BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)

[Eddy]

Fair enough reasoning, I suppose, but still like a kick in the testes to those of us who "backed BA".

[Betty girl]

I am pleased that they are getting the bonus.

I don't need any more Martyrs wondering around.

It has had a good affect on some of the strikers that I have talked to. It has made some of them realise that BA is a fair and good employer and I am sure, will make some of them think twice before following the Bassa mentalists into another strike.

You see the majority of strikers are just ordinary crew that have been badly advised by a nutty union and I do believe that some are starting to see the light and this gesture can only help. Plus, I believe, also that because their was no prior warning about it, that is why it would be difficult for BA not to pay it to all.


Just my own personal view and not the views of my employer BA.

[Juan Tugoh]

While I agree with what you say Eddy with regard to the bonus, at some point there will have to be some kind of reconciliation between the warring parties. This may take a long time and it may be a difficult process but someone has to start to be reasonable.

In the grand scheme of things this is small issue. I suspect it will make no difference whatsoever but I applaud KW for trying to take some of the bitterness out of something that ought to be a trade dispute without the rancour that exists.

If BASSA continues to behave true to form, their reward may well be significantly altered contracts through a 90 day notice of change. If that is the end position of BA should BASSA continue with their corporate stupidity, KW may be offering the olive branch so that he can say "well I tried but they just will not see reason - issue to 90 day notices".

[From Tunbridge Wells]

While I agree with what you say Eddy with regard to the bonus, at some point there will have to be some kind of reconciliation between the warring parties. This may take a long time and it may be a difficult process but someone has to start to be reasonable.

Juan, I wholeheartedly agree. Although it may be difficult, there is no point carrying on bitter tit-for-tat behaviour from all parties. Crew need to rise above it and move forward.

[jetset lady]

Nope. I'm with Eddy. It is a real kick in the teeth knowing that some of the most militant strikers will probably get more of a bonus, even pro rata, than my £400 I'll get despite being a full time purser of five years and operating the LCY-JFK route. Yes I'm grateful for it but it does leave a slightly bitter taste.

Time for all this tiptoeing around the strikers to stop BA, as whilst you're treating them ever so fairly, you're forgetting the rest of us in the company - all of the company - that have worked our rears off to help make this profit!

I'm starting to wonder if this leadership team is actually much stronger than those that have gone before. Enough is enough.... :mad:

Betty Girl,

Sorry, completely off thread and not a criticism, just sheer curiosity. What's the reason for the angel on your posts? Is there a significance or is it like a signature?

[Betty girl]

It's because I'm an angel, of course, Jet set Lady!! Didn't you know!!

[jetset lady]

Ah, OK. Thanks for explanation. Sadly, there doesn't appear to be a smilie suitable for me..:(

[Betty girl]

You can be an angel too. I am sure you are one!

[Eddy]

there will have to be some kind of reconciliation between the warring parties. This may take a long time and it may be a difficult process but someone has to start to be reasonable.BA has already been reasonable by not sacking a lot of these militants long, long ago.

Let's remember that BA could have allowed the latest ballot to go through to strike action before releasing news that the idiots at Unite had executed the ballot illegally, again, and dropping the bomb shell that those who took part in the illegal strike action were subject to dismissal.

Yeah, someone has to start paving the way towards reconciliation, but the initial slabs have already been laid. Some short sighted individuals - a minority, but nevertheless a large number - fail to see that, though.

Hope they save their four-hundred quid! They might need it.

[MFCREW]

I can't believe these people are getting a bonus. I can't believe it.

We are rewarding the very people who put in jeopardy the prospect of every other person in the company [entitled to the bonus] actually getting it.

Why not? they contributed toward the profit didnt they?

£400.00 is a hefty chunk of money and I'm delighted to be getting it. But that those who have sent me nasty messages by text and on FacePPRuNe, those who chanted intimidating messages at me (indirectly) as I drove past them on the picket line during the strikes and those who put on such a disgusting display during their silly marches and open-top sightseeing tours to the high court are getting it too.... annoys the almighty crap out of me.

And your point is?

This bonus is awarded - or should be awarded - for supporting the company in cutting costs, resulting in a certain level of profit. As I see it, though they may have done so for part of the year, those who went on strike and supported the industrial action didn't back the company for the full year. So it should either be pro-rated or not paid at all (and my vote is with the latter).

It is pro-rated - and why shouldn't they get it?

Eddy - you would be far better off trying to find out why a striker got the job of CSM whilst you didn't - after all you backed BA and according to your own line of thinking - they have "kicked you in the testes' more than once.

[MFCREW]

BA has already been reasonable by not sacking a lot of these militants long, long ago.

Can't sack them it's illegal

Let's remember that BA could have allowed the latest ballot to go through to strike action before releasing news that the idiots at Unite had executed the ballot illegally, again, and dropping the bomb shell that those who took part in the illegal strike action were subject to dismissal.

As if

Hope they save their four-hundred quid! They might need it.

Eddy, you need to stop being bitter

[MIDLGW]

I am also a bit frustrated about the bonus. I'm just hoping that the pro-rata will work out to be not in favour of the strikers. I'm not saying this because I'm bitter and twisted, I'm saying it due to working my whatsit off to keep our customers happy.

By the looks of things elsewhere, whoever of the strikers receive a bonus, they'll donate the money to crewdefence. At least they'll be wasting the money "wisely".

[Eddy]

It is pro-rated - and why shouldn't they get it?

It's pro-rated based on part time but we should also consider the huge chunk of the year that our striking colleagues delighted in proclaiming the massive impact on forward bookings that their industrial action was having. And, of course, the period of the year when the strikes actually took place.

Yes, everyone who works for BA contributed to the cost cutting but there's a group who negated their own efforts when they walked out on strike.

Unite and BA claim that the strikes cost something in the region of £120m. Forgive me, but there's no way that the 4,000 or so of you who actualy went on strike saved that much over the rest of the year.

As always, I applaud them for having stood up for their beliefs but I also don't think it's fair that they get the same as I get when bonuses (bonii) are dished out.

MFCrew, I'm not bitter. Not in the least. As I've said countless times before, I have the utmost respect for our colleagues who went on strike (the majority of them, atleast, who conducted themselves in a dignified manner). I just don't think it's fair that those of us who have backed BA year round get rewarded to the same level as those who didn't. But Keith has addressed this.

[From Tunbridge Wells]

I'm not saying it's right that everyone gets a bonus but I do think that there does come a point when things do have to move on.
It could be seen as a conciliatory gesture that will sway the middle of the roaders so everyone gains in the long run.

[Eddy]

Good point, FTW. And it's somewhat unsurprising that it's BA that mans up and makes the first move towards the return of a harmonious working environment.

[keel beam]

And it's somewhat unsurprising that it's BA that mans up and makes the first move towards the return of a harmonious working environment.

How many times does BA have to make the "first" move to resolve the dispute and get nothing back from the union?

WRT the bonus, a message to the CC that took strike action, how much more would that bonus have been had they not struck?

Also bear in mind that the accounting year was only 9 months up to the end of December. These 9 months are traditionally the more prosperous months of the year for most airlines. Expect BA to announce a loss for the first quarter this year.

I would hope, as a number of posters have mentioned, that this concillatory move by KW will make the difference in preventing the next strike and finally a conclusion to this dispute.

[123breath]

The profits were made despite the strike action, not with the help of them. It's somewhat disingenuous to suggest that they contributed towards the profit. We would have seen £150 million more in profit if it wasn't for the militant strikers. That said, I happen to agree that it might the right move for BA to offer the bonus, for a number of reasons including the fact that it demonstrates who is being reasonable in this dispute.

And another thing......anyone can be sacked for any reason at any time. An industrial tribunal will probably then find (a few months later) that it was unlawful dismissal, and compensation will be awarded, which will almost definitely fall short of re-employment. Haven't Unite/BASSA warned you about that?

[Betty girl]

MFCREW,

Looking back through all your posts it appears that, you say, you have only been working for BA for 3 months and have nothing to do with Bassa.

I also notice that on another crew forum a poster with the same name also posts unpleasant things about Mixed Fleet and BA and also declares to be brand new to BA.

I would not want to doubt, in any way, your word but I find it quite upsetting that someone so new to our airline can be so hateful of fellow crew and our management so quickly.

Are you sure you are in the right job. Maybe it would be better to work for another company, for your own sake, as I hardly think things will improve enough to make you happy in this job, if you are hating BA so much, so quickly.

Even after all this disruption over the last two years and working with fellow crew, having to walk on eggshells, I still love my job and my employer after 22 years.

[Flap 80]

The gesture of the Company to pro rata pay the 2010 bonus is not only morally correct, the misguided ones didnt strike all year , but it is a very powerful psychological message to those people who chose to believe the HLLT style rants of LM and his assertion that BA is a "BrUtish Employer"...How wrong he is and how I hope, as the majority of contibutors to this forum appear to hope, that this matter ends soon.

I have yet to meet any animosity between F/C and C/C and it would appear that the converse is true.

[Betty girl]

That's a very good post Flaps80.

I try and explain to people daily that you get polarised opinions on these forums and the reality on my flights is that most crew get on fine, both flight crew and cabin crew, and you get all sorts of points of view from both sides of the door.

There are obviously some crew that are very pro bassa and very upset still but the vast majority are very normal people that just want an end to it and unfortunately believed their union and striked as a result and it is human nature that it is hard, for them, to admit that what they did was a mistake! You see to justify going on strike, they have convinced themselves that BA has treated them badly and it is hard to admit, to yourself, that you were wrong.

Even myself, as a non striker, am not happy with how M/F has been implemented and I also worry about the future of my own job, so it is not all black and white, like many posters on here see it. I am afraid!!

However slowly but surely crew are starting to realise that it was a mistake to strike and that Bassa will not get them out of this mess and support is starting to drop!

The tide is changing, I am sure.

[flybymerchant]

Bettygirl, you wrote....MFCREW,

Looking back through all your posts it appears that, you say, you have only been working for BA for 3 months and have nothing to do with Bassa.

I also notice that on another crew forum a poster with the same name also posts unpleasant things about Mixed Fleet and BA and also declares to be brand new to BA.

I would not want to doubt, in any way, your word

....just to throw my tuppence on the pile, I very much would doubt it.

It doesn't take a genius to recognise Drunken Wally's puerile writing style. Someone claiming to be on the new mixed fleet, but very vociferous about hating it.....and about hating BA.....and so solidly supporting strikers and their actions/decisions even though they were taken supposedly years before MFCREW 'joined'.....but he's also apparently self-declared 'nothing to do with BASSA'....come on Wally, you can do better than this!! Jog on!

[Ops_Room_Junkie]

Betty,

your post 3277 was excellent and summed up my thoughts when reading the contributions that MF posts. That said nearly all your posts on here are excellent, you are one of the few consistent, balanced and fair posters from any workgroup.

I felt that same myself about MF posts but did not say anything in anticipation of being banned for 'playing the player and not the ball'.

I do hope that this dispute will soon be over, but I think (sadly) that it is going to run for sometime yet due to the mindset and the BASSA hierarchy and the Socialist beliefs of UNITE, who seem to be the most unprofessional organisation led by unprofessional/uneducated people earning huge salaries and with nothing to lose from continuing this dispute.

As I type this the world news is on the BBC about the struggles in the middle east/north africa and it just seem that this dispute and peoples concerns on either side are so small when compared with the life/death struggles out there.......but I guess we are lucky that we live in a society where losing a CSD from a crew compliment and a few other changes to terms and conditions /loss of staff travel are enough to motivate cries of outrage/illegality/against my human rights/racism etc.....rather than a society where actually not having jobs/votes/food and losing our lives as these poor folks do is a reailty.

[From Tunbridge Wells]

What an excellent post. :D

It is rather galling when Bassa compared their "struggle" to events from elsewhere in the world - only goes to prove how far removed they actually are from the real world and real oppression.

[Betty girl]

Thanks Ops Room Junkie,

You are very kind and I agree with FTW that your post was a good reminder of how silly this IA is especially in today's climate..

[Mesmer]

Hi,

I am in the majority on this forum in being extremely anti the BASSA leadership. I believe that we cabin crew had to make our fair share of cuts to keep the airline going. I also believe that BA's way of making those cuts were better for us than BASSA's ideas and that BASSA should have negotiated sensibly (and accepted the MTP) to try to get new entrants flying with us on the same fleet.

Having got that out of the way, I would like to pick up Flybymerchant on a couple of his points in post 3240.
it is the best rewarded group in the entire airline per productive hourReally? I will grant you that some cabin crew are paid far more than one would expect, but those are I believe a minority these days. Is the average crew member paid more per hour than the Leadership Team, pilots, IT consultants, each management grade etc? I have no idea what most "groups'" average pay is and I have no problem with whatever they are paid (well, except maybe the leadership team!), but I would be VERY surprised if cabin crew were the best paid per hour. Please give us some figures if you stand by this assertion.

losing one cabin crew member on a 747, from 15 to 14Again, let me stress that I believe this was the best way to make the savings and I don't have a problem with it. I do believe it jeopardises customer service and I think we have fewer crew on our aircraft than most major airlines, but it is a way of saving money which doesn't impact on my take-home pay - and that is what is important to me. However, calling it losing one crew member out of 15 is being disingenuous. The plane is split into the cabins in which we work and the lost crew member has to come from one of those cabins. The actual impact of losing someone from the back of a 747 would be losing 1 out of 5; from Club would be 1 out of 3 or 4 etc depending on the aircraft; and from First would be 1 out of 3. If the CSD is free to work on a trolley then we don't have a problem - it is when the IFE etc needs constant attention that the service will suffer. This is a minority of the time, but does happen. I am just pointing out that calling it 1 out of 15 is misleading.

I only wrote this post because if we are going to accuse the BASSA leadership team of untruths then we have to be able to back up what we ourselves say; and I would dispute the assertion Flybymerchant made about cabin crew being the best paid per productive hour.

[Betty girl]

That's a very balanced and good post Mesmer. You make some really good points.

All the evidence on average salaries, actually shows cabin crew as being on a par with most sectors of BA including the ground staff and office workers.

The two sectors that earn more than everyone else are Pilots and Management but then that is understandable and not surprising.

We do earn more that other UK airlines but if you took just the post 97 crew earnings, this figure would in fact be much more similar to the figures of other UK carriers.

When, however you compare us to other International carriers, we come out on a par with many and many other carriers pay their crew more than BA crew, such as Iberia, for example.

Other airlines do have the same number of crew on a 747, such as Qantas, I believe, but the majority that have premium cabins have more and some airlines, particularly the Far Eastern ones have as many as 17, 18 or even 19 cabin crew on a 747 compared to our 14. This dose make it hard for us, as an airline, to compete with the level of service offered, but we do try!!!

So well done for posting your post because I do feel the general hatred of cabin crew as a workforce is getting quite out of hand and it is good to read your balanced view.

[VSOP Fables]

The actual impact of losing someone from the back of a 747 would be losing 1 out of 5; from Club would be 1 out of 3 or 4 etc depending on the aircraft; and from First would be 1 out of 3. If the CSD is free to work on a trolley then we don't have a problem

Surely that's where the management aspect of the CSD job would be able to organise the service - maybe moving a crew member between cabins as necessary??? Or is that forbidden by BA?? A serious question - I don't know what's acceptable and what isn't. I worked in charter and we all pulled together wherever it was needed.

[Abbey Road]

MFCREWWhy not? they contributed toward the profit didnt they?Striking cabin crew cost the company. Their 'contribution' has been little more than name-calling, hissy-fitting and parading at Bedfont. All that juvenile behaviour has negated much of the cost-saving measures implemented by everyone else. If it wasn't for these cost-savings agreed by the majority of other BA employees, there wouldn't be a bonus to give! :rolleyes:

Can't sack them it's illegalTrite comments like that will come back to haunt the first lot of (unprotected) strikers when they attempt to implement their next predictable ballot! :hmm:

[malcolmf]

On the 747 the crew member was removed from the Club section downstairs which is where the CSD now works. No other cabin is affected.
It is difficult to compete with the likes of SQ because their crew costs are much lower (not just wages but pensions etc.)

[TOM100]

Mesmer

I also seem to remember in the not so distant past, there were 340 pax in M on a 744 (14F55J340M) this reduced with WT+ and new club and no reduction in crew.....

[Betty girl]

To be honest, some of you are making yourselves look ridiculous by nit picking Mesmer's post.

There is no other airline that has less that 14 crew on a 747 with the type of premium cabins that BA has. Most have far in excess. What's your problem!!...... Lets do it with even less!!!!....... it wont be a nice service for our passengers...... but who cares, as long as it's as unpleasant as possible for the cabin crew... that's ok then!!!!!!

Get real please, Mesmer said she/he understood why the crew were removed. she/he just said it did not make for good customer satisfaction, if the CSD gets called away, that's all.

Quite frankly as Mesmer has no axe to grind and is not a militant Bassa mentalist, just a hard working crew member that backed BA and did not strike, I tend to believe him/her when she/he says that club can be hard at times. I expect that none of you posting the opposite opinion have ever worked in an aircraft cabin......thought not!!

[Autobrake Low]

Easy Betty Girl - the point most seem to be missing is that it does not matter if crew believe the level of service or product has deteriorated as a result of the 'one down'! That is nothing to do with their remit.
Management have their job and we have ours. They had to make decisions to steer the airline through the roughest patch of its life. Cutting costs was fundamental.
Have passengers left in droves?? No - the load factors are excellent and the company making small profits again. I would say they have done great job.
I got sick of hearing CC on the radio and reading in the papers how it was not about money but about the damage to the brand and the level of service - what utter rubbish.
Whats next - should CC choose what fleet of aircraft to buy next? Should management consult CC about what routes they would like to see on the network?
Of course not - there are very clever people and very clever procedures of examination that take care of that - nothing to do with our jobs at all.
I hastily add that I recognise very clever people work as CC but they would equally find it quite insulting if a financial analyst from waterside was travelling as a pax and told them they were doing their job wrong!!!

[Betty girl]

I apologise if I came across a bit cross.

[ottergirl]

the point most seem to be missing is that it does not matter if crew believe the level of service or product has deteriorated as a result of the 'one down'! That is nothing to do with their remit.

Autobrake Low - you are correct in what you say but it is easy to see how some of the crew take any reduction in the service quite personally as this is what BA have previously wanted.

I have no idea whether this has been the case with your pilot training but for the last decade, we have trained the 'go the extra mile' message into the cabin crew along with a 'guardian of the customer experience' mentality. In short, we told them it was their remit. (The mood before that was all about the individual, with crew encouraged to 'be unique' and bring their personality to work).

We now have to retrain them into 'just do what it says in the service book' and the only extra they can get is 'you'! This is quite a difficult message to get your head around as it is so different to the ones that have gone before, so in the spirit of all 'change management' principles, it will take time and training to adapt the mindset. On Eurofleet we are currently delivering 'Eurofleet Experience' which is designed to do just that; it still goes against the grain not to hunt around the aircraft to find someone a veggie alternative, to lay the apple juice down so no-one sees it or fetch a Eurotraveller customer a Bailey's because you know it will make them happy.

It's also about retraining our customers because they are used to us stretching the rules to make them happy and they don't like to be told 'NO'. It's not always easy being shouted at for a whimsical change (e.g. removing hot towels from Club Europe) which has come from a faceless individual who may never have worked on an aeroplane.

So it's not the crews fault per se, old habits die hard but give us time, we'll get there just in time for the next change of direction from head office.;)

[frontcheck]

Unfortunately Ottergirl, that is the way of aviation these days. Whilst airlines still bang on about customer service,customer service it is all about saving money and if that entails cutting back on the number of staff expected to do a particular job - so be it. I have been in aviation industry for more years than I care to mention and worked for a number of airlines both UK and abroad but the last 10 years I have seen the reality change beyond recognition. As you say it is a difficult lesson to learn and when you are from the "old school" of thought it does take a big shift in the way you approach your role.

[JUAN TRIPP]

Firstly happy to be back home after our yearly visit to see family. Luckily got Club both ways, as still have my FULL travel concessions:D Our longhaul flights on BA were fantastic. Not saying that because I work for them, far from it, but on both sectors the crew including both CSD's were exemplary. In fact the best we have had for years, and believe me I was not sure WHAT we were going to get. Well done. Had a couple of yellow/red pens come and have a look from the back - I just smiled,winked and raised my glass of bubbly:):) ( Sorry but after all the c**p this past year, they deserved it!! )

So we have ANOTHER ballot. It will certainly be a 'YES'. But will Lenny and Dunc go for an actual strike. Probably as it coincides with Easter and the wedding. Too tempting me thinks. So KW has said that anyone going on strike next year will not get a bonus.This makes me think that BA are not going to dismiss any crew who are involved in an unprotected strike. Why say it then?

Seems to me that BA are playing the 'very long game' here, but personally my message to WW, KW and BF is, WE THE NON STRIKERS HAVE HAD ENOUGH. Don't please go all weak on us now. You have given the strikers a bonus ( they are laughing at you and us), so why let this carry on. If there is an unprotected strike, let it happen and then put them out of their misery. Remember its the rest of us ( thats ALL staff in BA) who have got you through all of this

Less crew
Mesmer

I also seem to remember in the not so distant past, there were 340 pax in M on a 744 (14F55J340M) this reduced with WT+ and new club and no reduction in crew.....

Good point

Yes and the same on EF as I keep reminding crew. The product even 10 years ago was much more and yet the crewing levals stayed the same until the 'imposition' in nov 09. As an aside, from my days on WW, I found half the problem was that the pursers weren't very proactive at helping in other cabins. EG On many occasions, we would be full in 1st and W/T, yet have say 20 pax in club ( out of 48 seats) with 4 crew. NEVER would the purser say to me as the CSD, I'm going to send one of my crew down the back to help straight away even though 3 of them could comfortably lokk after 20 pax. If I mentioned it, they would do it, but if I didn't, nothing would happen until the Club service was over.Its all about 'managing' the whole a/c. Interestingly, since going to 14 crew, my CSD friends on WW have said its actually brought the crew together more and that crew help without being prompted.:D

[VSOP Fables]

Its all about 'managing' the whole a/c.

Thanks Juan - you put it better than I did in my post earlier on this page!

[Caribbean Boy]

JUAN TRIPP (http://www.pprune.org/members/332344-juan-tripp) wrote: Seems to me that BA are playing the 'very long game' hereI believe that the strategy all along was to tough it out and not crumble under trade union power as had happened too often.

If there will be more strikes, then Unite will not be in a good position. BA will have operated most of its flights during the strikes and Unite will have struck for 10 reasons (listed below for convenience). There will be no more reasons to go on strike again, so Unite will have lost. All that aggravation and cost for so little, how stupid can you be.

Reasons for striking
1. The immediate restoration of staff travel concessions, in full, to the crew from whom they were taken.
2. Binding arbitration, through ACAS, of all cabin crew disciplinary cases related to the original dispute.
3. The restoration of all earnings docked from crew who were genuinely off sick during strike dates.
4. Full and proper discussion of the trade union facilities agreement at the company with the immediate removal of all threats and sanctions made by the company in relation to this.
5. The immediate cessation of actions taken against elected representatives of cabin crew, including; victimization; intimidation and exclusion.
6. The introduction of mixed fleet on different terms and conditions without agreement with the union.
7. The discrimination applied to union members in the allocation of part time contracts and transfers in breach of the Ops and Choice framework.
8. The company's continued and specific disregard for necessary union agreement in advance of any application of the disruption agreement.
9. The continued use of volunteer and/or temporary crew from outside the recognised NSP on both the Eurofleet and Worldwide fleets and their employment on terms and arrangements outside of existing agreements between BA and the union.
10. The company's offer of a separate pay settlement and variations to terms and conditions for those willing to accept non-negotiated changes to their contracts.

[PC767]

Juan, what a condesending post. Are you deluded?

You 'got' club because there was space in club. I brought a staff passenger back from a long range destination on my last trip. She had paid premium standby. She travelled on the jump seat at 5R. 12hrs. Naturally we made the trip as comfortable as possible.

Why would the crews or indeed the CSDs not be exemplary? Even CEO Williams accepts that will always be the case. It is generally the product which lets BA down. 'Not sure what we were going to get' - the BA product served to the best of the crew's abilities - no question. If I knew who you were, would I question what I was going to get. No. Grow up and stop believing the belittling waffle on this spite filled thread.

And why would anyone else know who you are? Are you now paranoid as well, red pens coming through the cabin just to see you. I can assure you they have better things to do.

Out of interest. Since your days on long haul, passenger numbers onboard may have been reduced. But from your recent FULL staff travel experience would you not agree that the current club service is fiddly, messy and long, oh and labour intensive if done properly.

[MFCREW]

Luckily got Club both ways, as still have my FULL travel concessions Our longhaul flights on BA were fantastic. Not saying that because I work for them, far from it, but on both sectors the crew including both CSD's were exemplary. In fact the best we have had for years, and believe me I was not sure WHAT we were going to get. Well done. Had a couple of yellow/red pens come and have a look from the back - I just smiled,winked and raised my glass of bubbly ( Sorry but after all the c**p this past year, they deserved it!! )

I'm sorry but that is total bull**** - as if you just "smiled,winked and raised my glass of bubbly" - what a liar.

If anything someone probably said "go and have a look at the prat in Club wearing Farah's and sandals"
:ok:

You made a provocative posting to solicit a response and you got one

[TightSlot]

Assessments of crew performance made while wearing champagne goggles are rarely reliable and sometimes reveal rather more about the person making the statement than was intended. That said, may we move on now from attention seekers to the subject in hand - Thanks

[Dutchjock]

PC767:

the current club service is fiddly, messy and long, oh and labour intensive if done properly.

Labour intensive????? That says it all. It really isn't difficult to see how we've ended up in the current situation.

And you call someone else deluded... :ugh:

[IvorBiggun]

I hear a few of the mentalists may be finding themselves in court or on disciplinaries after posts about a pilot in another place.

All stirred on by one of their leaders.

Oh dear.

I also hear that when requested by the police real names have been very easily forthcoming from the office.On at least 6 occasions I believe. It didnt even need a court order.

[JUAN TRIPP]

Assessments of crew performance made while wearing champagne goggles are rarely reliable and sometimes reveal rather more about the person making the statement than was intended. That said, may we move on now from attention seekers to the subject in hand - Thanks


I'm sorry Tightslot but I have to say,with the greatest respect, I find your comment about me a little patronising. I normally wouldn't bother to 'justify' myself in this situation, but I will as its you. The 'champagne' was my first drink of the day, followed by one and a half glasses of wine. No more even on a 9+ hr flight. Simple reason - I had a long drive on unfamiliar roads when I arrived. So no champagne goggles. All I was saying was ,what a great flight we had, especially with some of the stuff thats been happening in the last 12/18+months. I can tell you that working as crew with BA lately has not been easy. I'm sure my fellow colleagues on this forum will concur. It wasn't meant in any way to stir up feelings, it really wasn't. That aside, my apologies if I've upset anyone


PC767 said

Juan, what a condesending post. Are you deluded?

You 'got' club because there was space in club. I brought a staff passenger back from a long range destination on my last trip. She had paid premium standby. She travelled on the jump seat at 5R. 12hrs. Naturally we made the trip as comfortable as possible.

Why would the crews or indeed the CSDs not be exemplary? Even CEO Williams accepts that will always be the case. It is generally the product which lets BA down. 'Not sure what we were going to get' - the BA product served to the best of the crew's abilities - no question. If I knew who you were, would I question what I was going to get. No. Grow up and stop believing the belittling waffle on this spite filled thread.



No not deluded PC767. You say that you made a staff pax trip ' as comfortable as possible' Good for you, but my point and we all know this, is that it doesn't always happen. Spite filled thread eh. Your opinion not my mine though.


MFCREW said

I'm sorry but that is total bull**** - as if you just "smiled,winked and raised my glass of bubbly" - what a liar.

If anything someone probably said "go and have a look at the prat in Club wearing Farah's and sandals"
http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

You made a provocative posting to solicit a response and you got one

No not B******t, just a true fact as it happened. Now MF CREW, come on old chap, or shall I just call you DH. Are you really 31 as in your profile. How then do you know what Farah's are? Very 70's saying.

Anyway enough now, I will now move onto the next 'situation' to talk about, whatever that may be. JT

[PC767]

Dutchjock.

Yup, labour intensive. Especially if done to standard.

[PC767]

Fruitbat - spite.

Let me join in. You are a pilot, BA? LH?

If so, are you one of those who I serve tea, coffee, OJ, apple juice, 1st espresso, hot water, cold water, Times, Daily Mail, Telegraph, anything else with a crossword, sandwich, club kitchen chocolate, hot meal, any thing left in first meal, nuts, cheese board (oh hang on thats gone), sort your crew purchase out, spare pillow for controlled rest and wake up your colleague from official rest. And clean up the first seat once you've finished your movie.

Forgive me for not pitying you, or questioning your bunk time. Forgive me for not bowing to your experience of operating the club cabin on world wide.

Despite the spite game, let me say in sincerety I apprieciate your role, your achievements, your hard worked for rewards and your hard fought t&cs. But this is a cabin crew thread for BA staff, and as BA cabin crew who works on LHR WW and operates the club cabin I maintain it is labour intensive and fiddly. Not unpleasant not mundane, not strenuous, not unenjoyable. Labour intensive, particularily when passengers cannot have meal choice No1, nor No2. Not when the wine list should be embroided with a 'Bullseye' Bully and a micro player inside reciting (in a Jim Bowen accent) 'look at what you could have had.' Not when the caterer meets Heston onboard and states 70% meal load for 100% occupancy. Its a challenge and I enjoy it, I would have trained to be a pilot otherwise!!

But it is labour intensive. Did I mention losing the CSD from the service while they placate Mr Gold in first whose seat is u/s (again).......

[64K]

Spare a thought for some of your line managers - they can have a pretty heavy workload too! Managing teams of 200+ people, no pay rise for god knows how long, some earning less than some main crew members, more and more responsibility, etc.

Views above are my own, not those of my employer

[Dutchjock]

PC767

What is your point exactly? If a proper service takes 2 hours in stead of 1,5, so what?
Service levels vary greatly from flight to flight. You may always give your best, but unfortunately not everyone is the same. We have great crew, but there's no point in denying we have a lot of rot: "I don't give a sh*t, lets chuck meals and go to bed, let's bring the company to it's knees"

This is not spite, horrible prejudiced pilot talk. Look at the pax forum (not just this one). There is always a feeling of "I wonder what the crew/service will be like on this flight"


And please, can you try to avoid putting "labour intensive" and club service in one message? It really does make me want to :{

[L337]

As a LH BA744 Captain, I think PC767's post was spot on.

[ottergirl]

Thread warp - As a Eurofleeter it is not often I have to deliver the Club World service (only TLV) but I have to agree with PC767 - it does not flow! This is nothing to do with the crew delivering it or their leader working a trolley. Over the years I have delivered different business class services and this one doesn't seem fit for purpose either for the recipients or the deliverers because it is falling between two briefs; trying to give a restaurant twist to a limited-budget airline service and failing. Also as a passenger may I say that the quality of food on the last couple of flights I have taken seems to have been designed by Asda rather than Heston. A major overhaul is needed here and I am hoping our new boss from the Jumeirah group will use his experience of premium customer service to spearhead such a change.

PC767
If so, are you one of those who I serve tea, coffee, OJ, apple juice, 1st espresso, hot water, cold water, Times, Daily Mail, Telegraph, anything else with a crossword, sandwich, club kitchen chocolate, hot meal, any thing left in first meal, nuts, cheese board (oh hang on thats gone), sort your crew purchase out, spare pillow for controlled rest and wake up your colleague from official rest. And clean up the first seat once you've finished your movie.

superb post, made me laugh out loud which has confused the CRC TV room no end!

“The postings on this site are my own and don’t necessarily represent British Airways’ positions, strategies or opinions.”

[PC767]

Dutchjock.

So what?

The majority of club passengers from LHR are travelling on business. I would hazard a guess that from LGW club passengers are on leisure/holiday travel.

One wants a predominantly efficient experience, the other wants a predominantly enjoyable experience. Both attributes are also applicable to each service.

At LHR 1.5 hrs versus 2 hrs equals less work time or less rest time FOR PASSENGERS. It matters. It matters when passengers sit with a dirty tray in their way whilst firing up the lap top, not because the crew are in bed or doing the mail crossword, but because the crew are busy dealing with other passengers who need sleep before startig work at the other end. More crew equals a quicker more efficient service. More crew also equals more cost, I know. There was a trial whereby a crew member was taken from traveller on the Jumbo and placed into club. I don't know the outcome.

One more point. The WW Club service takes closer to 3hrs to complete the main meal.

[essessdeedee]

so how often is support offered from the other cabins when there is a full club load?

Also thats a bit of a presumption regarding the LGW club customer. I haven't been out of LGW for some time, but the business/leisure split looks similar to that at LHR.

[PC767]

It is a presumption, but based on destinations, i.e. caribbean, cancun, maldives and soon to be mauritius. Not quite Baltimore, Houston etc. And I suggest that on leisure the club experience is something to be savoured more than if on business. At least thats what I would expect if I had the cash to pay for a club seat to go on holiday. Even BA note that LGW is to be a premium leisure hub according to the latest 'up'.

On all my flights someone from econony is not two assists in club when their service is over. Cannot comment on all BA long haul flights because I cannot physically be there to see. Can you?

[Flap62]

On all my flights someone from econony is not two assists in club when their service is over

And again in English please!!!

[Maddie Baddie]

I have to agree with PC767 about the Club World service. To complete a full service takes, give or take a couple of minutes, three hours without rushing through the service. If you manage to get some assistance from any of the other cabins, which does vary from flight to flight, once they have finished it saves you a couple of minutes. It has nothing to do with getting as much time as possible on the bunks but making it as convenient as possible for our customers.

Club World has become a trying cabin to work in. It's become very difficult to provide a good service routine which actually flows and works efficientely. Before they removed the purser position, no. 7 used to be my preferential choice to work. I opted to work down last year and have worked as no. 7 occassionally and things are not what they once were.

Club World once used to be a very senior cabin. Has anyone else noticed that since imposition it seems as if World Traveller is the most senior cabin and Club World is very junior? I recently worked with a crew member who said he has worked only twice in World Traveller since imposition and the rest in Club World.

[cessnapete]

Surely the CSD allocates cabin crew positions to the most suitable crew, taking into account past experience. Not just chosen by the senior crew at check in?

[From Tunbridge Wells]

I have to agree with PC767 about the Club World service. To complete a full service takes, give or take a couple of minutes, three hours without rushing through the service. If you manage to get some assistance from any of the other cabins, which does vary from flight to flight, once they have finished it saves you a couple of minutes. It has nothing to do with getting as much time as possible on the bunks but making it as convenient as possible for our customers.

I dont have a problem with the service taking three hours as I honestly think the customers don't mind waiting. Flying has changed so much over the years - when I was a young trolley dolly, people used to be a captive audience (pre lap-tops, i-pads, ife) with little to entertain them apart from waiting for the nosh to arrive, so what is the rush?
Why is it more convenient for passengers to have a quick service? Most will have access to the lounges and will hardly be malnourished if they wait a while.

[Flap62]

Cessnapete,

Surely the CSD allocates cabin crew positions to the most suitable crew, taking into account past experience. Not just chosen by the senior crew at check in?

I think both you and I know that this is how it should happen. The fact that it doesn't and crew are allowed to pick their positions in seniority order is another example of how CSDs fail to act as managers and simply "go with the flow".

[DutchStar]

I have been with BA for over 13yrs and very, very rarely has a CSD said anything about the working position one chooses. You choose, in seniority order, where you want to work and that's it! That is the reason why lately the most junior crew are left with club...(I, personally, enjoy working in the club cabin anyway:))

[JUAN TRIPP]

Surely the CSD allocates cabin crew positions to the most suitable crew, taking into account past experience. Not just chosen by the senior crew at check in?



Ahhhhhh if only that happened. I'm afraid that once again Bassa/Amicus have 'insisted' over the years that all positions are allocated by seniority. Yes, in theory the CSD can allocate the positions themselves, but in all my years I can say that rarely happens. Only time I did it was when we had a large group of French speaking pax in Club and I 'asked' a French crew member if they wouldn't mind working in Club. On this occasion there was no problem, but I have had other times when this was turned down. Yes, I could have insisted but hey ho I didn't. Yes the power of Bassa was sitting on my shoulder:ugh:

On the new mixed fleet, the SCCM chooses the crew positions.:ok: A good example of this was back in 2006 when BA wanted 'dedicated' duty free crew on longhaul to get potentially more sales. Bassa put that down as one of the issues for the 2007 strike. Oh yes, the crew has generally always come before the customer on Bassa's watch:=

[Maddie Baddie]

CSD's rarely interfear with the working positions in my experience. I have a vague memory about some years ago when a temporary crew and a crew member from EF who had recently come over to WW were left with numbers 11 and 12. The CSD said he wanted at least one crew member with a bit more experience on the upper deck but he had a bit of a problem getting anyone to volunteer.

Choosing your working position by seniority is good when you are senior enough and one of the first to choose but a nightmare when you are at the bottom of the list for years. I wouldn't mind if the CSD allocated the working positions in briefing, or if they were allocated automatically by a computer which would ensure a "fair share" of every working position. It would also avoid crew members working in the same cabin for years having no idea what's happening in the other cabins behind the curtains. Not too long ago I had a crew member called out from QRS and left with a working position in Club World. She had no idea what she was doing as she hadn't been working in Club World for years.

[Yellow Pen]

Interestingly it takes 3 hours to complete Club service ex-LHR and that's accepted as just being a function of the complicated procedures, but when Mixed Fleet take 3 hours to finish the Club service they are roundly condemned by the militants who see it as a sign of incompetence.

[PC767]

Actually that was when the service was taking 4.5hrs plus. And they were not incompetent, just lacking experience. Not the best service for our passengers when over half the flight is taken with just one service. I'm sure they will improve.

It is worth noting that it has been well over 5 years since anyone was recruited directly to long haul on a permanent basis. Junior crew are hardly new. A few temps still around on contrcat No 3, and tranferees have a good 5 years plus in BA. So 'junior' crew on long haul are not new crew. Not really a scenario where the CSD lacks experience in the cabins and therefore needs to allocate positions.

Just a thought, if the service takes 3 hours then that is what it takes, not a problem. But alot of passengers are travelling alone and if not are seated independantly and thus treated as an individual. In that context is it really acceptable for a three course meal to take three hours? An hour a course. In a restaurant or at a dinner party this would be the norm because people would be interacting with each other, chatting etc. Not what happens onboard for alot of our passengers. Anyhow just a thought.

[GayGourmet]

It's quite interesting that the length of the CW service is being debated. Remember, BA listens intently to our customers. We care passionately about what they think. And if they were telling us that the service takes too long then something would be changed. And it hasn't been.

This 3 hours that we are talking about.... is that from take off to first break, or from the first drink delivery to the last coffee cup coming back in?

[Hand Solo]

I've flown in Club with Mixed Fleet quite recently and the service took 3 hours. I noted that it seemed slow but that seems to be about standard. It certainly wasn't 4.5 hours. That was 3 hours from wheels up to last coffee cup. Whilst that's acceptable on a daytime flight I found it annoying on the night return sector when I just wanted to get some sleep.

One thing I did find refreshing as a staff passenger was that the crew were genuinely friendly on both sectors and I didn't feel I was part of the usual staff travel lottery of whether you'll get a decent crew or a bunch of miserablists who want to make your day unpleasant.

[Dutchjock]

PC767

I take your point. I agree 3 hours to get your meal out of the way if you want to sleep is too long. In an ideal world you would have your colleagues who are done with there bit to come and help you, maybe a managing task for the CSD?

Having said that I hardly ever experience the service taking longer than 2 hrs. Does that mean the crew are not doing it properly? I'll try to be more aware out of interest. It's easy to not be aware of what's going on at the other side of the door

[c7xlg]

We seem to be going pretty off track so I'll be short... 3 hours from wheels up to last coffee is acceptable to me as a frequent flyer. Doesn't matter if I'm on business or leisure.

When it took 3 hours to just get to my main course on a recent Emirates (A380) business flight I DID complain to the airline as that is too long. The 'don't really care' response from their customer service dept will mean I avoid them in the future.

The service I had on ORD-LHR BA Club flight 2 weeks ago was good. The quality of the product on offer has certainly reduced drastically (apart from the seats) when compared to 10-20 years ago, but the cabin crew (see getting back on topic!) were friendly and efficient. Long may that continue...

[Betty girl]

The length of the service can depend on many different factors. ie. time of day, daylight or night time and number of passengers. A half full cabin will be much faster that a full cabin!!

The club service on Worldwide is not good at the moment. The main meal is squashed and unappetizing ( the E/F club meals look far nicer) and the wine list is a joke. When I travelled as a passenger recently I was given the wine list and automatically wanted the wine I had just been told was not available today!! It's human nature!!

In the past the club tray and presentation has been a lot better and I am sure BA have received feedback from both our crews and our passengers about this. It takes time and a lot of investment to change a whole service completely and I am sure this will come about with our new department leader. It does always seem that our cabin service product often changes when a new head comes in.

Obviously the current Worldwide crew will be faster than our new Mixed Fleet crew, this is obvious because they are more experienced at present but I am sure that Mixed Fleet will catch up as they get used to this messy service. I am sure both sets of crew work to give our passengers a good service.

It is very easy for people to post unkind remarks on this forum about other departments and often they are untrue and not born up by the facts.

At the moment Worldwide cabin crew have the highest customer satisfaction scores in the premium cabins. For the month of December our Worldwide crew got a score of 92% of our premium passengers rated them exceptionally or very good. This was a higher score than both E/F and Mixed Fleet crews got. These figures are posted on the walls of the communication room, next to the CRC coffee shop for all of you to read.

Please can we deal with facts and not how you imagine our cabin crew perform. It is easy to take a dislike to a set of people and imagine that they may therefore not give good customer service but this is not born out by the actual facts sometimes.

Thanks C7xlg for that balanced view.

These are my own views and not those of my employer BA.

[cessnapete]

Can't see the problem! BA Management set the cabin service standards/routines reqired, not the Unions.
A simple notice requireing CSM/CSD to allocate cabin positions at check in according to need/experience.

[Flap62]

A simple notice requireing CSM/CSD to allocate cabin positions at check in according to need/experience

Why should that be required? Allocation is what the JPM says, it's just that CDSs decide not to do it that way as they're often too scared to upset the crew. The book is written in this instance so that the CSD should use their management skills to ensure that the positions allocated give the highest levels of safety and customer service. The "in charge" crew member decides that it's just easier to let the crew pick. This is a failure of leadership - plain and simple.

The link to the current dispute is tenuous but it does show that the older, more experienced crew feel that it doesn't matter what the regulations say (JPMs) or management (in this case their immediate supervisor), they are untouchable and will do it there way. This is why we are where we are.

[Yellow Pen]

When I travelled as a passenger recently I was given the wine list and automatically wanted the wine I had just been told was not available today!

Now there's something I can agree with! I've taken to just asking what they've got as invariably whatever I want off the wine list is either not on today or all gone. The wine list was a stupid idea and it sets passengers up for disappointment from the outset.

[Betty girl]

Ceesnapete and Flaps62.

Just to clarify that all Worldwide crew are all experienced crew apart from some Temp crew but most of them have left or moved to Mixed Fleet. In fact experience as referred to in the JPM is just six months !!! so not really something that requires a Worldwide CSD to manage!! Of course on Mixed Fleet they will need to look at this carefully on each flight.

Just like our pilot community, BA has always been seniority led as are many airlines. In fact I would say, that many would say, that the seniority driven factor is actually more of a problem in the pilot community than in our own! Depending of course if you are at the top or the bottom of the list!!!It is usually a problem when you are at the bottom but by the time you reach the middle!! You don't want the system to change !!

I can see however that it will need to change in our community but for other reasons than mentioned by other posters. As both WW and E/F are shrinking fleets and will have no new entrants joining in the future, the same crew will now remain at the bottom of the list forever!! This will mean that some crew will be condemned to get last choice forever and of course that would be unfair!!

These are all my own views

[JUAN TRIPP]

Its not quite as simple as that - wished it was. When seniority was brought in to bid for cabin positions in the 80's, it was the right decsion at the time. As time has passed, its become a milestone around Cabin services necks. Remember, this was agreed between both BA and the unions 'at the time'. The irony is that now, seniority only works for 10-15% of crew max. They get what they want 90% of the time, but for the others ? The 10-20% at the bottom get pushed into what the rest dont want at the time eg. product/crewing level changes, pax loads on the day etc. Inevitably where you need the experience, most times you finish up with the inexperience:ugh: So both the crew in that cabin and more importantly the customers lose out. Brillient isn't it. As I said, on certain occasions I've swapped crew around but on a normal day, no way. Oh yes I've got balls, but CSD on longhaul I found to be the loneliest job in BA, so I'm not going to cut my own nose off thanks. I personally think seniority should go, as it gives us a hierachal system that benefits just a small minority. Hopefully its something BA will look into soon

[Flap62]

Juan and Bettygirl

The good book says

The SCCM must ensure that, when allocating crew positions at briefing,
operational experience is taken into account and spread between the
front and rear of the aircraft for take-off and landing

How does seniority picking positions sit with the word "allocate"?

[JUAN TRIPP]

Flap62

On the day, that certainly happens, eg if you have new crew, VCC's etc. On longhaul, all crew have flown at least 5-7 years min at the moment. So its difficult 'to work out' who is experienced and who isn't in what cabin:ugh:

[Flap62]

Fair do's

Shall we leave this now and let the thread get back on topic?

[allenmark]

thank you very much for sharings...i really enjoy all of these posts..

[Betty girl]

Flaps 62,

Exactly what you say. In BA's and the CAA's view operational experience is, it has recently been reduced from one year, just 6 months. You could have a whole crew apart from the senior crew member with just 6 months experience each and they would be considered capable of operating in any position. When someone has less than 6 months experience, you have to make sure they are working with someone who has more than six months experience. Obviously this is done and there is a limit to how many crew can be on board with this lower experience. ie on an airbus only one crew member with under 6 months experience can be in charge of a door and part of the core crew on that aircraft but on bigger aircraft the number goes up. This is why initially all the new Mixed Fleet crew had to have had previous airline experience and it is only now that they have got their numbers up that they have can take on completely new, new entrants.

On worldwide it would only be when a new person was on board or a volunteer that the CSD would need to do this. On Mixed Fleet this will be very critical in the next few months as many brand new crew are just about to come on line and the CSMs will need to look very carefully at the spread of crew across the various doors.

The CSDs and CSMs are putting these crews in these various positions not to aid the cabin service but to have a legal spread of crews across the door areas. That is what the JPM is referring to and not who does or does not work in Club, First or World traveller!!!

Obviously on Worldwide everyone will have miles more experience than just six months and on any occasion this is not the case, the CSD would be looking at it and repositioning anyone to another position if needed. Crew with this lower level of under six months are marked on the briefing sheet accordingly so, so that the CSD is aware that he/she needs to monitor this and it will be exactly the same on the M/F briefing sheets although it will need a lot of thought from the CSMs as they will be dealing with many more new crew on their flights.

[cessnapete]

Just for info I have recently completed a pax trip Lhr/Den/Lhr, first experience of MF route.
On way out service a bit slow due inexperience etc, but very smart appearanced crew, and extremly friendly. Only experienced travelers would notice the difference.
On Den/Lhr could not tell the difference between MF and 'old WW'. Efficient and friendly, and again very smart appearance.
Both flights near full.(A VCC on return sector probably helped the service given though)
An ex. Ezy lady we chatted to said the money not great at the moment but lifestyle/routes/aicraft types in BA beat the hell out of 4/5 sectors a day around Europe in her previous life, and friends of hers queing up to join!!
All were looking forward to extra routes opening up due to their upcoming B744 qualification.

[JUAN TRIPP]

Interesting info Pete. Good to get it straight from the horses mouth:ok: Yes The ex Ezy girl is what I think is typical and BA know it. Its the 'Bassa' lot that we cannot convince

[Yellow Pen]

... apparently BASSAs latest edict is having a pop at BA Asset Protection for not apprehending Rajib Karim. It would seem counter-terrorism is now within their scope of operations and they should have picked him up as he was only working a few offices down from them. Perhaps BASSA believe that Waterside stretches all the way from Harmondsworth to Newcastle?:ugh:

Mind you, their geography was never that good. Remember when they said BA should operate a shuttle to Mexico City from Barbados?

[flywcm]

Having read much about New Fleet, I thought it worth a comment. I have just flown as passenger in Club World to Denver. I was impressed by the bright smiling faces and very smart uniform standards. Throughout the service was impecable. Only one crew member had former BA service experience, the remainder from airlines such as Aer Lingus and Easyjet. I am not saying ww would not have been as good but it could not have been better. Maybe BA are doing some things right.:ok:

[TruBlu123]

Flew back from LAS a few days ago. It was a pleasure to see the female cc walk through the terminal wearing their hats, very elegant. The onboard experience was also very encouraging. The pax in CW must have been very impressed with the service levels they received. I certainly was. A key component of course is reward based performance. My wife had a conversation with the CSM, he was acutely aware of the need to deliver consistently high levels of service. I just hope that the GPM etc... accurately reflects their efforts and in turn the reward based payments. They certainly deserved recognition on this flight from my observations.:D

[PC767]

It is much easier to look smart in a new uniform.

A regular problem for 'us legacy' lot is trying to replace our old worn out uniform. A friend was recently told he had a three month plus wait for a new waistcoat. Yellow shirts are a norm.

This is because of a world wide cotton shortage - a result of catastrophic weather occurances. Thats the official line, or it could be that uniform preference is going to new fleet and the odd VCC. My manager somehow managed to kit herself out in a shiny new uniform and is at least sympathetic to my comments about managing uniform standards.

The management have made no secret of describing mixed fleet as elite crew. A cynic would suggest that leaving legacy crew to wither in aging uniforms only subconciously promotes the new fleet = elite fleet dogma.

[PC767]

Trublu123

Were you one of the passengers who must have been impressed with the CW service, or it that merely a suggestion?

[dolly bird]

As a CSD I have experienced the same problem with trying to get new shirts. I have been to uniform stores three times over four months to get new shirts and none are available! It is extremely frustrating especially for those of us who try to maintain high levels of customer service on all flights!

[Bengerman]

In an effort to get back on thread,

Can any BASSA supporter say what it will take to end this dispute?

It would help if abuse, emotion, supposition and vitriol were avoided.

[Ancient Observer]

Bengerman,

Oh, pay attention at the back!!

it is simple. BA need to join Doctor Who, Back to the Future, Time Bandits and others and rewind the clock back to about 2007 when bassa could click its fingers, say "Jump" and BA would ask how high they should jump.

Time to go back to JB.

[fly12345]

There is absolutely no problem with delivering a seamless, brilliant service with the present number of crew on board.
Fact.

[PC767]

fly12345.

Opinion. Not fact.

[Yellow Pen]

If some crews can do it so well why do others struggle? It clearly can be done well, so why not consistently well?

[PC767]

May I dare to suggest that is the passengers who are not consistent.

As is their right, they tend to have adhoc requests, wish to engage in conversation, have problems for crew to sort, eat at different speeds, drink different amounts, have many different needs from the inflight experience etc.

Unlike service routines which are written in offices and tested on willing watersiders, who sit and observe the script.

Passengers are human, not guinea pigs. Perhaps the problem is that the service is inflexible and does not take into account adhoc needs and problems, perhaps this is where extra hands on deck are a bonus.

The service works well when everything else works well, in all cabins. If all the equipment is working, if all the product is available and if passengers are in the mood to take just what is given then service can be consistent. However we all know the reality...

And maybe this is where some crew excel over others. Thinking outside the box and going the so called extra mile to make things work. An area of goodwill which has suffered under Walsh's civil war.

[Middy]

PC767 I appreciate your thoughts but sooooooo boring !!!!

This had never been Mr Walsh's civil war but support form The City who want the company back where it should be on the FTSE 100 index and have supplied funds to do just that.

This is now the real world of aviation and individuals are welcome to join it or not. Their choice. BASSA simply do not like being told what to do after so many years pulling the strings.

Bruised ego's do not make a company successful and keep thousands of hard working staff across all areas employed. The future is everthing for us all and BASSA need to wake up and work alongside many others to keep us all in a job.

If people do not like that then they can leave and discover what a tough world we really live in today.

[PC767]

Who states that the company has a right to be on the FTSE 100 index. If the company sorted its problems out and performed well enough it would earn a place there. And do you really believe a group of cabin crew are the difference between being where we are or being back in the FTSE 100.

I'm sure both Bassa and Unite would be delighted to work with Mr Williams, however despite their requests and his comments that he is willing, nobody is talking.

Finally, I think most crew are aware of life in the real world, they actually live in it, and that is why they fear for their futures. Striking may well not be the right answer (and I didn't), but rolling over and watching safeguards, wages and work disappear isn't either.

Editted to add, I do not find the needs of the passengers I serve boring, nor the uncertain future I face.

[GayGourmet]

Unlike service routines which are written in offices and tested on willing watersiders, who sit and observe the script.

Sorry PC767, I do understand this perception, but this is not the whole picture when it comes to evaluating new products and services. In the past BA had to consult Unite and were often frustrated by their resistance to change for customer benefit.

And just to clarify, while ww crew should be proud of their 92% customer satisfaction scores, Club World London City crew (who are LGW based) achieve 95-97% every month. There are 3 crew for 32 customers and they plate up meals, deliver media players to all customers, mix cocktails, among other unique service elements.

I'm not being argumentative, just wanted to share some stats that may not be available to all, and make the point that exceptional levels of service are achievable with the right attitude from the crew.

I believe the majority of BA crew (wherever they are based) are extremely talented. But there are still a number who let the side down.

[VintageKrug]

GG: In the past BA had to talk to Unite and were constantly frustrated by their resistance to change for customer benefit. Involving unite has proved time and again to be the least effective way to re-design service on board.


Evidence to support GG's statement:

Here is the HotTowelGate link:

. LGW/LHR - 29/01/09 Hot Towels (http://www.uniteba.com/LGWLHRhottowels.html)

And here is ClubWorldLondonCityGate:

. LGW - 24/07/09 - Fisher - LCY Update (http://www.uniteba.com/LGWfisherupdate240709.html)

you can see that BA originally wanted a la carte dining for London City, but it "wouldn't work" according to BASSA. Here:

. LGW - 27/07/09 - Fisher - Failure to Agree (http://www.uniteba.com/LGWfisherFTA270709.html)

you can see that Unite originally wanted Cabin Crew to have 24 hours rest in Ireland after operating the arduous (less than one hour!) LCY-SNN service.

While there may have been a few valid points in all that, it's just no way to operate a modern business.

[kangaroojack]

Oh, wow....so it really is true re the 'hot towel issue' in traveller +...I'm shocked, totally, totally astounded!

Now, if I was a member of Cabin Crew I would be extremely embarassed if I was approached about this outside the company. An extra crew member onboard for a task that takes 'minutes'?????????????

I dare anyone, even the BASSA diehards to come on here and defend this.

I'm surprised the media did'nt get a hold of this during the dispute to show all and sundry the level of militancy and 1970's union mentality, though, even back then, it would have received the 'you what' response!

Oh dear. I thought I had a clear picture of what we are up against, clearly I was wrong. I was 'kinda' hoping that this was a fictional case. What a lot of :mad::mad::mad:!!!!!!!!!!!!

[Fargoo]

Ref the Fisher (LCY) servce, i've read that link and can't see any problem with the Unite side of it at all. Far from them rejecting an a la carte service it clearly says

Originally BA brands wanted ‘a la carte’ flexible dining for 32 people. Some initial trials were done and it was obvious that this was not achievable with 3 crew. BA believe that 3 crew can deliver a Club World service however. The aircraft delivery is the problem as we will not be able to do many trials. The aircraft will be similar to the A319 however.

Seems to be reasonable to shelve an original idea if trials show it's unworkable.

[fly12345]

Hot towels in WT+ have been done on every flight I have operated.
No problem.

[jetset lady]

So not only do you completely ignore my explanation of, as you so quaintly call it, "ClubWorldLondonCityGate" VintageKrug, but you then go on to post the same incorrect information on another thread. Re-posting it here won't make it any closer to the truth than it was on the passenger thread. :rolleyes:

[twinboom]

hello fly1-to-5. Alas not on the recent, in all other respects most satisfactory, LHR-DEL-LHR, 747 out / 777 back on which I was a (full fare paying....) WT+ Pax and, before anyone asks yes: I am current Airline Crew so qualified to post.
My annual trip, in Prem Econ, to the S.Hemisphere is normally on the VS competition. Now of course I didn't choose them for that reason (actually their ff programme is greatly superior so if one doesn't need truly World Wide coverage then it is a no-brainer) but one does get, inter alia, the Hot Towel served - like everything else - with a Smiley face. Theres a clue.:O

[Glamgirl]

Now, now, everyone. This thread is about BA CC and terms & conditions, aka strike issues. Posters here are now moving into childish territory, talking about whether hot towels etc should be "permissible" for CC to do during a flight.

I do notice that certain posters talk about how difficult the service can be, considering the reduced crewing levels, however I also notice the "implied" lack of team work in regards to other cabins. By this I mean if Club finishes the service first, the crew help in other cabins, and the same goes for the WT crew. It seems it's a WW "thing" to only stay in their allocated cabins, whereas at LGW we muck in wherever needed.

Having said the above, I think we need to re-focus on the issues at hand, ie whether the next ballot will be legal or not and so on and so forth.

VK, as we all can see, you are rather good at some research, however, when crew tell you what the real story is, please accept it.

[Abbey Road]

Having said the above, I think we need to re-focus on the issues at hand, ie whether the next ballot will be legal or not and so on and so forth.Unite and BASSA may be able to produce a legal ballot. What is seriously in doubt is whether any strike action will be protected - there is a big difference!

Given that public communications from both Unite and BASSA have constantly gone on about the links between any forthcoming strike and those that have already taken place, the considered opinion is that a forthcoming strike would not be protected. The 12 week zone has come ..... and long gone! The first folk to strike would be propelled on their way out of the door, sharpish, with P45 to quickly follow! And vexatious ballots, with no intention of actually striking, but merely to allegedly damage BA's business, are also likely to fall foul of the law. Either way, BASSA and Unite are up the creek ..... and the paddles disappeared ages ago!

Len McCluskey's 'threats' are mere posturing - he hasn't a hope of getting BA to change it's position.

[MissM]

Abbey Road

Not the P45 rumour again, please. Even before the first strike in March last year there were rumours that anyone going on strike would be issued their P45.

If BA would have any intention of actually going ahead with it surely they would have issued them earlier when they had the chance? Why have they gone to court on several occassions for an injuction when they instead could have allowed us to go on strike and issue our P45?

[Wirbelsturm]

If BA would have any intention of actually going ahead with it surely they would have issued them earlier when they had the chance? Why have they gone to court on several occassions for an injuction when they instead could have allowed us to go on strike and issue our P45?

Because BA has a legal right and responsibility to pursue all avenues to prevent damaging action that could impact the value attributed to the share holders.

Nothing to do with being caring but everything to do with ensuring that all avenues have been explored prior to contentious action being taken. Now that the courts have upheld ASLF's and the RMT's complaint against legal injunctions I feel we might see what pans out if another strike is called.

[Juan Tugoh]

If BA would have any intention of actually going ahead with it surely they would have issued them earlier when they had the chance? Why have they gone to court on several occassions for an injuction when they instead could have allowed us to go on strike and issue our P45?

I think, perhaps, it is more pertinent that UNITE have up until now managed to run protected strikes. The issues being used as a reason for further IA are not separate from the last action, this means that there is a real possibility that the strikers may be sacked without it automatically being deemed unfair dismissal. Similarly the costs incurred by BA (including losses incurred as a result of the IA) can be reclaimed form the union. The situation is different from previous strikes.

I do not think that BA will resort to sacking but I think they will go after UNITE for costs. There is no particular benefit to BA to sack strikers, there is a large financial reason to go after the union. Indeed it could be argued that the Board would be acting irresponsibly if it were not to go after the union for costs.

Just because they haven't done it so far doesn't mean they won't this time. The situation and the legalities are different this time. Gambling your job on the weak premise that they won't sack because they haven't done so far would be stupid, just plain stupid.

[MissM]

Are you saying that BA would sack thousands of cabin crew if we go on strike again? I doubt it very much as they wouldn't be able to run a full operation for months if they did.

I can't see anything wrong with fighting for a good cause instead of doing nothing and hoping it goes away sooner or later. At least some of us are supporting our union, which is the reason to our terms and conditions, unlike some who are doing nothing and relying on us that we are doing it on their behalf.

Crew on Mixed Fleet are getting a 747 license. Why? I was under the impression they would be operating only on A320 and 777. There's another sign that management really can't be trusted.

[Smell the Coffee]

Crew on Mixed Fleet are getting a 747 license. Why? I was under the impression they would be operating only on A320 and 777. There's another sign that management really can't be trusted.

I don't believe the 747 licence was ever under any question.

Having MF on all 3 aircraft makes sense - total flexibility to operate across most of the BA network.

I don't remember reading or hearing anything to the contrary.

BA made it obvious why it wanted to create MF. To save money. It does not surprise me therefore, that MF are getting trained on the 747 from April.

[Sporran]

Miss M,

Try looking at the situation from the employers side - just for once!!

The total lack of negotiation (as voted for by bassa members on that very democratic show of hands) means that BA management in their capacity as senior management in a PLC have a legal obligation to do their utmost to ensure that BA continues operations.

BA cabin crew, through their looney union branch, are holding ballot number four to withdraw their labour. There's another sign that this union cannot be trusted not to interfere in the running of the company. BA senior management are reacting to the position that the union put them in and would be deemed to be negligent if the did not do so.

There are always 2 sides to every argument and it is incredibly frustrating to the rest of us that so many cabin crew are unwilling to look at both sides of the argument.

BA have been incredibly patient throughout this whole saga. As stated above, Untie have by their own very public admission linked this ballot to those that have gone before.

No matter how much I detest some of the really awful antics from some quite nasty people I would prefer that BA do not make martyrs out of the first cabin crew who do not turn up - especially as they will most probably be cannon fodder for the 'brave leaders'....... However, with each passing day BA must be getting closer and closer to taking some VERY heavy action.

The continuous negative conduct of bassa should ensure that there can be no sympathy when the sleeping tiger finally wakens up.

[From Tunbridge Wells]

I fear you may be wasting your time trying to persuade anyone who is still a Bassa supporter to try and start thinking independently - the mass brainwashing seems to have obliterated the part of the brain that is capable of reasoned thought processes for good.
It's a complete tragedy (and I'm being sincere - good crew totally hoodwinked makes me so sad)

[Special Patrol Group]

Crew on Mixed Fleet are getting a 747 license. Why? I was under the impression they would be operating only on A320 and 777. There's another sign that management really can't be trusted.

And Unite agreed to put the last of BA's offers to the members, then didn't - yet another sign why Bassa/Unite shouldn't be trusted either.

[Sporran]

TW

Alas, I think you are correct. However, I still think it is important that we do our best to engage with each other and conduct discussions on an adult-to-adult basis.

The adult-to-adult part appears to be the most difficult bit for too many bassamentals!!

[Abbey Road]

Are you saying that BA would sack thousands of cabin crew if we go on strike again? I doubt it very much as they wouldn't be able to run a full operation for months if they did. BA won't have to "sack thousands of cabin crew" - just those that strike on day one. That will get other potential strikers attention very quickly! How many strikers do you think there will be on day two ..... if there is a day two?

[Fender Strat]

Miss M and anyone else who is contemplating striking and believes that BA won't sack those who walkout on strike (assuming there is a mandate for strike action). Have you looked at the number of temps out there who are looking for work ? How many are in the hold pool at present ? How long would it take for BA to pull in a few hundred to replace those sacked on day one of any industrial action ? Don't forget that the company has a cushion of VCC who will cover until the first batch of temps could come online. Oh and how many other lambs do you think will cheerfully follow once they see the first batch get their P45s ? Time to put the thinking head on.

[Litebulbs]

How do you sack somebody today?

[Sporran]

Come on Litebulbs!!

Someone taking stike action is in breach of their conditions of employment and puts themselves in line to be sacked. As I believe you have mentioned many times, any such action would be found to be unfair dismissal if it has taken place during PROTECTED strike action.

I believe that the strike ballot, and various statements from bassa and Untie have inorexibly linked this ballot to all the other ballots before. If that is the case ANY strike action taken by bassa members will be unprotected. It will not be deemed to be unfair dismissal - so THAT is how you could sack someone today!

[Litebulbs]

How do you sack someone? How do you sack someone on day one of a dispute? It is not the apprentice, you have to follow a procedure. How do you sack someone who is not at work? Do you have to follow a procedure?

Come on Sporran:)

[MrBernoulli]

How do you sack someone who is not at work?In these circumstances, where BA has had to put up with this behaviour for such a long time, I suspect that those that don't show up on day-one of the strike will be contacted by phone to see why there has been a no-show. If they don't reply, perhaps a courier-delivered letter stating that the lack of contact (either employee-to-BA, or BA-to-employee) leads BA to think that a breach of contract has taken place and said employee has entered the process for dismissal.

Claims of illness will be looked at very closely, I'm sure, but those with a 'history' will be walking on thin ice. Won't take long for word to get around, but by then 'martyrdom' will have claimed a few, who will be giving marching orders. Cue the usual hand-wringing from BASSA and claims of bullying and the like. By then it is too late - BASSA and Unite will have well and truly used up their pathetic 'arsenal'.

But this assumes BASSA and Unite have the guts to step up to the plate. I don't think BASSA and Unite will, because they know they have screwed up royally, and day-one strikers will be in line for firing! Will it get as far as a strike? I don't think so, regardless of whatever showpiece ballot they care to run. They don't have the spine to do it.

[Litebulbs]

So not sacked on day 1 then?

[PC767]

Why should Unite not be trusted over the ballot for an agreement issue?

Walsh wrote that it was a precondition that both branches must endorse the agreement or else he would not recognise the ballot.

First Amicus leaders read parts which they believed undermined the process of unions and individuals rights and therefore felt they could not endorse the agreement.

Bassa then followed and likewise felt unable to endorse the agreement. As a Bassa member I recall they were happy for the ballot to go ahead, or so they wrote, but the leadership would not be endorsing a yes vote.

Thus Walsh's precondition was not met.

With consideration Unite did not waste the time or money on a ballot, which in my opinion would have been rejected with the same fury that industrial action has been voted for. And I write this as a moderate.

[Juan Tugoh]

any such action would be found to be unfair dismissal if it has taken place during PROTECTED strike action

This is not the case. Taking strike action outside a protected period does not mean that any dismissal made will automatically be unfair. What the legislation does allow for is that any subsequent ET will not automatically rule that the dismissal was unfair. If, as Litebulbs is suggesting (at least I think this is what he is getting at - LB forgive me if I have misinterpreted) is that the company would still have to follow a disciplinary procedure before a sacking takes place. Without looking at BA procedures I suspect there would first have to be period of suspension while the case was examined ( I have no idea whether BA's procedures allow for this suspension to be without pay).

For these and many other reasons I do not believe that sackings will occur. I do believe that BA will go after UNITE for costs. If BA really want to deal with BASSA then the suggestion above of an SOSR settlement with the new contract being the last offer made,the one that BASSA would not allow their members to vote on, would be far more likely. BA have certainly done enough for a court to accept an SOSR settlement as reasonable (reasonable in law that is). It would also allow the genuine believers on the BASSA side a chance to stand by their principles and refuse to sign the new contract - BA needs to sack no-one.

[Litebulbs]

Agreed with all apart from me splitting hairs about an SOSR still being a sacking, although potentially reengaged. A bit like the big discussion last year about VR still being a dismissal.

[Juan Tugoh]

If BA were to offer a take or leave it deal - here's a new contact sign or at the end of 90 days you will be out of a job - then the individuals concerned will be under a lot of pressure to sign. It gets worse as someone that resigns from BA loses their ST entitlement unlike someone that takes redundancy. (I think they get their entitlement back at retirement age 65 but that can be along way off and during the years when you may want/need to have ST).

Of course there would have to be a period of time to allow people to sign. This would allow UNITE time to attempt to gain an injunction preventing the SOSR action subject to a full court hearing. In the best case SOSR would take approx 110 days from announcement to people leaving the payroll. They could effectively leave the company sooner as their airside passes could be revoked immediately and they can be sent home and given 90 days pay in lieu of notice. Whatever the case, this is not an instant thing, in law nothing really moves quickly.

[Litebulbs]

I was talking on the other thread about a lock out. One of the two times I was on strike (both at BA) we were not allowed back in until we signed in and effectively accepted the new terms we were in dispute over, which was a heart overruling head moment and being worse off after the hissy fit.

[Flap62]

MissM,

getting a 747 license

You do not have a "license". You are trained and authorised to operate on a certain type or types. That is all. The concept of a "license" has been introduced as part of the "bigging up" process.

[Juan Tugoh]

Cabin crew will use the term "licenced" and "Flight Deck", pilots tend to dislike these phrases, probably in the same way that crew dislike the terms "legacy crew" or "heritage crew" and are now trying to introduce this "first crew" phrase. Ranting about them will not change anything, these phrases will continue to be used especially when it is realised that some people get irritated by them.

The term that is probably most apt for this situation is qualified, as in "Cabin crew are qualified to fly on three different aircraft types". However, knowing that will change nothing.

[VSOP Fables]

Couldn't resist posting this from New Scientist jobs, hope you don't mind Mods:
Tomato Breeder (Vegetables Division) (00284) -... Tomato Breeder (Vegetables Division) (00284) -... ... (http://jobsurl.com/nHhh)

[MrBernoulli]

Cabin crew will use the term "licenced" and "Flight Deck", pilots tend to dislike these phrases, probably in the same way that crew dislike the terms "legacy crew" or "heritage crew" and are now trying to introduce this "first crew" phrase.In January there were "Jurassic crew" referring to New Fleet as "Cheap Fleet". Accurate in terms of overall costs, perhaps ....

[Wirbelsturm]

"Cheap Fleet"

Maybe it was 'Cheep' fleet as they are always 'chirpy'?





...................................................


I'll get my coat! :(

[MissM]

You do not have a "license". You are trained and authorised to operate on a certain type or types. That is all. The concept of a "license" has been introduced as part of the "bigging up" process.

Thanks but I will, as the majority, continue to use the term "license".

[mrpony]

Sorry to butt in.

CC are licensed to work on aircraft after undergoing the required training. (verb - permitted or allowed)

As such they have licence to do so.(noun - figurative - permission)

What they don't possess is a piece of paper that says e.g. 'Crew Operating Licence for Fokker Friendship' on it.(noun - tangible - self-explanatory)

Hope that helps.

PS a private messager even more pedantic than I points out that training and attestation to it is the only requirement by law for CC to operate. So, CC definitely never possess a Licence as such, as opposed to pilots who are required to.

Hope that helps more.

[strikemaster82]

Mrpony: I too am confused when I hear BA cabin crew refer to their licence. (Ask to see it!)

I had to refer to the GCSE English website when I read MissM's post:

Licence is a noun, license is a verb. Before learning to drive, you apply for a provisional driving licence, but the DVLA must license you to drive.

Apologies to our friends in the USA where they use "license" as a noun.

Enough thread creep perhaps, how is the ballot going? :)

[ottergirl]

The concept of a "license" has been introduced as part of the "bigging up" process.
Deep sigh - When I started flying a quarter of a century ago, it was a licence and it was a little yellow cardboard booklet which stated 'CAA cabin crew licence' on it and the name of the airline, in my case British Caledonian, within its covers was a list of all aircraft types you were qualified to operate on. I still have it together with a nice navy blue OAA licence which was issued to me on completion of my Gulf Air SEP exams. So while I'm sure you are correct in that they are no longer considered to be licences, they certainly were once! Should you feel you really need to see it to believe it, then pm me and I will e-mail a photocopy of it. When we refer to licences then, it is due to historical terms of reference.

What I fail to understand is why it upsets you all so much? What can it possibly matter what qualification we have to operate an aircraft or what name we give it? It is just a name - get over it because we have this same discussion every couple of thousand posts! It really does appear to be petty and small minded.

[Wirbelsturm]

Ottergirl,

To be honest, as flight crew, I don't really care, most of us don't really care infact no-one apart from the most pedantic care.

As long as you are qualified to operate the hardware you are on then that is good enough for me. I have to have a smelly green folder in the rare case the CAA/Local Authorities wish to see it, you need only to be certified by the company to operate. That is all.

So, can we now get on with the discussion? Where does the recent court ruling on non eligible ballots leave BASSA/Unite as the majority of injunctions were based on that premise?

[mrpony]

I think the wording of the legislation must have made it confusing for people. Agreed it doesn't matter a jot.

[TightSlot]

Well thank God we've resolved that one at last! Moving on...

[CaptainBarbosa]

What is the timescale for the current ballot, please? Also, does anyone have an indication of which way the ballot will go?
Thanks.
Barbosa

[Snas]

does anyone have an indication of which way the ballot will go?

I have a view…. :)

I think that voting for a strike that your leader has already said probably won’t result in a strike and even if it does most likely won’t result in you actually striking, will generate a yes majority of those that are still in the union and bother to vote.

I personally don’t think there is much doubt about that. I also think that any result generated under such circumstances has absolutely no meaning whatsoever.

[essessdeedee]

What is the timescale for the current ballot, please? Also, does anyone have an indication of which way the ballot will go?
The ballot closes 28 march. I'm with Snas. Glorious leader says that it wont go to a strike - majority vote for strike - Glorious leader calls for a strike - Majority come to work:ugh:

[CaptainBarbosa]

Thank you. :ok:

[Dutchjock]

So what's happening with the accounts saga? Anyone any further with the 28 day legal time span to see the books?

Show me the money! :}

[Human Factor]

I vote for Snas. Suffice to say, the numbers of those who vote and the numbers of those who walk are likely to be very different. :oh:

[stormin norman]

Interesting to note that the company is latching on to all things Conservative at the moment

Having shafted everyones pensions by switching from RPI to CPI the talk from Mp's today on the police is 'why should anyone get a yearly pay scale rise for doing the same job'

What betting 'pay scales at BA to be reviewed'

[BikerMark]

Stormin' - it's definitely on the agenda. If you can get on the intranet, the People dept's Inform newsletter for January 2010 mentions moving from an entitlement culture to a culture where pay is earned. This was in relation to the A-scales but you can be sure other areas would have been in the frame eventually. However, this was during Tony McCarthy's tenure and it remains to be seen if this has changed at all. I suspect not.

[ltn and beyond]

With every thing else going on in the "Bassa V's BA fight" have Bassa informed the membership of the flight time limitation changes that are being pushed forward by EASA supported by ALL european airlines NOT JUST BA.
If these changes happen we can all say goodbye to our lives as we know it today.

Our agreements WILL BE CHANGED BY IMPOSITION :eek:


Crews I have spoken to have no idea its on its way, I hope they do not represent the majority of the work force, but if they are then the union has really let its members down..

[Flap33]

Spot on Ltn & Beyond.

The changes being proposed by EASA are going to change all of our lives if they are implemented..... 7Hr 30 Minimum Rest anybody?

BALPA have thoroughly briefed the membership about the proposed changes and how we can formally object. Has BASSA been so thorough?

Ignore this at your peril, the HMRC debacle should not be allowed to repeat itself - the unions have a responsibilty to keep their membership informed of all matters that affect the members.

Tunnel vision?????

[Bengerman]

Too late, consultation finishes on 20th March 2011.

Whilst BASSA has been fiddling around at Bedfont and dreaming up squalid campaigns for their members whilst simultaneously lying to them, the Elephant in the room is going to have far more impact on the working lives of their members than taking the CSD out of the office ever did.

Members should be sueing them for wilful neglect!

[Abbey Road]

EASA FTL proposals will never have been on BASSA or Unite's radars. Lets face it, DH, LM & Co can't spell EASA, never mind know whats coming. They are too busy attempting to push their trite and irrelevant agenda. :rolleyes:

[fruitbat]

I've even heard some CC welcoming the idea of doing extra hours so they can earn more money!!

[Betty girl]

I would just like to make a point that some of you seem to be forgetting with regards to WW and E/F cabin crew.

We work to separate agreements to scheme which can only be altered with the agreement of our representatives (Bassa and Amicus at present). Although we work within scheme rules, sometimes our own agreements are more restrictive, such as how much rest we get after a flight and how many total hours we can work in a 5, 6 or 7 day period for example on E/F and days off after trips ( Minimum base turnarounds) for WW etc.

So unlike Mixed Fleet and our pilot colleagues who work to scheme rules, the only thing affecting WW and E/F crew will be the total number of hours per year of 900 at present and in the past there was no limit and we functioned fine then.

I have not been happy with Bassa's performance during this strike but I am sure they are aware of the changes of this legislation and have been looking at how this will affect cabin crew. They are not completely useless!

I have myself signed the offer and it specifically says that BA will honour my current working agreements and they will remain the same unless amended through negotiation.

Just my take on the situation, not the views of BA.

[Runway vacated]

I must say, BG, I think that is an extremely naive view of the situation.

Do you honestly think that, in years to come, with our competitors working to the newer, more commercially effective limits. there is not going to be a gradual ratchetting of your own rosters towards the EASA limits?

Either that, or you stick rigidly to your current limits (the BASSA "nyet" school of negotiation) and become so economically inefficient that you are all "encouraged" to find alternative employment as NF undergo exponential growth.

In either event, should these proposals become law, we are ALL, both pilots and cabin crew, into a whole world of hurt.

I really, really wish that I believed that BASSA's "laissez faire" approach was the result of a realistic analysis of the likelihood of these proposals becoming law, and the effect they would have on its' members. But, given their long history of blundering when anything requiring even a modicum of intelligent thought comes along, I am forced to conclude that it is due to incompetence and a lack of awareness.

[dave747436]

Hi Betty Girl,

I think I understand your point - scheme might increase but our agreements would prevent BA implementing this increase. (to paraphrase).

Pilots in BA are rostered to Bidline rules (which are more restricitve than scheme) in the same way Cabin Crew are rostered to their scheduling agreements.

'On the day' Pilots will usually extend to scheme, but have the option not to, of course.

That's how things stand today with CAP 371 (scheme) and everyones agreements.

Now project forward just 2 or 3 years....

The new EuroFTL's are in place and 2 or 3 airlines have pushed through agreements with their crews to work close to these new limits: 1000hrs/yr... arriving at a longhaul destination in the morning & departing that same evening... 5 sectors in Shorthaul, 7hrs in a hotel then 3 sectors (then the same the next day).... impromtu split duties... the list of horrifically fatiguing things goes on.

BA approaches BALPA & BASSA with the news that we crew are double the cost of our competitors - we must become more productive or the airline will not survive (sound familiar?!). And it's true - our competitors will have huge competative advantages.

What to do?
Strike? Possibly - but if BA genuinly can't support our pay & conditions, how will that help?

So we'd have to negotiate, and inevitably our scheduling agreements would trend closer & closer to these new EuroFTL's.

Surely the best response is to try and influence the FTL legislation before it's set in stone?

BALPA has put enormous amounts of effort into organising resistance to these changes, and the FTL's will have just a profound effect on Cabin Crew as Pilots.

In short - neither Cabin Crew or Pilots will be able to rely on scheduling agreements to protect them if these EuroFTL's ,in their current form, become law.

[Betty girl]

Thank you for explaining that to me Dave.

I can see that Unite (aka Bassa and Amicus) should be investigating these things in a simolar way to Balpa but how do all of you know that this has not been happening?

[dave747436]

Let's hope that they are.

It does seem a possibility that the BASSA high command are putting all their energy & resources into fighting the current battle, though - I haven't heard any crew talking about FTL's in the galleys or downroute.

The great pity is that even if BASSA pull a rabbit out of the hat and win todays battle, the war will be lost tomorrow anyway (for all of us).

[Betty girl]

Can I also ask a question to those of you that are more informed about this new legislation.

Do the CAA have to agree for UK crews to work to these new limits or can the CAA continue to set airline schemes in the way that they do now.

I believe that they set our current scheme rules, as they are now, for reasons of safety. Can the CAA overrule these new limits for UK airlines or are they required to lower their limits to the same as these EASA FTL.

Can I also ask who is it that has decided these new FTL, who is the EASA?

Thanks BG

[Litebulbs]

Please correct me if I am wrong. BA flight crew work to scheme, whatever the scheme that is in force is?

The majority of BA cabin crew work to industrial agreements and as long as that agreement is "apt for incorporation", unlike the manning level issue, then those agreements can only be changed by agreement, unless for some other substantial reason.

Would you as an individual support the protection against a unilateral change to a contractual obligation?

[Scapa]

BA Pilots work to bidline rules which are industrial agreements and limits much like the cabin crew work to their industrial agreements. As dave747436 says pilots can work to scheme should the need arise on the day and be willing.

Much that we could kick and fight our way through and say we wont accept any changes to our agreements, should every other competitor be working their crews to EASA limits then it is a futile fight. The worst case scenario is we win and make BA uncompetitive and ultimately put them (and us) out of business, the best case scenario is we loose and end up working to or closer to EASA limits and fly round with eyes out on matchsticks.

[MrBunker]

Hi LB,

Not quite! BA pilots are rostered to Bidline limits which, as with the cabin crew, are our industrial agreement. The same negotiation is required to amend BLRs as would be for the CC industrial flight time limitations to be amended. That some pilots elect to work beyond BLRs on the day in an attempt to complete the flight is outwith the industrial framework that BLRs themselves represent. Indeed, many CC operate into discretion quite frequently which represents work beyond the industrial framework.

Cheers

MrB

[dave747436]

Morning Litebulbs,

BA flight crew are contractually obliged to work to Bidline Rules, anything above this is goodwill and attracts no extra pay.

'On the Day' the Captain will use his judgement to decide if it is safe to continue to operate beyond BLR's, anything up to the legal limit (whatever that may be, CAP 371 as things stand) taking into account various factors including previous rest and duties of the entire crew (FC & CC).

To reiterate - BA flight crew (and BA cabin crew) are contracted to work to their various agreements only.

My concern is finding ourselves in the position of being compelled to accept changes in our agreements to keep BA competative. The change wouldn't be 'unilateral', it would be with our agreement (because we would have no choice).

IMHO our best chance for maintaining the best T's & C's possible is for BA to be as profitable as possible.

[Betty girl]

Is anyone able to answer my question?

[mrpony]

EASA - European Aviation Safety Agency (http://www.easa.eu.int/home.php)

[Forestman]

EASA FTL proposals will never have been on BASSA or Unite's radars. Lets face it, DH, LM & Co can't spell EASA, never mind know whats coming. They are too busy attempting to push their trite and irrelevant agenda.

Agreed, and based on BASSA's performance on pensions not so long ago they will ignore the issue until the last minute, be bailed out by BALPA's efforts then go on to blame BALPA for stitching them up.

[Betty girl]

Thanks for that Mrpony.

Do the CAA have to use the EASA limits or will they still retain the ability the set scheme in the UK?

[Forestman]

I believe the CAA are obliged to use the new limits. Even if they are not, the alternative would be to cripple UK airlines relative to the rest of Europe.

[Bengerman]

BG, from 2012 the CAA will have NO say as to our FTL's.

[Scapa]

Hi Betty Girl,

I'm cetainly no expert on EU legislation however looking at theEASA FAQ's (http://www.easa.eu.int/frequently-asked-questions.php#what-is-the-agency) it looks like from the answers from "Does EASA deal with Flight crew Licensing and Flight Time Limitations" and "Why is an EU agency needed to look after aviation safety" it looks like where the JAA was a body to suggest rules and common practice to be adopted by member states EASA is a centralised body to enforce legislation for EU member states.

So in answer to your question I don't believe we or the CAA could opt out.

[dave747436]

Yes, whatever the final EASA legislation looks like, it will apply to all EU registered airlines - individual nations will not be able to opt out.

Also you're absolutely right when you say
I believe that they (CAA) set our current scheme rules, as they are now, for reasons of safety
The current CAA CAP371 limits are are based on science & research, the new EASA rules are not.

[The Blu Riband]

BG
IT isn't really relevant whether the CAA follow suit with regard to potential changes in European FTL legislation because the majority of airlines operating into or out of the UK aren't British; in other words we are not only competing with other UK airlines.

Balpa (which is not just BA) , and other pilot organisations are lobbying and petitioning to prevent changes.

These changes have already been implemented in other countries - like Switzerland.

I am extremely surprised you believe Bassa could ever protect you against future change given their demonstrated ineptitude over the last 2 years. And surely you cannot believe for 1 minute that they are preparing a defense of current FTLs to counter EASA proposals!

[Betty girl]

Thanks for your replies to my question.

I think that all this European legislation is getting out of hand.

It seems that in all areas of our life unelected members of European institutions are interfering and making decisions on all our behalves, not only in aviation!!

Anyway thanks for that info.

[Betty girl]

Blu Rib,

As I am not a member of Bassa or Amicus or Unite so I have no way of knowing what they are or are not doing about the EASA proposals.

I never once said Bassa could PROTECT me and in fact I feel Bassa's actions recently have done great damage to the Cabin crew community and more importantly, they have actually weakened themselves by their intransigence during this dispute.

It sounds to me that Bassa's relatively small voice would have little impact on this proposal but then what do I know I am just a niave cabin crew member.

I am of course very pleased to hear that you well informed pilots and your efficient union are making protests about this. Thank you and well done!

[Wirbelsturm]

I think that all this European legislation is getting out of hand.

Just say thank you to David Milliband, the grinning banana monkey, for signing up the UK to every bit of nebulous, irrelevant legislation that comes out of the fevered minds of the Brussels bureaucrats.

Sadly none of the crew I asked had any clue of either the proposal, the implementation or the effects of this ruling from EASA. None had any idea of what it was or whether BASSA was doing anything about it.

The 'safety net' that is the UK scheduling document which covers all flying crews including Cabin Crew will be torn up and thrown away. The CAP371 document is widely regarded around the world as the 'gold standard' with respect to the management and prevention of fatigue and is based upon several scientific studies into the effects of prolonged working in the aviation environment.

The EASA documents have no recourse to such studies and have been put together with the input from certain airlines management and HR departments. (AFAIK BA have not had alot of input into the document, you can guess who the main driver has been).

This needs to be sorted out and modified soon and the BASSA members need to push their Union to get a grip on this now. Implementation of new 'legal' structures could happen soon after ratification. As long as your scheme is within those new EASA regulations there is nothing to stop the company from implementing them as the legal supporting documentation has changed.

Beware!

[Scapa]

It sounds to me that Bassa's relatively small voice would have little impact on this proposal but then what do I know I am just a niave cabin crew member.

Although TIC i'm sure its a real shame BASSA have not got on top of this one as I am sure it is numbers of objections which is really going to make a difference to the EASA decision makers, a well orchestrated BASSA/UNITE campaign to 10,000 members would have made a huge difference compared to a BALPA campaign to 3000 (BA) members.

[Betty girl]

Well lets hope that behind the scenes that they have made a representation on the behalf a BA cabin crew and if not then they are letting their membership down.

Having said that though, I do realise that airlines are always driving down cost etc. but for years BA have operated within the CAA scheme rules but have not up until now rostered either cabin crew or pilots to those limits.

I understand that these new rules will be even less restrictive but I am not sure that, that necessarily equates with BA actually adopting these limits, as up until last November (when Mised Fleet started) they never have rostered to the limit under our current scheme.

They have of course just started to roster Mixed Fleet to the current CAA scheme rules but having looked at quite a few of these rosters, I find it hard to believe that it would be sustainable to roster to even lower limits. In fact some safeguards have already been put in place, to alleviate some of the problems that have developed, as a result of Mixed Fleet crew informing the company that some of the rosters have been too tiring.

What I am saying is that just because the rules get relaxed it might not necessarily follow that ALL the companies adopt the new limits. Some may put safety first and realise that these new limits are unsatisfactory.

It is of course to be applauded that BALPA is highlighting these safety implications.

[Human Factor]

BG, from 2012 the CAA will have NO say as to our FTL's.

From 2012, the CAA will effectively cease to exist as the regulator. To all intents and purposes it will become a regional office for EASA.


I understand that these new rules will be even less restrictive but I am not sure that, that necessarily equates with BA actually adopting these limits, as up until last November (when Mixed Fleet started) they never have rostered to the limit under our current scheme.

BA use (more or less) Scheme limits for crews at LGW, just shorthaul for pilots but both longhaul and shorthaul for cabin crew (where was BASSA when that happened...:E?)

If BA's competitors adopt the new limits, as a previous poster has mentioned, it will only be a matter of time before BA has little choice but to do likewise to compete. It is unlikely that Bidline Rules will protect the pilots for ever so what chance does the WW/EF Scheduling Agreement have? :(

[yotty]

Another great idea from the E.U. :ugh: Cost of air travel could rise by a fifth under European VAT proposal (http://www.airportwatch.org.uk/news/detail.php?art_id=2744)

[luke77]

EASA would have a 2-pilot 1-night stop LHR>Los Angeles>LHR :eek:

[Betty girl]

Human Factor,

Both your bidline and our agreements have the protection that they are negotiated agreements and as such only negotiated changes can be made. Even though SFG does work to near scheme rules they are laid down in an MOA as are Mixed Fleets ( at the moment they are sharing the SFG MOA temporarily) which are also agreements that would require negotiation for change, although in the case of Mixed Fleet there is, at present, no one to negotiate with!!

I do however understand that if other airlines operate to less restrictive rules, this does add pressure for change on airlines like ours, so I can understand why we should all be worried.

[Betty girl]

Bf has just posted a quick note to all cabin crew that Keith Williams and Len McCluskey have met today for discussions. It was a positive meeting and further discussions will be held in the near future.

[StewM]

Betty girl,

As MF crew, I find this new proposal extremely worrying. However, as the fleet is only 3 months old, and crew are already reaching their 900 hr limit (some temps who returned to BA last summer), I feel it's impossible to put more pressure on us.

We have been told by some CSM's that this is the reason MAN & AMS have been transferred over for May onwards.

As you mentioned above, we are already working right down on scheme limits. It makes for an uneasy discussion with management when there is no-one to negotiate for us.

What further stunts are they going to pull?!

[Betty girl]

StewM,
Don't worry too much because, as I have mentioned, I don't think any airline like BA would want to roster any crew more than BA are already rostering you Mixed Fleeters.

It would be self defeating to have exhausted crew because exhausted cabin crew don't give good service and in my personal view some of the rosters I have seen (not all) have been shattering.

The Man and Ams have been added to help with your hours and also to help keep you productive because they are used as links at the beginning of shorthaul trips and at the end and as you have mentioned the flying hours are lower.

One outcome of this legislation might actually help all crew that operate longhaul rosters like you and WW crew is that the 900 hour would go. I really don't think you need to worry that your rosters will get worse from this because you are all very productive already.

Ultimately I expect that Unite will obtain the right to negotiate for you but seperately to WW and E/F just like they do for SFG, but that wont be untill some kind of settlement!!!!

Hope that puts your mind at rest. I find that you get quite a lot of scare mongering on all forums from one side or the other, so please don't worry.

BG

These are my own personal views and no those of BA.

[jetset lady]

I'm sorry Betty Girl but I have to disagree. This isn't scaremongering. This is happening and it's happening right now. If you are in any doubt of that, please take the time to read the R&N thread.

Don't worry too much because, as I have mentioned, I don't think any airline like BA would want to roster any crew more than BA are already rostering you Mixed Fleeters.

Really? Two years ago, would you have thought BA would have rostered Mixed Fleet as they have? The truth is, EVERY airline will do whatever it has to in order to survive. If that means a high crew turnover, then so be it. Just have a look at some of the Middle Eastern airlines. Known for great service and also known for working their crew to the very limits. Again, if you have any doubt, have a read through the ME threads.

StewM,

I'm sorry if that worries you but in my opinion, it should. BASSA are in the situation they are now because they never thought BA would do what they have. Frankly, I'm not sure there is a lot we can do it about it. Not enough cabin crew in this country have the knowledge or interest in what is happening in the industry to make a difference. Those of us on here and on other aviation sites are in the minority, which ever side of the fence we may be sitting on. In the majority, it seems apathy rules. (Obviously, not including BG in that, even if we do disagree on this threat!)

[ottergirl]

After a chat with some of the crew managers today, there is a recognition that working mixed fleet to the limit will damage the very enthusiasm that BA are hoping for. They are thinking very carefully about which routes to add to the fleet to offset this. MAN is definately going to lower those flying hours. MF will get better as it grows, a new fleet always takes time to bed in.

[Betty girl]

jetset lady,
I do think BA will indeed come after WW and E/F in the future and they will use M/F as an example of more efficient and productive rostering. However the rostering of Mixed Fleet is very tight already and seems worse than what you, yourself are working to.

I don't actually see how it could be tighter than it already is as BA have already altered the days off after some of the trips, to alleviate the tiredness that some of the crews were reporting back to them and I realise they also did this when SFG was set up but some longhaul trips on Mixed Fleet are not even triggering a day off after, let alone two.

I don't think we always disagree!! I agree with lots of your posts and think you talk a lot of sense.

We both agree that Bassa have created a big mess and are actually doing us all a huge disservice. We need a good, strong and democratic union to represent us and if people like you and I feel unable to support them, all they are doing is creating their own demise and that is bad for us cabin crew.

[MrBunker]

BG,

I'd strongly, strongly urge you to look into what the new EASA FTLs would mean for you if implemented. There's simply no commercial way BA would be able to leave our current negotiated industrial agreements in place and survive in a market where other airlines can roster to the new "scheme" that the EASA proposals will bring in. Having a strong union or a set of agreements that can only be changed by negotiation will be an irrelevance. The airline will have to adopt the new scheme or wither on the vine in the face of such marked efficiency differences that other airlines will be able to reflect in their ticket prices. I think you can forget MBTs as you know them and a reasonable slip time down route. I'm away from my main computer at the mo but when I get back I'll post a list of the changes these would represent and why BA would have no choice to implement them from a commercial point of view.

Cheers

MrB

[Betty girl]

Thank you Mr Bunker.

I understand how you perceive this as a threat and I can see this is a worrying new development for aviation but as Mixed Fleet crews are already struggling with some of their rostering and BA have acknowledged this and are alleviating some of the issues to make their rosters more sustainable, I personally feel it is unlikely that they would adopt even worse rostering practices for them.

I can understand how worrying it is for the pilot communities in particular because competition for pilot jobs is so high across Europe and the World at the moment and BA pilots are very well remunerated compared to some of the European low cost carriers but for cabin crew, the terms and conditions that Mixed Fleet are working to, are actually at the level BA want. They are on a low basic and productive compared to E/F and WW and work to an incentive scheme and BA realise that you need, keen and happy cabin crew, to give good service, not knackered tired ones. So apart from comming for us now (people like me), the job has been done. Of course I can completely see how worrying it must now be for all of you because of course BA could repeat their model of direct entry senior crew onto a new pilot fleet on new terms and conditions!

I also want to make the point that BA is a very safety minded airline and I really don't think they would put profit before safety, although of course maybe some of the smaller airlines might be tempted to, so I have faith in the fact that all our management are aware that the CAA rules are the safest and as such I personally believe BA will continue to use these guidelines. I do think however they will definitely adopt the new total hours per year because of course the 900 hours limit, incidentally also imposed by the EU, has been a nightmare for BA.

I think maybe you should start a new thread called EASA because I feel that this is not what this thread is about. I know that you are all convinced that Unite has not looked into this but I feel it is a tenuous link with this dispute and although it is important, I don't think it is what this thread is supposed to be talking about.

These are all my own personal views and not those of BA.

[MrBunker]

Thank you Mr Bunker.

I understand how you perceive this as a threat and I can see this is a worrying new development for aviation but as Mixed Fleet crews are already struggling with some of their rostering and BA have acknowledged this and are alleviating some of the issues to make their rosters more sustainable, I personally feel it is unlikely that they would adopt even worse rostering practices for them

Last one from me off topic - this is where, I think, the point may be missed. It's not about sustainability of rostering - it's about a whole new legal framework which means that the entire way your roster looks will change. Long haul flight followed by 7.5 hrs rest as a minimum requirement for example. And once BA can fly 1000 hrs per crew member per annum instead of 900, it means the crew won't even run out of hours. Yes, they might well be fatigued but, in the current world, how do you think they'll likely be managed if they start pulling themselves off trips due to that? The reason I fear for this is that it doesn't rely on the largesse of an employer to stick to agreements. It's commercial suicide for BA if they don't take up these new limits IF they become law as, sure as eggs is eggs, every other operator will roster their crew to them and then, unless BA go with it, we'll be fiscally unviable. I think it's a lot lot more serious than you think it is, be you flight or cabin crew.

MrB

[ottergirl]

Mr B
Before we put this thread drift to bed, can you publish a link to the proposals so that not only can Bettygirl and I see what we are up against but also so that we can spread the word. Is there a website which has all the information because some of the suggestions on here are beyond belief? 71/2 hours off after a long haul flight does not seem to be either wise or desirable from anyone's point of view; it will be time for a career change because fiscally unviable is better than dead!
Regards
OG

[Betty girl]

Ottergirl,
There is actually a thread on the Rumours and News thread above, where some pilots are voicing their opinions.

Opinions seem to vary, not all are predicting the end of the world!!! It seems to be monthly hours that is worrying them the most and I expect that is, what is, really the worry for our pilots.

I can't imagine that BA would roster 7.3 hours off after a transatlantic flight or that any of our Unions would accept that even if the rules did allow for it!!

Take care

[Runway vacated]

Betty girl, despite using this issue to get in a dig at BA pilots, I shall try and explain why you have missed the point...

This is not about NF, WW or EF. This is not about pilots protecting their current pay and conditions (our union have done a very effective job on that score), nor is it about us needing the support of the cabin crew in a struggle that will only benefit us.

This is about a fundamental upheaval in the way ALL crew can be rostered throughout the entire EU. What was previously an illegal roster will become the norm, be you a pilot or stewardess. The entire concept and definition of 'fatigue' has been changed, and the playing field has been tilted firmly in favour of the airlines. Bless you for thinking that BA will not put safety before profit. The EASA proposals completely re-define what is meant by 'safe'.

If you think your current agreements will protect you, then I beg to differ. How will you go about ensuring such protection? Strike? I think not. With competitors rostering to the new limits, and enjoying the commercial advantage they will bring, BA will have no choice but to impose (there's that word again!) a change in working practice. Take it or leave.

What the pilots are trying to do is make you aware that these proposals are on the horizon. Most cc are utterly unaware of this threat to their quality of life, which in itself speaks volumes for the competence of BASSA. I, and most other pilots, want them to be aware of the situation. If they choose to act, then they need to let BASSA know, and quickly. If they choose not to, then at least they have had the choice.

By all means continue to criticise the pilots in BA if you wish. But on this issue the interests of pilots and cabin crew are aligned.

[Betty girl]

Thank you RV,
I don't think I have ever criticised a BA pilot!! That's something made up in your head!

[Cough]

Having looked at the FTL proposal, the 7.5 hour rest is a short haul thing. When you go to that level of rest, you have to meet a list of requirements which basically discounts a long haul flight.

However, it is still an atrocious way of achieving rest on shorthaul. For me it could mean a 6 sector two day trip, with my body probably achieving a sub 5 hour sleep period. I WILL be tired on day 2 and safety WILL be compromised.

BG, by the way, I really respect the way that you write on here and stand for your beliefs...

[Sporran]

Here is a quick summary of some of the 'problems' with the EASA proposals, when compared with the scientifically based CAP 371.

1. Reducing rest has always been at the behest of the aircraft commander, after he has taken consideration of the state of his crew. Under EASA it will be at the behest of the operator, maybe even just before report.

2. The max number of duty hours worked in 7 days will increase by 5 hours, but 'nothing' is being said about 14 days!!

3. The number of early starts will be almost unregulated and the 'window' defining an early start closes to only one specific hour - 0500 to 0559, from 0500 to 0659 at present.

4. The max flying duty period would be increased. The early morning allowabel FDPs show a huge increase in those in CAP 371.

5. The flying hour limit would increase to 1000 hours per '12 consecutive months' - up from 900 hours.

6. Minimum rest away from base could be cut to 7.5 hours from the existing 10 hours.

7. The present 2 days off together in any 14 days ensures that the body gets 3 nights to recover. There is no mention at all of 2 in 14 in EASA!!!

8. EASA makes no comment regarding doing a standby at home and then being called to carry out a flying duty period. There is therefore no protection about doing a standby followed by a long flying duty period.

9. Airport standby rules would be 'watered down'.

10. The definition of 'home base' would mean that you would be expected to report directly to that home base, but not get credit for the journey in any flying duty period.

11. A lot of the definitions and interpretations that are clearly defined in CAP 371 are not even mentioned in EASA.

12. EASA make no mention at all on several critical areas, such as: restrictions around late finishes and early starts, restrictions around what constitutes a night duty and options related to night operations, control if delayed at the start of a flying duty period.

As is usually the case, BALPA recognised the unsound review process of EASA and then did a thorough study of the document. All BALPA members were then advised of the problems and encouraged to look at the proposals. We have then been encouraged to contact MPs, who were briefed at Westminster, and the next step is to put carefully considered 'arguments' against some of the draconian measures being proposed.

[Betty girl]

Thanks for that Cough,

I took the longhaul reference after 7.5 hours rest from Mr. Bunkers post, so sorry if I have proliferated an untruth!!

Thanks also for that information Sporran.

As I have said before I am very greatful that you pilots and Balpa are looking into this matter and it is good news that you are all so well informed.

Thank you.

[MrBunker]

OG,

Eurocockpit (http://www.eurocockpit.be/pages/easas-future-ftl-rules-npa)

BALPA (http://wakeup.balpa.org)

EASA (http://easa.europa.eu/rulemaking/docs/npa/NPA%202010-14.pdf)

I apologise as these are really hard going - a bit like the CAA scheme document. Well well worth a read. If I can get permission from BALPA I'll post the responses to EASA's position from them as well.

I'd say enjoy but...... ;)

MrB

[MrBunker]

Betty Girl,

Apologies - it's a SH rest thing. I'm away from my main computer so that was a memory dredge! The links above are definitive tho!

PS - the 7.5 in SH could, at the whim of the operator be turned into a split duty with no prior notification according to these proposals.

[Betty girl]

Thanks Mr. Bunker,

Yes it is obvious that a lot of these proposals by the EASA have been badly thought out and I am glad that your union is protesting.

I know that BA may well adopt some of these things but as you are, I am sure aware, BA crew don't actually work to the limits of the CAA regulations and lots of smaller charter or low cost airlines do.

It is, a worry and I am very glad you are all looking into this issue but the point I was just trying to make was that, just because you can roster like this, does not mean that BA will roster like this. As in the example of WW and E/F cabin crew now, our agreements are more generous that the current BA scheme, so BA have not forced us down to the lowest level possible and even Mixed Fleet that do work to scheme rules are having safeguards put into their rostering because the scheme at present is creating tired crew. All I was pointing out was that just because they CAN roster to these levels does not mean the they WILL.

But I am very pleased that you all are looking into this and protesting to the higher authorities and I am sure that because you are well respected pilots they will listen to what you say, far more than me as a mere uninformed cabin crew member!! Just joking!!!

Once again thanks for explaining all this to me and other cabin crew and thanks for protesting on all our behalves and I can clearly see that it is definitely in all our interests that these proposals do not go ahead.

[123breath]

http://easa.europa.eu/rulemaking/docs/npa/NPA%202010-14.pdf

This link should take you to the full EASA proposal document. It makes for heavy reading, but if you page down to paragraph 108 you will find the important bits.

The union to which I pay my membership fees have filtered the important bits out, kept union members fully-informed, launched a campaign to counter the proposals, and even held a presentation in the Houses of Parliament in order to raise awareness amongst MP's about the dangers of these proposals, which was extremely successful. BALPA have done and are doing their bit to protect everyone in the aviation industry (not just pilots) from these proposed changes. Time is running out. The consultation period finishes on 20th March.

Strength is in numbers, and cabin crew have pilots at a disadvantage in that measure.

Can someone who is still a BASSA member please confirm that BASSA have their eyes on the ball as far as these changes are concerned. What action has been taken by BASSA? If nothing has been done, or if, as I fear, BASSA are not even aware of the implications of the EASA proposals, then why not?

Before the mods accuse me of straying off-thread.......this is very much relevant to cabin crew industrial relations. The battles that lie ahead with BA will be very much worse than anything we have seen so far if the regulations are changed, and will have far more impact on our working lives, both cabin crew and flight crew.

Worst of all, safety is at stake, which I'm sure we're all concerned about.

I would urge all cabin crew to ask for a peek at the sample roster BALPA have sent all it's members. It is very worrying, and could be very real in a few years time. It makes any Mixed Fleet roster look like a picnic.

Come on cabin crew, wake up, and make your union earn their membership fees!!!!

[Runway vacated]

BG I apologise for casting aspertions on your post. I misinterpreted your comments as assuming the pilots would be the only ones affected by these proposals, and so there was a measure of self interest in our concern.

This is true, in as much as these proposals will affect EVERYONE who works on board an aircraft in the WHOLE EU.

The previous protections to our rosters ('scheme' in BA parlance) will be completely destroyed. The CAP371 definition of what is 'safe', 'fatiguing', 'early start' and a whole host of existing protections will be replaced by new definitions, or no definition at all, created primarily at the behest of the airlines. Why? Because in the creation of these proposals the airlines had the ear of the legislators, and inserted many proposals that suited their own interests at the cost of their employees.

The idea behind these proposals is to level the playing field across europe, which is laudable enough. But the EASA are seeing this in more political than safety terms, which is usual for a european institution. They see the UK, with the gold standard CAP371, and they see, say, Italy, with a rag tag of regulations, and see the compromise as being somewhere in the middle.

The point that pilots organisations are making is that, where safety is concerned, this approach is not acceptable. The fatigue regulations have been paid for, quite literally, in blood. In the USA there is a recognition by the FAA that fatigue is an area needing greater regulation, after the Colgan Air crash. In Europe they want us to go the other way.

So this is a very, very big issue for all of us. It completely overshadows the petty squabbles currently underway, and could lead to a less safe and more stressful life for all of us.

[Betty girl]

I agree with all you say RV.

[malcolmf]

Just one example:
8. EASA makes no comment regarding doing a standby at home and then being called to carry out a flying duty period. There is therefore no protection about doing a standby followed by a long flying duty period.


An individual on a 12 hour home standby between 00:00 – 12:00 is called at 04:15 for an 11:55 report. According to the NPA, there is no “reduction on Max FDP” in this time band so an individual can be assigned a 13 hour, 2 sector FDP which will give a “last on chocks” time of 00:55 – a duty of 24 hours 55 minutes. Even more disturbingly, if the situation falls outside certain parameters then the NPA is totally silent – there is no protection around a long standby being followed by a long FDP.

[123breath]

Still no news about what BASSA have done so far, or intend to do? That's a worry.

It's beginning to look like BASSA have done nothing.

I have spent just a few hours over the past weeks keeping abreast of developments, and written a letter to my MP who subsequently attended BALPA's presentation at Westminster. This despite working a full-time roster. It really wasn't too much effort, considering how important the subject is.

How much time has BASSA spent on the EASA proposals? I thought its role was to protect the future of its members? If BASSA view the proposals as being of little consequence, they should say so publicly. How much priority have they given the EASA consultation?

BASSA.....please step forward and make a statement of your intentions. If you don't, then what exactly is the point of your existence?

[MrBunker]

BG,

I agree in essence but the problem with these proposed changes is that they increase the scheme limits by such a long way that BA will likely have no choice but to roster crew to a place nearer them because to fail to do so will render them financially unviable when compared to those competitors who will no doubt roster to the new limits. It will only take one major european player to start using them and the rest will be forced to follow. This is not a gripe at BA, their hands will, commercially, be tied in this respect. It's a gripe at the ill-thought out EASA proposals.

MrB

[ottergirl]

123breath
Common cabin crew, wake up who're you calling common?!!!:O
I will wade through these lovely links and try and fathom the message, looks like I'll be back on the forum in about a month if I don't lose the will to live in the meantime!

[123breath]

Sorry, but come on.....it's a common mistake!


Previous post now edited :)

[Dawdler]

who're you calling common?!!!:O

Well! I say!:=:O

[Forestman]

I will wade through these lovely links and try and fathom the message, looks like I'll be back on the forum in about a month if I don't lose the will to live in the meantime!

Read quickly. You (and BASSA) have got until the 20th March to comment on the proposals. After that you'll be too late.

[ottergirl]

OR.OPS.FTL.240 Nutrition
If the Flight Duty Period (FDP) exceeds 6 hours, the operator shall provide a meal and drink opportunity in order to avoid any detriment to the crew member’s performance.

Liking this bit! Wagamama's?

3 — Reduced Rest
(a)
The minimum rest period under reduced rest arrangements shall be 7h30 or 7h30 + 2 × (t-0h15), where ‘t’ is the travelling time between the airport and the suitable accommodation, whichever is the greater, and shall include 2 hours in the WOCL.
(b)
The operator shall only use reduced rest in accordance with Fatigue Risk Management provisions.

Guessing that this is the bit that has everyone so riled; the current limit being 10 hours. I can also see where Betty girl was going with her stance that the BA CC (as many are so fond of telling us) will rarely be persuaded to work to scheme when our industrial limit gives us much more time in bed! Nevertheless it sets a dangerous precedent.

(a) Fatigue management training shall be provided to crew members, crew rostering personnel and concerned management personnel.

Found what I'll be doing with my time for the next couple of years if this is brought in!

Still reading!

[MrBernoulli]

It's beginning to look like BASSA have done nothing.Beginning? Unfortunately, it was obvious quite a while back that BASSA were not going to be able to react to this EASA NPA because they just don't have anyone with the knowledge and skills to cope with this kind of attack. As harsh as it sounds, it is the reality.

BASSA have largely been 'okay' when forced to defend their own fairly limited empire ..... but the last couple of years has seen them lose out big time to BA because all they know how to do is a fist-thump, a foot-stomp, and "No, no, no". Another harsh reality. The EASA NP is pitched at a level way above anything they comprehend. If they were ever going to do something about it, they would had to have started long ago, as other groups have (not just BALPA!). Too late now - way too late.

If the BASSA hierarchy ever had an inkling these proposals existed, they didn't understand them, and probably hoped somebody else in their empire would have a go at wrestling with them. Ultimately, if they knew of them, BASSA hoped they would just go away. Well, they haven't gone away, and the commenting 'window' ends on the 20th March.

BA won't give a flying fig about the industrial agreements - those will be summarily set aside! As has already been stated, clearly, several times on this thread - to survive, BA will enbrace these proposals with vigour (in fact they have encouraged EASA to make them) and implement them forthwith.

Which is why, as ususal, it falls to the union groups of greater intellect to bail BASSA out of another mess. As usual. :rolleyes:

[ottergirl]

the union groups of greater intellect not being one to blow your own trumpet then?

Can anyone tell me, the bit where the maximum number of hours in a week is raised to 60/65 for pilots is only bringing it into line with what the cabin crew already do. Likewise the monthly limits for pilots will go to 190, the same as ours is currently. I can't see that our limit has been raised though. Has it? Could it be that this proposal will actually have a bigger impact on the pilot community than the CC one? (Not that I am defending Unite's lack of action.)

[MrBernoulli]

Wasn't blowing my trumpet at all - it was a reference to the other union committees when compared to BASSA - fact of life.

[flyeruk69]

As far as I'm aware BASSA are aware of the proposed changes in FDL for flight crew, having read through the proposal it's my understanding that it will affect the flight crew hours more than the cabin crew who's scheme already does most of whats being proposed. 7.5hrs minimum rest not withstanding.

Cabin crew have only had the 900hr restriction for 5 years or so, before this there was no annual restriction on hours, I can only speak for long haul at BA, but cabin crew would regularly do 1200 hours per annum, to the point one of our recent managers complained on a forum chat , and I quote,

"We pay for 1200hrs and only get 900hrs from our cabin crew now".

The other side of the coin is that the cabin crew themselves don't like the 900 hour rule because if they are full time they get up to 3 weeks a year grounded due to 900hrs. thats viewed as a wasted opportunity to earn.

Regardless of where you stand, there is no denying the massive rift between the flight crew and cabin crew at the moment (not a pop just reality). The cabin crew at BA are just not inclined to listen to flight crew calls for solidarity in great numbers regardless of the result of inaction.

Possibly a sad state to be in, but it's the reality of recent times.

[Betty girl]

Ottergirl,

I have just read and reread this document now 3 or 4 times and I agree with you.

The working limits are very similar to those that cabin crew already work to.

The 7.5 hour rest period is NOT something someone can be rostered, it is reduced rest during disruption and travelling to and from the hotel is not included in this time.

There are safeguards in that, as now, the captain can reduce a duty day or increase the rest if he feels his crew may be suffering from fatigue.

Written into the document is a duty for the operator to produce fair and workable rosters. This document just sets out the very minimums that an operator can work to, in my opinion it does not mean that operators will work us all to these limits everyday anymore than they work us to the cap371 limits now and as has been pointed out we all have our own agreements or MOAs and they need to be negotiated away before our duty days can be altered.

Added in are these required 30 min meal breaks every six hours which will in actual fact maybe improve some of the cabin crew rosters!

This argument that other airlines will work to these levels and BA will not be able to compete are also strange because the actual document states that some EU countries are already operating to less restrictive versions than this EASA document sets out. eg Ireland and Italy.

I have always found it strange how cabin crew could always work one hour longer than pilots and also required one hour less rest than pilots. One good thing is that this document treats us in the same way, minus the extra pre-flight briefing that we do!!

As for the 900 hours, that still is 900 hours in a calender year it is just that you can do 1000 in a rolling 12 month period which will make it easier for airlines to cope with when someone gets close to their maximum, instead of getting them to sit at home, as happens now.

Obviously I would prefer we stayed under the umbrella of the CAA but having looked at the document and compared it to current cabin crew scheme it is not very different in my meager opinion.

Hope my opinion does not upset anyone too much. Just an opinion and as you all know by now I am quite opinionated!!!!

These are obviously my views and not those of BA.

[mrpony]

Far from being meagre your analysis is excellent and opinion spot-on!
What's all the fuss about?

[strikemaster82]

BG I have always found it strange how cabin crew could always work one hour longer than pilots and also required one hour less rest than pilots.

We don't do the same job, that's why, pure & simple. We may be in the same tube but the jobs are completely different.

[MrBunker]

BG,

Fair enough. I genuinely hope you're right and I'm wrong on this one. I think the subtext and legal frameworking of this will mean a fundamental shift in what we're both used to. A bottle of Krug to you from me if you're right.

Cheers!

MrB

[Betty girl]

Strikemaster, I and all cabin crew are very aware that we do a different job to you pilots.

Both our jobs are tiring but very different.

I think that maybe you have not read the EASA documents about cabin crew hours because they spend a lot of time explaining why they feel cabin crew should trigger the same rest and duty hours as pilots and of course it is for completely different reasons because as you so kindly brought to my attention, we do a completely different job.

Both our jobs are however needed to carry passengers on an aircraft.

These are my own views and not those of BA.

[mrpony]

The tasks of Flight attendants (FAs) require a sufficiently high level of alertness and cognitive performance to ensure safety and adequate response especially in nonroutine situations. From the viewpoint of general health and physiological needs, the same requirements for cockpit and cabin crew should be applied. It has been shown [Vejvoda M et al. 2000] that the fatigue levels of cabin crew towards the end of flight duty period tend to be much higher than those of cockpit crew. In addition, flight attendants have reported increased perceived stress and workload due to changes in duties and responsibilities since “9/11” [Nesthus T et al. 2007]. This result from a study among US cabin crew appears equally applicable to European cabin crew and may further contribute to higher fatigue levels.

From the Moebus stuff that BALPA seem to favour.

[Betty girl]

Thanks Mr. Bunker,

I hope so too. Lets hope that in a years time, this will all be over and we can crack open a bottle.

BG x

[Runway vacated]

BG you are cherry picking small sections of the proposals that appear to vindicate your willingness to do nothing. Unless they are seen in the overall context of the entire proposals you cannot reach the conclusions you reach about how little they will affect you.

But at least you have taken an interest and formed an opinion. I certainly do not concur with it.

[Betty girl]

R V. I think 'vindicate my willingness to do nothing' is a bit rich.

Are you not one of the pilots encouraging cabin crew to leave Unite! So what exactly are you suggesting someone like me does!

I have read and reread the proposal and I can assure you, I did not cherry pick anything. I genuinely looked at our cabin crew current scheme and compared it with this proposal and the hours were similar. I did think the ability to reduce rest to 7.5 hours, not including transport, was not good but I really doubt many Captains would agree with this being a satisfactory level of rest and the proposal did say that he had to take into consideration how tired his crew were before reducing the rest!

Anyway, we will just have to agree to disagree with each other and as Mr. Bunker said, lets hope you are not right! Quite frankly I very much doubt anything that a cabin crew union says will make any difference to what these EU people will do. Plus don't forget that for some countries within the EU this is actually MORE restrictive and those countries will be protesting that it is too strict!!!

These are my views and not those of BA

[64K]

Getting back on topic just slightly...


A brief update on our talks with Unite

Yesterday, Keith Williams met with Len McCluskey, the general secretary of Unite, to talk about the current cabin crew dispute. It was a positive meeting and further discussions will be held in the near future.
Hopefully something promising one day soon...?

(Views above are my own, not those of my employer)

[DextersLaboratory]

Off topic again, apologies mods..

Just to clarify, you don't have to belong to a union to register and comment on these proposals. Do you think EU policy makers will pay more attention to 200 responses or 20000? Any aviation professional in the EU should be concerned by this which repeatedly considers the 'economic impact'.

BG, not a dig at you but as LHR EF crew (?) look at the proposals for 'home base' and early starts. Can you see anything to stop BA rostering you six 05:00 starts at LGW! (Or even 06:00 starts which are no longer 'early') Yes I am looking at worst case, just as a rostering computer would.

As BA became increasingly uncompetitive due to it's restrictive rostering and given recent history, do you think they wouldn't try and address their cost base?

Anyone who can afford time to post here should post some feedback on the EASA proposals.

[123breath]

Someone “hiding their head in the sand, like an ostrich” is said to be foolishly ignoring their problem, while hoping it will magically vanish.

[Betty girl]

Please stop having a go at me because I am one of the only cabin crew posters on here.

We have agreements, you and us, and these proposals do not mean BA can ignore them. They are just a minimum standard that all EU airlines cannot go beyond.

BA do not roster us to cap371 limits now, nor Gatwick, which have their own MOA and they do not even roster Mixed Fleet to cap371 limits, so why do you insist that just because they CAN do something, that they WILL do something. As an airline BA have always negotiated with it's aircrew about these things.

You are the very people that keep telling us all, what a reasonable company BA is but it seems that when you may have your own hours increased, because that seems to be the biggest difference for pilots, you don't like it. As you keep telling us BA are a reasonable company and I am sure they will honour your bidline, unless negotiated otherwise with you all.

Of course they could set up a new fleet of pilots and bring in direct entry Captains!! but of course you wouldn't mind would you, as long as they understood what they were signing, it would be totally up to them if they wanted to work to lesser agreements!!!After all it is fine for them to do that with the cabin crew!! Just joking!! Some of you of course will not see the joke but I know a lot will!!!!

[MrBunker]

BG,

I get the joke, no snags, although your analogy would have to contain us refusing to negotiate at a union level before hand ( ;) )! However, I think the point that people are urging upon you here is that the change in the ruleset (when all changes are taken into account) would place negotiated industrial agreements so far from the legal maximums that it would only be a matter of time before airlines started rostering towards them (if not, as you point out re industrial v scheme, all the way to the absolute limit). When that process begins BA will have only one choice and that will be to do the same or become increasingly more and more expensive in comparison to our competitors. Like it or not, I don't believe people will pay that much of a premium to fly BA. And when that happens, it'll be our agreements, all of our agreements, placed under a very forensic microscope. But, as I said yesterday, I fervently, genuinely hope that you're right and I'm wrong. Better still, I hope we can stop this EASA bastardisation (even some of their own points admit they're not scientifically proven and are driven by commercial aspects - that's an alarm bell, right there) before it even gets wings (sorry).



MrB

PS As much as I like it, I can't really justify heavy captains in today's competitive marketplace and I know I'm shooting my future command in the foot by supporting that viewpoint.

[Betty girl]

64K,

Yes I highlighted this too and I think it is a really good step forward.

Also KW has been coming into the CRC every morning, before he starts work, to talk to cabin crew direct about what they think it will take to end this dispute and he is going to do this all next week too. He want to talk to as many cabin crew as he can before resuming talks with Len.

I am very optimistic about this and think he seems to be very proactive and I like his style of management so far from what I have seen.

[blimey]

mrpony

It has been shown [Vejvoda M et al. 2000] that the fatigue levels of cabin crew towards the end of flight duty period tend to be much higher than those of cockpit crew.

If all the ccrew were asleep on the final landing of a long day it would make no difference; the pilots on the other hand......

[Betty girl]

Mr Bunker,

I really do understand these concerns and I am pleased that BALPA are putting forward your views but as I have said there are already EU airlines working to lesser rules than EASA.

Also there are EU airlines that are WAY MORE unionised than BA eg Air France, Iberia, Finnair, to name a few so I am just not convinced that this doomsday scenario of all airlines working to the lowest common denominator is completely correct.

We shall see.

Thank you for the considered way that you debate without the need to insult me.

Thanks BG.

[Betty girl]

blimey,
You run the risk of making yourself look silly.

I think we want ALL our aircrew to be working at their optimum, whether they be pilots or cabin crew. I don't think it would be a good idea for any crew to be so tired they were asleep, even if it were just the ones sitting at the doors!

[Abbey Road]

I don't think it would be a good idea for any crew to be so tired they were asleep, even if it were just the ones sitting at the doors!True! Which is why it is so difficult to understand why so many BA cabin crew feel that shopping on a layover, particularly in North America, is so much more important than planning their rest properly during that layover. The resulting moans about tiredness et al on the return journey just don't cut the mustard, do they?

[ottergirl]

BA cabin crew feel that shopping on a layover, particularly in North America, is so much more important than planning their rest properly during that layover.
Is it not possible to do both? 24 hours is a lot of shopping! Thats like saying that Flight crew shouldn't go to the gym but should be resting instead - downright silly!

Bettygirl - I have had more time to look at the proposals on the EASA site and the actual changes proposed are not hugely significant to BA CC, in fact bring the FC into line with what we already work to. The sliding scale for calculating max duty periods is still below our industrial limits although is tricky to read. The omissions though I can see are a problem so worst case scenario, we could find ourselves doing one more early start in a working block unless global alleviation is used then it could be two. There are a couple of areas where EASA propose to consult more so they could change.

[dave747436]

Hi BG,

I hope you're right about the EASA EuroFTL proposals - and think you probably are to some extent.

It may not be an instant change.
Perhaps you won't wake up the morning after the legislation is passed to find that you're actually reporting to LGW today, at 0430, to fly 6 sectors, finishing at LHR 14hrs later....(even though your car's at LGW!).

The trend will inevitably be towards the limit though, wherever that limit is finally set, as airlines struggle to remain profitable against a background of increasing taxes & fuel prices. Sadly in this industry we're always just one 9/11 or oil crisis away from staring bankruptcy in the face

Just as Mixed Fleet will be a constant thorn in BASSA's side during every future pay negotiation, these EASA proposals will reduce our negotiators ability to preserve our current conditions.

My view is that I'd rather expend some energy now to influence the limits, rather than expend energy later to avoid being rostered to them!

It may be that we cannot influence change - but if we say & do nothing then the airlines that are pushing this legislation through (and why would they bother if they don't intend to use it?) will be able to say "look, our crews don't care!".

Can I suggest a visit to FTL Campaign Site • BALPA FTL Campaign Home (http://wakeup.balpa.org) , there's some interesting graphs & information on there.

ATB

BG - You have a PM.

[Betty girl]

Ottergirl,
I think the break of 30 mins to eat after a 6 hour duty is a good addition and will be a good safe guard for our Mixed Fleet colleagues who don't have an agreement like ours, which does roster in a 30 min extra turnaround in duties over 8 hours or of course 30 mins extra clear time if that's not achieved. So it is good for them.

[Juan Tugoh]

The new limits may be within or the same as CC industrial agreements but at the moment scheme (CAP371 effectively) prevents you mostly from being worked to your industrial limits. It is a given that with EASA coming in BA's scheme will be changed to reflect the new EASA limits - they are after all effectively what will be the law. So the problem is that you will be being worked to the most limiting of the two rule sets, this has been scheme in many cases but will become industrial.

Another one for you is the use of discretion - the company will be able to, in certain circumstances plan it. That is fine again as often CC industrial limits are less limiting. Not so for the FD crew. They may well stop working to scheme - which they mostly do when things start to go awry - and start to become a little more rigid in their application of BLRs, which is their industrial limit. So something happens and the day is extended and the FD crew walk off the aircraft, in the meantime the CC end up working to their industrial limit which I believe is 16 hours off schedule (Please correct me if I have that wrong)

Either way I do not think that BA CC will continue on as if nothing has changed. There is a innocence in that line of argument I find it hard to understand.

[Betty girl]

Well it's 14 out of base (unless it's a long range flight with bunk rest). It's 15 if down route but it is only 12.30 for rostering purposes, (unless long range) or less if cap371 is more restricting.

It's nice that you are so concerned but even EASA is more restricting on a lot of occasions and at least flight crew and cabin crew will go out of hours together unlike with Cap371.

Our agreements are just safeguards, we work to BA scheme (cap371) when that is more restricting and the same would apply with EASA so we will go out of hours together or before you!!.

I have gone back and yet again read the proposed document and it is still the Captain that has to extend a duty. Have you actually read it?

These are my own views and not those of BA.

[BASSAwitch]

Can we get back to the immediate industrial situation now please?

I've just got back from hols and surprise surprise no BASSA account info. They have failed in providing the information mandated by the Certification Officer so I'm putting in an official complaint on Monday. They'll soon learn who I am so I expect a barrage of abuse before the end of the week. Animals.

I have also heard from my source at Watford tribunal that Mr Holley has lost his ET. He is due to receive a letter next week but he has been told verbally. Is this on the BASSA forum yet? If not why not?

There doesn't seem to be anything on the internet about it except here. (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23920278-ba-sacked-man-who-took-time-off-for-union-job.do#addComment) Comments after the article are HILARIOUS. :p

[PC767]

It seems to be a presumtion that all european airlines will work to the EASA proposals, except BA, who will in time be forced to change - in order to remain competitive - and fall into line.

I cannot see pilots and cabin crew from every other european airline letting the message slip to their respective bossess, 'not a problem, go ahead.'

Air France, Alitalia or Iberia. All nice moderate crew willing to oblige!!!

[Human Factor]

Air France, Alitalia or Iberia. All nice moderate crew willing to oblige!!!

Probably true. However for example, change "Iberia" for "Vueling" and hopefully you can start to see the problem.:eek:

[JUAN TRIPP]

Can we get back to the immediate industrial situation now please?

I've just got back from hols and surprise surprise no BASSA account info. They have failed in providing the information mandated by the Certification Officer so I'm putting in an official complaint on Monday. They'll soon learn who I am so I expect a barrage of abuse before the end of the week. Animals.

I have also heard from my source at Watford tribunal that Mr Holley has lost his ET. He is due to receive a letter next week but he has been told verbally. Is this on the BASSA forum yet? If not why not?

There doesn't seem to be anything on the internet about it except here. (http://www.thisislondon.co.uk/standard/article-23920278-ba-sacked-man-who-took-time-off-for-union-job.do#addComment) Comments after the article are HILARIOUS

Well I for one are 100% behind you here. This is something that has bugged me for years. Am really interested too about this Bassa Ltd. The fact that it was registered in Eastleigh, just a few miles from chez Holley, in Jan, is very interesting. Good luck.
Yes comments in the ES were very funny. Must say that some of the info I read even surprises me. Love the bit on his extention to his house:D

[MrBunker]

Thank you for the considered way that you debate without the need to insult me.

Thanks BG.

Hi BG,

A pleasure, genuinely. I can't help but think that we do someone a disservice if we cast aspersions on their personalities, especially when all we know of those people is what we read on the internet, let alone ascribing someone a characteristic by dint of their chosen career. Equally, I can't help but think that had both sides in this dispute engaged in polite, reasoned debate, that we wouldn't be in quite the unpleasant bind we are in.

Right, off to open some red and settle down to watch the rugby. Some things transcend the industrial landscape..... ;)

MrB

[Betty girl]

Thanks Mr. Bunker,

I totally agree and enjoy your afternoon.

BG

[TorC]

BA confirmed (on 11/03/11 on the BA intranet) that KW and LM met and talked on 10/03/11.

Oddly though, neither the cc89 website (uniteba.com) or the Unite website (unitetheunion.com) makes any mention of this. I can't access the bassa website, but suspect that silence is also being maintained there as well?

Why would they keep so quiet about this I wonder? After all, they've been calling for BA to talk to them for ages.

[Entaxei]

You talk to the Organ Grinder - not the monkey

[MissM]

True! Which is why it is so difficult to understand why so many BA cabin crew feel that shopping on a layover, particularly in North America, is so much more important than planning their rest properly during that layover. The resulting moans about tiredness et al on the return journey just don't cut the mustard, do they?

Are you suggesting that we should stay in our rooms for 24 hours instead? Maybe it's the tiredness of flying back and forth (like going to ORD, BOS, DEL and YVR in 18 days total) that makes you tired and not that you are out shopping instead of planning your rest? It's not always possible to sleep, or rest, because of jetlag.

[IvorBiggun]

Maxi

I will. BALPA has a membership in BA of approximately 98%.

95% of a 70% turnout is approximately 67% of total community , not like your numerically challenged colleague seems to think.

Actually on a non industrial issue a 70% turnout is very good, especially as it deliveres 4.3% and another share plan.

Oh how I wish I was in BASSA.

[binsleepen]

Have you seen the latest press release from Unite re pregnant women at BA.

BA shamefully stops pay of pregnant cabin crew (http://www.unitetheunion.org/news__events/latest_news/ba_shamefully_stops_pay_of_pre.aspx)

What rules do BA require CC to follow with respect to living distance from work? I realize some CC have been redeployed from regional bases as they have closed but what are the rules for those recruited to London bases? Pregnant women though are not disabled. Most pregnant women continue to work well into the 7th or 8th month of the pregnancy. Do BA CC expect to have the entire time off while pregnant as well as 9 months after?

regards

[Yellow Pen]

It seems Unite may be hoist by their own petard!

The majority of BA’s cabin crew are women and will receive around £25,000 per year, including flying expenses.

Weren't they trying to say cabin crew were on poverty wages recently?

[Shaka Zulu]

Yup. The most recent rant:



The “old boys club”.

Sexism and gender bias, bordering on the misogynistic, is alive and well in Waterside.

The cabin crew dispute has proven many things, one of which is that male dominated cronyism still flourishes behind Waterside’s gleaming fa�ade. Beneath a thin veneer of spin, platitudes and trite PC sound bites, lurks a far darker truth.

A predominantly female workforce had the audacity to stand up for themselves and have an opinion and one that the last bastions of male dominance didn’t like.

These people stood up for themselves, for their rights, to protect the families they had, or the ones that they planned to have in the future. They dared to say that “we deserve better than this; we are worth more” and this simple defiance appeared to offend the Waterside establishment.

It appeared that many of our mainly male pilot colleagues could not accept this: adopting a “upstart trolley dollies should be seen and not heard” approach. Women and mothers attempting to interfere with their destiny, having a say in their own lives was apparently an unthinkable heresy!

BALPA and PPRUNE websites were, and still are, full of veiled and often overt, bigoted indignation. Not only that, but a significant number of all the disciplinary action taken against crew had one common element, either as witness, victim or instigator -

A specific male BALPA rep.

To be fair many pilots have expressed disgust and disappointment over BALPA’s stance towards the cabin crew dispute, so much for kind words, they have failed to back these words with their actions, the same individual has recently been elected once again by the same pilot community to continue to represent them.

Many pilots went against all the fundamental principles of trade unionism, setting up a volunteer system and an alternate union, in the PCCC, to undermine any stance or action that crew could take. This unhealthy obsession with our dispute led some members of flight deck to go so far as to attend the numerous court cases surrounding our dispute, openly congratulating the BA legal team if they won.

Strong women were not only mocked but also pilloried on flight deck forums, branded dismissively as ‘militants’, none more so than your chairwoman, Lizanne Malone. Our supposed ‘colleagues’ were so concerned at this apparent threat to world order, that not only did they not support the cabin crew, they could not even bring themselves to remain neutral, many of them fell over themselves to “back BA” or to involve a salivating Asset Protection department, in trivial imagined slights.

The union representative for the vast majority of dispute related cases was a woman, representing predominantly female crew. The rep in question was Nicky Marcus, a polite, intelligent and articulate woman. She was sacked for being a good rep. Managers alleged that she was somehow threatening and intimidating towards the head of Asset Protection. A man who had spent a long career in the Metropolitan Police, coming into contact with hardened drug dealers, murderers and violent offenders prior to joining British Airways. Obviously this had not prepared him for his exposure to the ‘intimidating’ Nicky Marcus.

It would appear that cabin crew, and by de facto, predominantly women, had to be kept in their place at any cost.

BALPA’s crass intervention in our dispute was essentially a case of people whose earnings can be well in excess of £100k per year with pensions to match, telling colleagues that could earn less than a tenth of that, with a poverty line pension, not only actively telling people they should bow down and accept it but also willingly assisting an employer be able to introduce this gross distortion.

It wasn’t that long ago they wanted our help in helping to protect them from the threat of cheap pilots being used through open skies, how ironic are their current actions when we face the same threat. Next time they ask the answer will be a polite but firm

Fox Trot Oscar.

[Juan Tugoh]

This all seems to have the ring of desperation about it. It is all highly emotive and full of accusations yet short of any verifiable fact.


Perhaps DH has now been informed of the result of his Tribunal and does not care anymore.

[ottergirl]

Good grief, who writes this tripe? Have they actually walked around Waterside? The female employees could well out-number the males. And how long have they been flying that they still don't know that foxtrot is all one word? I despair!
sacked for being a good rep. and nothing else?
earn less than a tenth of that only if they are 33%!
Next time they ask the answer will be a polite but firm
the answer is always NO, now what was the question?