in men's undergarments looking more like a pole dancer than a respected Cabin Crew member, is this site any surprise?

I expect that PCCC and BA have already saved the screen shots.

BASSA can't offer a dignified representation to its members so this is what the public gets.

[TrakBall]

AlpineSkier

Actually, successfully "managing an employee out" of a business is definitely not the same as "sacking" an employee. Ideally, it is a process between a manager and employee where the employee comes to realize they are not meeting known performance criteria and they leave voluntarily.

Often, these employees are not happy in their jobs because they already know they are not meeting job expectations. In the few times I have had to "manage out" an employee, they have left voluntarily and have actually gone on to other jobs where they were more satisfied and happy.

I know that what some people call "managing out" is the equivalent to "sacking". However, that's not what it means if done correctly.

TB

[Diplome]

TrakBall:



Ideally, it is a process between a manager and employee where the employee comes to realize they are not meeting known performance criteria and they leave voluntarily.



Short, sweet and on point.

[rowan11]

Actually I wonder if BA have ever considered using an independent Occupational Health Service, a lot of organisations refer staff after 6 weeks to 3 months absence - depending on the illness of course. After interview with the employee, the report can benefit both the employee and employer - Referals often result in the employee returning to work quite soon.!!!

[jethrobee]

@alpineskier I am not being trying to be over complicated in my use of language, there is a process that any business has to go through to sack anyone, as an employer you cant just rock up for work someday in a bad mood and sack someone.

You have to "manage people out", basically to protect your company as much as possible from the wrath, expense and damage of the employment tribunals.

Companies have to put employees on a plan to help them get back to work, and set targets and goals. It takes a great deal of restraint as a manager to go though this process, and you have to be meticulous in following the rules to avoid the tribunal.

In my opinion it would be extremely difficult to performance manage someone with so much hatred for the company that pays their wages.

I could never work for a company where I didnt feel valued and genuinely enjoy what I was doing, so how people can sleep at night taking a salary while trying to destroy the thing that pays them that salary is simply beyond me.

[call100]

Very off topic here and a bit of a newbie question - but how do you quote a former post and get it to come up in a blue box - I've searched everywhere on here and have had to resort to quoting other posts in " "
After you have clicked the 'Reply' button..
Go to the address bar and at the end of the address you will see ...quote=1...delete the number 1 and press enter.....

[Final 3 Greens]

... why as a manager should I care about an employee not meeting the required standard...

If you are a gangmaster, then you can terminate them and get a replacement from the Jobcentre or the black economy.

On the other hand, if you run a professional business.....

And therein lies the BA dilemma for me; at the moment, BASSA is making the BA senior management look very good, due to gross stupidity.

The CC T&C's and industrial agreements make them an easy target for management to target for large cost savings.

However, I wonder how much of an inspirational leader WW really is?

Prior to the strike, lest we forget, all I saw was a continuous erosion in product and an apparent fall in service levels on the ground.

The strike is an exciting diversion and as Churchill would have no doubt acknowledged, it is easier to be a strong leader when you have an enemy, who is clearly the villain.

But what happens post strike?

[GemDeveloper]

However, I wonder how much of an inspirational leader WW really is?


In my experience, there is a number of Senior Managers who are very capable of taking costs out of an organisation; sometimes, when there is a real question of survival of the Company, very ruthlessly.

There is a far fewer number of Senior Managers who are able to build and grow an organisation so that it has a sound and self sustaining future, able to adapt rapidly to market changes and stay ahead.

Very rare birds indeed are the Senior Mangers who are gifted with the ability to do the latter having done the former.

The problem of rebuilding BA to “The World’s Favourite Airline – Once More” requires nothing short of Inspirational Leadership; in my book, that’s getting people do achieve things that they didn’t know they could do. And that Leadership has to be visibly in place throughout the Company: there seem to be lots of Managers in BA at the moment, but there’s a big difference between ‘Managing’ and ‘Leading’.

For Willie Walsh, the problem is compounded by two factors.

1. He hasn’t got long to do it: there are the Competitors breathing down his neck, and there is the fundamental profitability of the Company to address. Others already have commented on the needs for Fleet Renewal, Product Upgrades, etc., and the shareholders, quiescent at the moment, will soon start to ask fundamental questions about the return on their investment.

2. He is running a virtual organisation: whether the customers’ experience of BA anywhere in the world is exactly what he wishes it to be is in the hands of individual, and often quite junior, staff. If one runs a team of people all at the same location, one can see continually what’s going well, what’s not going well, and discuss and adjust accordingly. If one is running a virtual team, where there is no chance to meet around the coffee machine, then one had to be very clear up front as to what’s important to us, and how stuff gets done by us, and one has to take every opportunity to give reinforcing feedback, and to check any errant behaviours

It would be impudent of me to make a judgement on whether WW has the qualities of an Inspirational Leader that will enable him to achieve Phase 2 of the rebuilding of BA. The only other thought is that the Board may have already considered this in their discussions about who becomes the MD of BA when WW becomes the CEO of the New Company.

As a long standing customer, and observer of the Company’s fortunes, I sincerely wish WW and his team all success in putting the organisation back on a sound footing.

[Final 3 Greens]

GemDeveloper

If I may say, that is a very nice summary.

[Ancient Observer]

Gem

Yup, well put. Great post. (I sometimes have to agree with F3G)

I've met some folk who can do both.
The best was a guy called Paul, who is now CEO & Chair of a large private Company. Even the family like him! (Private - so it is never in the papers). Inspiring, great at growing people/teams, Global in outlook, has lived and worked outside UK/Europe, fierce on costs, and a model of clarity with respect to under performing managers. Good staff love him. Bad staff leave.
I would use his full name, but the post would be deleted.

PS - on the "managing people out" question, a friend of mine came up with "Creative external redeployment"

[Diplome]

"Creative external redeployment"


That is being immediately forwarded to my hubby.

[Diplome]

Wasn't there supposed to be an offer finally shown to the BASSA membership today?

[Papillon]

More British Airways Strikes Could Be On Way As Union Set To Recommend Rejection Of Cabin Crew Deal | Business | Sky News (http://news.sky.com/skynews/Home/Business/More-British-Airways-Strikes-Could-Be-On-Way-As-Union-Set-To-Recommend-Rejection-Of-Cabin-Crew-Deal/Article/201004415620982?lpos=Business_Carousel_Region_1&lid=ARTICLE_15620982_More_British_Airways_Strikes_Could_Be_O n_Way_As_Union_Set_To_Recommend_Rejection_Of_Cabin_Crew_Deal )

[PAXboy]

GemDeveloper has certainly nailed it. After a working life of 32 years across a wide range of industries - the inspirational ones are 1 in 100 and that's a maximum. Which type WW is will have been decided by the Board and it is they who will decide whether he has done the job they hired him to do.

One of the very few MDs that admitted his job was 'hatchet man', to turn a company around was Sir Michael Edwardes. He said that, when he had done his job, he had to leave because he was not the right man to then lead a company forward. Many who start a company do not realise this and try to take the company from start up to 'plc'. One who knows that he is not is Sir Stelios Haji-Ioannou.

We'll have to wait and see where WW is on the scale.

[Diplome]

Papillion:

Thank you for the link.

Now if they would just reveal the darn offer.

Well done that BA did not relent on Staff Travel or the disciplinary proceedings.

[wet vee two]

Profit chasing is what it comes down to.BA posted profits before the gfc.What changed? Some got richer and some got poorer nothing else.

The pension deficit was caused by? Thats right painting tails and lavish projects. investing in areas where there are no apparent returns or appreciation of assets at the cost of service. Like most things in the UK service is absent and due to what I ask you laureates?

Lower wages, lower staff morale lower profits. Its simple but since we live in an era run by neo managers, the business cycle will occur with even greater regularity.

BA will not reclaim its former glory.

When one employs people who are just passing by instead of making a career just like the strikers then the ensuing service will be similar to a Macdonalds type of service and the premium traffic will go where the premium service is offered and maintained. See what happens to brands such as LuieV, Chanel, Burbery or any other premium brand that decide to take a page out of Willie's book of tricks.

Try telling that fact to a fund manger and see the ensuing reaction........an immediate downgrade....... because one cannot quantify morale on a balance sheet........and thats how most of today's companies are run. Where people go to work because they have to not because they want to and hence the crappy service that we have. But you go Willie go and show us how its done!

Service what service, who wants a cuppa tea instead?

spelling of brands intentional to adhere to forum rules

[Diplome]

wet vee too:

Your post would make sense if the initial offer required a pay cut..it didn't, if BASSA Cabin Crew actually worked to maximize service, I remind you of the few minute hot towel run, and if these incredibly well paid LHR Cabin Crew had the reputation as being the best in the business. They don't.

As I observe the messages that will be coming out of Unite/BASSA over the next few days I'll be reading with an amused smile.

I'm sure they would like that first offer back now. They haven't actually served their members well in this instance.

[4t2b]

Papillion

Your link seems to be at variance with the link to the Independant being posted on the other thread.

Which is likely to be correct ? (Ref restoration of ST)

[Snas]

Mr Hill's is being quoted here - thats how I read it.

So, this is what Mr Hills has said, not what BA have said to, err, anyone.

It is not however what Unite are saying on their own press release: -

“Despite important progress made in a number of respects, management has refused to budge on victimising cabin crew who had their travel concessions withdrawn as a result of the strike. It is also taking vindictive and disproportionate disciplinary action against union members in defiance of the words in the agreement they are asking us to endorse.


BA cabin crew dispute to continue (http://www.unitetheunion.com/news__events/latest_news/ba_cabin_crew_dispute_to_conti.aspx?lang=en-gb)

[Snas]

Yeah Bags, it is messy.

Still, early days. Over the next 48 hours I guess it will become clear, we may even get to see the details that people are expected to actually vote on. - As yet my partner hasnt had sight.

[Snas]

I’m happy to be told that I’m wrong, but, I don't think this vote is a legal process that they can get wrong, as it were.

This is a simple gathering of views by the union who already have a legal mandate to accept or reject, strike or not, as they see fit.

[Diplome]

Snas:

I think you have it right. The Union is looking at this as "advisory" which may explain some of the lax procedures. Procedures I'm a little surprised about given the seriousness of the issue.

How BASSA reacts should be fun to watch. Mr. Holley has lost his Staff Travel and from what I hear is up in front of the disciplinary board.

Will the BASSA membership truly put their wellbeing at risk for the likes of Mr. Holley...Mr. "Its been so long since I've done this can someone remind me what a trolley is?".

[Diplome]

A message from Unite that is revealing from the CC forum with a thank you to Caribbean Boy:



No Staff Travel? Europe may come to you!

As you may be aware, BA tried everything they could legally to prevent our strike and mitigate its effects. One of the most significant of these measures was to carry out their threat to remove staff travel from strikers.
Can BA legally do this? Many of you have asked questions about the legal position.

Firstly, there are some basic fundamentals with procedure with which BA have not complied.

Secondly, there are issues around the potentially contractual nature of staff travel itself.

And thirdly, some interesting points arise in relation to European law.

Under UK law the starting point is that an employee generally has no rights against an employer who has treated him less well than others because he took part in industrial action. The position is different though if the detrimental treatment by the employer is sufficiently serious to amount to a fundamental breach of an important contractual term (such as the implied term of "trust and confidence"). In some circumstances, this particular breach is so serious that the employee would be entitled to resign and claim constructive dismissal. In that situation British law gives the employee very clear rights, but no doubt BA will be boldly taking that risk and seeking to ensure that any removal of what it calls “non contractual benefits” falls short of that hurdle.

However that is not the end of the story. Recent judgments of the European Court of Human Rights may lead to changes in UK law. As noted above, detrimental action against strikers must be of a fundamentally serious nature if it is going to provide strikers with legally enforceable rights. The European Court of Human Rights has recently suggested that this is too tough a test. In a series of cases involving Turkey and Russia it has recently indicated that it thinks the law should move on and has ruled that if an employee is treated less well than others because he or she has taken, or intends to take, part in a strike or other industrial action he or she will have a legal right to sue their employer under the Convention.

British courts must interpret UK law in a way which will give effect to the Convention and if that is impossible can issue a "declaration of incompatibility" which is likely to lead to Parliament making appropriate changes to UK law. In some circumstances it is even possible for direct applications to be made to the European Court of Human Rights.

On the face of it, this could pose a problem for BA. Currently, the UK Human Rights Act 1998 allows direct application of the Convention only in respect of the activities of public authorities and persons carrying out functions of a public nature, and it does not give private citizens or companies directly enforceable rights against each other. So while the judgments of the Court of Human Rights noted above may lead to future changes in UK law which might then strictly prevent BA taking the sort of action they are taking against strikers, BA may feel that they are currently immune from legal action with their "benefit removing" plans. However, what they need to bear in mind is that the UK Courts and tribunals have a higher calling – and often shown that they are prepared to go to great lengths, even inserting words into Acts of Parliament, to ensure that they fulfill their duty to interpret UK law in a way which will give effect to the Convention. Beware BA.

So, assuming Unite explore every avenue open to us, BA may find they are on treading on thin ice if they go ahead with permanently removing, or in any way reducing the provision of benefits for strikers.

We shall keep you informed of our progress with this matter.


First, this position has its dangers:


Secondly, there are issues regarding the potentially contractual nature of staff travel itself


Cabin Crew members of BASSA should be thoughtful before taking this approach. If it is argued successfully that Staff Travel is a "contractual" benefit (something Unite and BASSA have recognized is not good for their members in the past) there are tax complications that could become absolutely brutal.

Secondly, is this a signal that Unite will agree to a contract that does not contain the reinstatement of staff travel and leave their membership with the hopes that they will regain it in the Courts?

[PAXboy]

wet vee two Well said. Your assesment is one to be agreed with.
BA will not reclaim its former glory.True. Whether they win every step from now, nor none, the glory days are behind them and NOT just due the current locally difficulty. Rather, just the natural affect of human beings over an extended period of time.

[Dawdler]

If the reports are true that a couple of hundred BASSA members have resigned since the last vote, with resignations perhaps still happening daily, it would probably be very hard to get a perfect list of members together for a legal vote.Not rumours but a fact, they have lost nearly 800 members since November (source •*BASSA•*About us (http://www.bassa.co.uk/bassa/WebPages/AboutUs.asp)) Paradoxically they have put on about 12 members in the last week. The link shows (I guess) an automatic counter of their membership as I write this it stands at 10,041 it has been as low as 10,029 (last week) It appears to be fairly precise, so you would think that they have confidence in their membership database.

The last message I put up on this subject was deleted for some reason but it contained only Bassa issued figures.

[GemDeveloper]

We’ve had this discussion before. If it is a contractual benefit, then it will be taxed as a ‘benefit in kind’. This is the norm for HMRC, so, for example, many years ago when I worked in London, and my employer kindly gave me a loan so that I could buy an annual season ticket to get to work, the Revenue taxed me on an amount reckoned from the value of the interest that I would have had to pay if I had borrowed that money at a commercial rate from the Bank.

And on another occasion, when the Company graciously invited our respective Mehmsahibs to join us when we were at a meeting in one of the more attractive European cities, their airfares and a contribution to ‘their’ hotel costs were grossed up and we were taxed on this gross amount.

Any action by BASSA to claim Staff Travel is contractual is likely to have this unintended consequence: an unintended consequence, moreover, that is likely to affect all BA staff, as I cannot see HMRC allowing the existing rules to stay in place for any other categories of staff if the rules are changed for Cabin Crew.

[ExXB]

Using my very last BA miles for a trip to DXB on 12 May, returning on the 24th, and are curious to what the dates could be, or likely to be.

In the event the answer is no it appears that they won't announce new strike dates until after the 6 May election. So this likely would not be earlier than the 7th. Do they have any notice period this time around?

Is there a Bank Holiday in the UK, or school break that they will 'want' to avoid during May?

I would be connecting over LHR so am more concerned about getting to and from Heathrow.

Thanks in advance! :ouch:

[Diplome]

While they are being so defensive and wordy has BASSA even posted the offer on which the members will be offering their opinions?

[Dawdler]

3rd May and 31st May both "Bank" Holidays i.e. National Holidays which tend to spread over the previous weekend..

[Pohutu]

It is my understanding from posts some time back on the CC thread that staff travel was specifically negotiated by the Union as a non-contractual benefit, in order to take advantage of the favourable tax treatment.

Just because the benefit is treated as non-contractual for tax purposes, it doesn't follow that it must be protected for employment law purposes - the tests are not the same. So it is, just, possible that a judge could find that staff travel is protected under employment law for strikers, but the tax-free status could remain.

However...there appear to be several legitimate legal arguments either way as to whether it is a protected benefit. So it could go either way. In weighing up those arguments, the tax status of the benefit is not strictly relevant to whether it is a protected benefit. Judges are only human, though. I think that a judge is likely to harbour a feeling of 'you can't have your cake and eat it' , which means that the union are going to face an uphill struggle to win the argument in court.

[ChicoG]

“So I am asking all British Airways cabin crew to stand up for their union and their own sense of dignity and self-respect and reject the offer in the forthcoming ballot. Should they do so, I hope management will at last come to its senses and negotiate a sensible agreement.”

If they had any dignity and self respect they would have kicked this shower of :mad: into touch a long time ago.

[LD12986]

As noted on Flyertalk, Unite's commentary on the loss of staff travel on the CC thread bears a remarkable similarity to much of the content of this blog:

CLB Employment Solutions Blog British Airways and the cabin crew strike (http://www.clbemployment.com/blog/2010/02/25/british-airways-and-the-cabin-crew-strike/)

[cdtaylor_nats]

“So I am asking all British Airways cabin crew to stand up for their union"

This sums up exactly what is wrong with the union - it's meant to be standing up for the cabin crew. They are exactly like the current crop of politicians who have forgotten they are the servants of their constituents not the masters.

[k3lvc]

LD12986

Written surprisingly by a Mr Malone - coincidence ?

[RTR]

The Institute of Fiscal Studies has told us that all three parties in the election have not been as up front as they should have been! The truth, we are told, is that spending cuts aired by the Tories, Labour and Lib Dems are woefully short of reality and that spending cuts will have to be much deeper. If that is true then it will cost each one of us loadsa dosh! Up to £700 a year.

This will mean that the money in our pockets will be more precious than it is now. Prices will rise everywhere: petrol, food, commodities, air fares, train fares and travel per se - everything!

On reflection, therefore, it must be a case for the CC to question the feasibility, or the common sense, of pursuing a strike again. As it says in the blog above BASSA want them to "support your union" - for what? Themselves that's what! They will lead the CC wherever they want - with no regard for them. They are typical union reps who like being on a high.

It has to be a no win situation - for anyone. Indeed, a strike by any union body at a time like this is going to be so counter productive it will surely damage those who go into another confrontation and with LESS chance of 'success' as the last one.

This country is in a mess, not as bad as Greece, but it ain't good. Reflection is definitely good though.

[Diplome]

k3lvc:

Could be. I found a Mr. Malone who is head of employment law at a solicitors' office so I'm sure there are more Malones out there.

The similarity between the blog post and the Union missive is interesting. Good find to whomever is responsible.

[Octopussy2]

Even though employment law is not my field, it is quite plain that what's on the blog (and quoted by Unite) is highly speculative and of very little legal value. If Unite's members are being misled by that into thinking that there is likely to be some legal recourse against BA in the future as a result of the removal of staff travel, then they are clutching at straws, not least because, if there is new EU legislation, it is very unlikely that it will have retrospective effect - so it won't help those strikers who have already lost their staff travel.

[Mariner9]

Perhaps the strikers will have legal recourse over the loss of ST against BASSA/Unite, who advised that ST could not and would not be removed?

[4t2b]

While they are being so defensive and wordy has BASSA even posted the offer on which the members will be offering their opinions?

By the same argument, has BA ever put it's offer in the public domain ?? I am still slightly confused as to where this "offer" of restoring ST with loss of seniority came from.

Just asking :confused:

[Diplome]

4t2b:

The difference is that BA has no obligation to "publish" its offer. They can do so if they feel that it is to their benefit but their offer is not determinate on any other individual or groups' approval.

From what I understand Unite/BASSA have the offer in hand, have been issuing repeated commentary to their membership about their recommendations regarding the offer, but they still haven't submitted it to their membership for consideration.

Why the delay? I realize that the more militant membership will vote against the offer regardless of its content, but many members will want the opportunity to consider this offer and weigh the positives and negatives to themselves personally. This will be a serious decision for many individuals.

[4t2b]

Diplome

So it is rumour/scuttlebutt then?

IMHO it would be suicidal to depart from the previously published position of "no return of ST" , why lay the company open to unrest further down the line?

UNLESS, someone is being being concillatory and applying the old riot control rule of never backing them into a corner from whence there is no escape?;)

[Ancient Observer]

BA do have an interesting issue with respect to the offer.

bassa might have, say, 60 % of BA CC as members. How should the other 40% of CC be consulted about the offer?
If I were in BA I would argue for the BA CC "managers" to start earning their money by pro-actively, but sensitively, communicating and "selling" the offer.

As HF14 has put it, it will be a difficlt "sell" but it is about time the CC management fraternity - including CSDs who are paid as managers - to earn their money and to replace the impact of bassa.

[Diplome]

Courtesy of ian100 at Flyertalk a message from BASSA issued yesterday. If it has been previously posted I will happily delete.

They don't sound optomistic.


Time to wake up and smell the future...

During the 7 days of our industrial action, those that grasped the enormity of what we all face took action and came to Bedfont; those that didn’t went to work.

By "backing BA" it has allowed a change so big to come about right under people’s noses, that many people could not - or will not - simply believe it.

The nature of that change?

The culmination of a three-year plan, as reported in the Guardian to crush the union that protects you -that aim has now been all but achieved.

On Thursday of this week Duncan Holley, the secretary of our branch, is going to be dismissed over an on going disagreement with British Airways, over derostering for undertaking union duties on your behalf.

Today the few reps that attended a briefing from Tony Woodley heard an update on any progress he had made and to finalize arrangements on how your opinion could be sought via an electronic ballot. British Airways chose to not deroster any reps to attend and indeed insisted that any who were able to attend would have their basic salary deducted.

These are hardly the actions of a company seeking to achieve negotiated peace, instead they are designed to be as provocative and confrontational as possible.

They could not send a clearer signal of their intent, if they tried. At the same time they also have revealed that Branch Chair Lizanne Malone will also be the subject of a disciplinary along with Amicus Convenor Blair Veakins.

Without being rude if this does not tell you anything, then we may as well give up...and that means ALL of us.

We are now getting to the point where it is difficult to believe that we can ever find a solution to the current situation. Things now are so bad that they will simply never be the same again.

No matter how hard we try to negotiate to improve the situation, things just seem to go from bad to worse.

As you already know, we have been supporting Tony Woodley as he has tried to find a fair and reasonable solution and to bring a welcome peace within British Airways. To be fair, he has worked incredibly hard to try and make that happen. His intentions were honourable, and he did his best to obtain a proposal for you to consider. Later this week you will be asked your opinion via an on-line ballot.

Against this approach it would appear that determined elements within British Airways’ management, far from wishing to "meet us half way" and achieve any kind of resolution, simply appear determined to be as deliberately antagonistic as possible.

Crew members continue to be dismissed and others suspended as we try to find a solution to the outstanding fifty plus dispute related disciplinaries. The very reps that are working with Tony Woodley on the solution have been refused release to work on it. "Do it in your own time or don’t attend, your choice" was the BA flat response.

Until last week, we have not been approached or asked for an alleviation of any kind since summer 2009; we were simply not asked, they simply believed it is their right to break any rule they wished, when and wherever they wanted to. All agreements are now meaningless. As a result of the volcanic ash the disruption agreement was requested and happily and promptly given to assist in repatriating crew and passengers. Then, out of the blue an "alleviation" was requested to operate a Hong Kong service with reduced rest but with a threat "if you don’t give the alleviation, we will use strike breakers". The "threat" was unnecessary as a positive response was again given within the time scale.

A request to reduce rest on an ad-hoc basis for other "mercy" flights for the next two weeks was also asked for and in the circumstances would have been given.

Their recognition of this cooperation? To assemble a crew of "strike breakers" from retired crew and ground staff and operate the flight - 12 crew, 13 hours rest, £2.40 an hour.


Friday’s Delhi? Same again! A positioning "strike breaking volunteer crew" who would operate the return inbound flight, with just eight crew- they consisted of four ground staff, two temps. Two "normal crew" were called off QRS. These "real" crew were booked into economy, the volunteer/strike breakers? Club of course.

Over the entire weekend "strike breaking ground staff volunteers" were rostered in pairs to a wide number of flights, to fly with "real" crew.

Many of the Euro fleet crew who returned to base after being away up to twelve days, were then expected to report for duty the next day. BA were of the opinion that the crew had achieved the appropriate days off whilst marooned down route.

Quite simply this is how Bill Francis has been instructed to do business. If we are not all prepared to stand up for ourselves then we best all get used to it and quickly.

Temp crew and volunteers continue to fly along side regular crew, on a different agreement and on an hourly rate and different days off, while our own crew sit at home unused and on 24 hour availability.

If people don’t wake up and see what’s happening right under their noses and how the wording of this agreement is so important to them, then they never will. Bill Francis is building on his vision of the future and whether we like it or not, we are all going to be a part of it, one way or the other.

Your union has been effectively shut down now for months and if things do not change, will remain so. We no longer have any meetings with British airways on any subject. We no longer have a say or a voice. Our offices has been sealed closed and shut down and lets be honest here, so has your union.

Backing BA?

That’s exactly what some people have done; backed BA in their ambition to destroy their union and with it, any hope of their own future job security - if they do not wake up pretty soon, it will be too late.

During the last strike days, we even had the ludicrous scenario of people who had chosen to break the strike, ringing our emergency phones asking us to complain to BA that they, BA were breaking their agreement!

Is this really how out of touch some of our community have become?

Worried about new fleet? You should be - it’s growing right under your nose. So believe us when we say that if you don’t support your union now by remaining united, by standing firm to secure a meaningful deal the future looks very bleak. If an agreement cannot be reached then regrettably more strike dates will have to be announced. If we fail then the job as you know it is over.

At the end of the day, we represent you. If you’re not that bothered, fine, we will stop beating ourselves up trying to protect you from something that worryingly doesn’t seem to concern some of our community.

Please stop leaving it to those with the strength and courage to support themselves, their union and their colleagues. Thousands of you, our members, selflessly sacrificed their trips and their earnings - some people lost up to two weeks of basic pay and their staff travel for the good of others, not just themselves - and for that Unite is immensely proud and grateful for their sacrifice.

If a deal had been achieved, it would have been bought about by their bravery. If we don’t get a solution, then quite simply it will be because too many people "looked after themselves" and broke the strike and so encouraged your management to believe that this is "the way forward" and is acceptable to the crew community.

If you are not one of the brave crew who supported us at Bedfont, and by taking action then what did you do? Do you feel proud of yourself?

Bottom line?

Please Do your bit before it’s too late, or simply sit back and enjoy the ride, but remember this, it’s going to be a wild one. Our conscience is clear...is yours? We have screamed from the roof tops for a year, exactly what will happen to cabin crew in the future.

If this warning continues to fall on deaf ears, you won’t have to wait too long to see it become reality...just glance at your next crew list.

[Diplome]

4t2B:

rumour or scuttlebutt? Who knows until BASSA sees fit to actually let their membership see the offer they keep talking about.

Ancient Observer:

Good point. A more proactive and positive participation by BA managers would be appropriate.

[Llademos]

4t2b ... the offer, plus the letter from BA to the Union, is on the BA Intranet; easily findable by any CC (or other BA staff for that matter)

[Jarvy]

Yes but we are SLF here not CC so we don't know the offer.
Going back to the union message, if the union had talked and maybe accepted the offer from a year ago then just maybe BA would not have needed to play hard ball now.

[R Knee]

If I were any BA employee I would be very concerned that a restitution of Staff Travel, as a condition, following negotiations with Unite could make it a contractual benefit and subject to Income Tax.

This would rather help wWW to achieve his aim of phasing it out, as well as causing massive problems to the CC Commuters. (Hope ex Spe3dyB reads this even if he can't comment).

[im1234]

re: CLB Employment Solutions Blog British Airways and the cabin crew strike

Shame the author can't even get the the name of the union correct. Unite is now "Unison"... 3rd paragraph No doubt Unison will...

[tomkins]

Maybe he sees it as a negotiation tool?

[Entaxei]

Going by WW's score to date, I would say that the idea of WW offering to restore ST to those that went on strike etc., is purely part of the fantasy wish list from the union, BASSA or Unite.

WW has proved to be a man of his word, whenever he has stated that something would happen, given certain circumstances, it has happened and has been an action which there is a total refusal to reverse in any manner. Which in view of past history has got to be applied if BA are to regain control of their operation. Unfortunately BASSA never recognised this change in direction and even now does not appear to understand that the world has altered around them.

[Entaxei]

Sudden thought - I guess that with the merger, any Spanish practices existing will be up for change!! ;)

[just an observer]

Sorry, but every strike up till this one, across the whole airline, not just CC, staff travel has been withdrawn and then given back in the settlement agreement, so no reason for CC to expect it to be any different this time.

As said before, this time the CEO was far more vocal re ST, and the permanent loss thereof, than before, but even so, I can see why CC thought it would be restored this time.

In fact, I am ambivalent re staff travel - suppose some time in the future a group of employees have a genuine grievance, which ultimately leads to a strike, there is now a precedent for them to lose ST, or at least seniority, it may not always be justified, even if this time BASSA have, effectively, created a situation where the loss of ST seems justified.

[just an observer]

Ignoring the salutation - I agree re your your 1st and 3rd para but am not totally convinced re your 2nd and 4th para.

I am speaking as one who enjoys staff travel via my spouse who is an employee (not CC)

[wascrew]

All of us within British Airways were hoping to be in a position, to be
able to recommend, at long last, a deal that would bring about a welcome
return to normality for our airline.

This has not been possible. After a sensible pause for reflection from
both sides since the last days of industrial action, talks resumed
directly with our General Secretary Tony Woodley and British Airways CEO
Willie Walsh.

These concluded late yesterday evening and were unsuccessful.

Though the dispute was over imposition, British Airways insisted that any
settlement must include several new areas.

* New fleet
* Changes to the disciplinary, grievance and redeployment agreements
* A complete renegotiation of the trade union facilities agreement
* Two year pay freeze
* Two year capped pay deal
* Introduction of monthly travel payment
* Future promotion
* Route transfer procedure to new fleet
* Ops and choice
* New disruption agreement

Though not ideal, with good will on both sides this could have formed the
basis of

"A way forward"

The words were fairly broad and not particularly specific or detailed, as
it would require a huge leap of faith to entrust or guarantee the rest of
your flying career to "good will."

Your union was prepared to fulfill our half of the bargain but in the end
what was missing was the complete absence of any " Good will" on behalf of
British Airways.

Without that, it would be impossible to have the required faith in what
are essentially just words.

Actions speak far louder. A systematic insistence of zealously pursuing an
increasing number, now over fifty, dispute related disciplinaries and
applying disproportionately harsh sanctions - for trivial reasons. Along
side this an obvious desire to permanently "punish " all those, who
participated in a legal and lawful strike have become the stumbling
blocks.

How could we recommend, in good faith acceptance of a set of words, the
spirit of which has already been broken before the ink is dry on the
paper? We would be misleading you and were just not prepared to do that.

British Airways customers must ask why there are still on going threats to
their travel plans, essentially over punitive decisions our CEO opted to
take. If he had not chosen to take these actions, this dispute could well
have now been resolved.

It would be wise to reflect that for many in higher management the focus
appears to be on crushing cabin crew, rather than the business of running
an airline and carrying passengers. There simply is no sensible business
rationale to insist on enforcing decisions that will affect between 4000
and 5000 people permanently, unless it is over pride or a desire for
revenge. It simply does not make sense.

There will of course be an on line ballot to ask your views in the next
few days, but to be absolutely clear, we have no other choice but to join
both Tony Woodley and Derek Simpson in recommending that you join us in
rejecting this proposal .


PLEASE DO NOT REPLY TO THIS E-MAIL
IF YOU WISH TO UNSUBSCRIBE OR CONTACT US

[email protected] (LHR)
[email protected] (LGW)
Unite Cabin Crew (Former Amicus Section)
www.uniteba.com (http://www.uniteba.com/)

[harrypic]

I would argue that it may be possible people outside BA have a better "informed" opinion than many CC in BA who don't choose to be "informed" and just accept whatever BASSA say

[Diplome]

Tomkins:

and I would suggest that if you are not BA cabin crew or management,then you are really not in a position to criticise or even make an INFORMED oppinon on this subject.

Ah yes, let's leave that to those sage and diplomatic individuals wearing Mr. Walsh's visage on their bottoms.:rolleyes:

With all due apologies I'm more of the opinion that at times it takes individuals operating outside of the vacuum of a situation to see circumstances clearly.

[harrypic]

Tomkins,

This ia a popular thread and attracts many diverse posters because many many people are passionate to see our flag carrier prosper and get back to being the world's favourite airline....which its not at the moment.

Many of us posters aren't employed by BA but, as above, are passionate to see it regain its former glory (and we are not SLF or PAX - we are customers that pay BA staff's wages).

Until 5 years ago BA enjoyed most of my business - then the CC service became unreliable, some flights great, others had sour (read, customers are a pain) crew and rubbish service. I then switched to Emirates and what a wake up call, superb service every flight, no inconsistancy of service.

I would love to give my business back to BA (and it's significant business) - I hope the resolution of this dispute will persuade me to - many CC posters on here have influenced me to re-consider my staff travel policy once the dispute is over and the :mad: have either left or realise the customer pays their salaries, not the airline.

So, gather your colleagues and PLEASE make BA an Emirates beater.....

[PAXboy]

The wording, mood, style and ethos of the memo posted by wascrew, is that of the 1970s and 80s.

I do have sympathy for those whose working conditions are being held and may, it seems,. decline somewhat. I have been there. I have had my conditions changed, I have lost work that I thought was going to continue into the future and so on. BUT.

One of the best examples of the way in which the world has changed is the Greek financial problem. If their melt down continues into the other countries being talked about - then Europe will be in the next Depression. Arguing about the tiny detail of your ex-job will pale into insignificance.

[Diplome]

baggersup:

I'm sure they will be posting the offer in its entirety.

It would be absolutely inane for BASSA to ask their membership to vote on an offer they have not seen, both from a responsibility to their members and public relations view.

As I don't have access to the BASSA site I can't speak with certainty but I don't believe they have posted the offer in full as of yet. BASSA is aware that many of their members look to them to keep them fully informed and I find their reluctance to address the entire offer a disservice to their members.

[4t2b]

4t2b ... the offer, plus the letter from BA to the Union, is on the BA Intranet; easily findable by any CC (or other BA staff for that matter)

Interestingly, on the other thread THEY are beginning to doubt the existence of this offer ?? Is it there , has anybody read it ??:confused:

[Mariner9]

Wascrew's linked union letter is disgraceful. They are treating their members as fools.

The union advises its members to reject the deal because of a lack of trust in BA, illustrated, they say, by BA's intransigence is restating ST and dropping the pending disciplinaries. So basically they are saying that you can't trust BA because they are doing what they said they would do, instead of going back on their word! :ugh:

[call100]

It's up to the members to either take the recommendation or vote to accept. This is where it becomes a folly to leave the Union in some kind of protest. All those who don't agree could be in there campaigning and voting to accept.

[Mariner9]

Does anyone know if the Unite have given the details of the BA offer to their members yet? Or do they simply expect their members to vote solely on the basis of their recommendation?

[fincastle84]

This is from Unite's website, courtesy of HiFlyer 14. Thanks you!:ok:

All of us within British Airways were hoping to be in a position, to be able to recommend, at long last, a deal that would bring about a welcome return to normality for our airline.

This has not been possible. After a sensible pause for reflection from both sides since the last days of industrial action, talks resumed directly with our General Secretary Tony Woodley and British Airways CEO Willie Walsh.

These concluded late yesterday evening and were unsuccessful.

Though the dispute was over imposition, British Airways insisted that any settlement must include several new areas.

* New fleet
* Changes to the disciplinary, grievance and redeployment agreements
* A complete renegotiation of the trade union facilities agreement
* Two year pay freeze
* Two year capped pay deal
* Introduction of monthly travel payment
* Future promotion
* Route transfer procedure to new fleet
* Ops and choice
* New disruption agreement

Though not ideal, with good will on both sides this could have formed the basis of "A way forward"

The words were fairly broad and not particularly specific or detailed, as it would require a huge leap of faith to entrust or guarantee the rest of your flying career to "good will."

Your union was prepared to fulfil our half of the bargain but in the end what was missing was the complete absence of any " Good will" on behalf of British Airways.

Without that, it would be impossible to have the required faith in what are essentially just words.

Actions speak far louder. A systematic insistence of zealously pursuing an increasing number, now over fifty, dispute related disciplinaries and applying disproportionately harsh sanctions - for trivial reasons. Alongside this an obvious desire to permanently "punish " all those, who participated in a legal and lawful strike have become the stumbling blocks.

How could we recommend, in good faith acceptance of a set of words, the spirit of which has already been broken before the ink is dry on the paper? We would be misleading you and were just not prepared to do that.

British Airways customers must ask why there are still on going threats to their travel plans, essentially over punitive decisions our CEO opted to take. If he had not chosen to take these actions, this dispute could well have now been resolved.

It would be wise to reflect that for many in higher management the focus appears to be on crushing cabin crew, rather than the business of running an airline and carrying passengers. There simply is no sensible business rationale to insist on enforcing decisions that will affect between 4000 and 5000 people permanently, unless it is over pride or a desire for revenge. It simply does not make sense.

There will of course be an on line ballot to ask your views in the next few days, but to be absolutely clear, we have no other choice but to join both Tony Woodley and Derek Simpson in recommending that you join us in rejecting this proposal .

[Tigger4Me]

Unless I've missed it, we don't seem to be any nearer to getting an answer regarding ST. Has anyone, seen anywhere, any official documentation stating that BA will reinstate ST for strikers from October 2010 as has been previously suggested?