BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)

[Betty girl]

BlueUpGood,

You say in your post -

''MF is the standard of uniform, look, service, professionalism and demeanor that BA, our employers, and the business that pays our mortgages, wish to see on board in 2011 and beyond.''

If that is the case why not give all of us that standard!!!

Don't say it is to do with the union because they have never made decisions about our uniform, it has always been decided at board level what uniform we wear.

The stricter standards are fine by me and most other senior crew members.

[Yellow Pen]

I'm sure BASSA would demand a duty day and payment for going for a hat fitting!!!;)

[Tray Surfer]

Not forgetting the Early Report day if applicable!

[Chigley]

....just when you thought you'd seen it all! DH is holding court on BASSA forum and this is his latest posting (you may want to sit down incase you collapse laughing)

I tell you what this dispute has done, more than anything else and this is more important than anything tangible - it has told BA that they can't bully the membership without strong resistance. It has told BA they can't smash the union without strong resistance. It has told BA they can't just do what they please without strong resistance. This dispute has empowered you the membership to stand up and be heard. It has given you all a common purpose and it has given you pride and faith in the majority of your colleagues. It has proved that the little man in the street can oppose big corporate bullies. It has stopped BA in their tracks and quite possible helped this job from being completely worthless in 10 years time. Are you still on your old terms and conditions and has anyone forced you to new fleet? No they haven't dared. You are still earning the same money and allowances. This dispute is all about having a voice and the power to shape your destiny. I could go on all night but will finish up by saying No, Hatty, you have gained nothing you can touch and you are right those 4 things are a product of this dispute but my God how you have achieved more than you will ever know. Years from now you will fully realise what you have done. Rgds Duncan

I have highlighted the best bit. DH is now taking the credit for our T & C's remaining the same and our pay. If he'd bothered to read any of the comms from BA he would have realised that this is what OUR employer was proposing all along before he took himself and his deluded followers on this path of self destruction. Priceless! :ugh:

[Tray Surfer]

Well, in fact, my earnings this year are NOT the same... Due to loosing many days flying allowances due to Industrial Action... But hey ho, if I had gone on strike, I could have claimed my strike pay... I am sure that would have made up for it... :rolleyes:

[plodding along]

Can someone, somewhere please tell us just exactly HOW you expect us to "sort them out"?

I'm not saying that YOU can sort them out, my point is that cabin crew as a GROUP look bad because of the action of the union and many members.

BASSA had about 9000 members at the last count, if crew left in droves then they would be forced to change attitude before they ran the risk of being de-recognised.

Crew should be "sending a message" to BASSA not BA.

Until crew resign then nothing will change, BASSA/UNITE will continue to run this dispute on everyone's behalf, if they run it badly then crew as a group will look bad and anti BA.

I know we have many, many excellent crew, what I don't understand is why so many feel that this is BA's fault and not BASSA's.

[Snas]

This dispute is all about having a voice and the power to shape your destiny


...but that does not extend to having a voice when it comes to accepting or rejecting BA's latest offer, that voice belongs to the few, not the many.

[Betty girl]

Thanks Chigley,

That is just priceless. He is taking credit for us having our terms and conditions in tact when they were never being removed in the first place.

The man is deluded, living in another world to us all.

He and the other reps have caused us, those that worked and those that didn't, a year of hell for absolutely no good reason.

Thanks for that Duncan.

[essessdeedee]

What if every crew union member wrote to their branch head, copying in Tony Woodley and Willie Walsh, stating whether they are (or not) prepared to accept the deal? Would both BA and Unite have a clear way forward out of this sorry mess:confused:

Blue up good said
''MF is the standard of uniform, look, service, professionalism and demeanor that BA, our employers, and the business that pays our mortgages, wish to see on board in 2011 and beyond

Betty girl - This is the current standard. Not just for MF! and looking around the CRC and on board, the current fleets simply are not showing it:*

[essessdeedee]

The first time that I have heard DH describe himself as the little man in the street:eek::D

[Betty girl]

esseedeedee,

Actually there are two standards being worked to.

The uniform guidelines that most staff in BA are asked to work to are very different to those that Mixed Fleet, crew idols and the New York crew out of London City have been given.

Most crew and the ground staff, and these have only last November been relaxed, are allowed to have their jackets open or closed, can wear a cardigan or Jumper under their Jacket, can use or not use the handbag, are allowed to use, and these items are actually mentioned in the standards, the retro BA bag with the 80's logo and the longchamps bags and can use the neck scarf as a cravat or with the toggle

Mixed Fleet are however required to wear the hat, have to have their jackets done up, must use a cravat, are strictly not allowed to use the retro bag and longchamps bags and must use the BA handbag.

I would personally like us all to work to the stricter standards and these standards have always been used with previous uniforms.

I have been told by my manager that the relaxations in the regulations, came in as a result of the ground staff getting cold at some of the departure gates and wanting to use the retro bags also.

Most senior flying crew were surprised at the relaxation in the regulations and it is even more surprising seeing as Mixed Fleet are now required, only a year after the standards being relaxed, to use a stricter set.

Why not make us all work to the stricter standards!!!! At least all the flying crew. I find that you can have a whole crew all wearing it differently and it does look a mess but as a senior crew member I cannot do anything about it because it is actually to standard.

I do know that as well as this a few crew could make more of an effort with their hair etc. and I do manage this on the day myself but if we all had to comply with the new stricter standards Mixed Fleet are working to it would indeed make us all look a lot more uniform and smarter.

[ottergirl]

Hi Bettygirl,

I totally agree with you about the downgrading of our uniform in all aspects but one. That hat! It's a mystery to me why anyone would be upset not to have one. Having worn a variety of uniforms since I started (and managed the crew wearing them) I can tell you that every uniform that we have worn a hat with has been a pain in the proverbial to manage. The last one was originally made of rabbit hair so half the crew were allergic to it, then it became the summer straw one all year round which was just hilarious in the rain! People sat on them so they looked as mishapen as many of the pilots ones do, they got left behind on board, the hat boxes shattered if you dropped them, they blew off on the apron when boarding up the stairs, and were an absolute curse if the temperature hit 30C or over. Add to that the strange effect they had on your hair and you get a picture of why, when Julian MacDonald was briefed for the new uniform, the hat was planned only for VIP flights. Be careful what you wish for :) you can look fantastic in your uniform without a lump of blue wool on your head.

Good to hear that the new Mixed fleet are making a good impression on line. I overheard a couple of conversations in training this week which leads me to believe that they are just the same as existing crew and all that is needed for the moaning to start is a few roster runs! We shall see!

[Hot Wings]

Talk about missing the point! MF is not just about the uniform. If you want the hat then you'd better be prepared for the stricter standard of performance management, sickness, tardiness, etc... that come with it. Not to mention recognising the fact that the First Officer and not the CSD is second in command of the aircraft.

The issue is about presenting our customers with a consistant standard of crew and level of service.

[ottergirl]

The issue is about presenting our customers with a consistant standard of crew and level of service.

I think not! Consistency means 'the same'! This is about presenting our customers with two different standards of crew and levels of service and, if BA have their numbers right, we'll have a decade of double standards before there is even a 50/50 split.

While it's unusual for me to have anything pro-BASSA to say, I can see why they have decided not to recommend the offer having read the appendix about legal redress. The crew who have lost their jobs have paid their union dues for many years on the understanding that they would receive support, both legal and financial, from Unite should they ever need legal representation in a dispute with their employer. For a union to then sign away that right as part of a 'deal' would be dodging their obligation to those members. Arguably, protecting that right could be the most, if not only, responsible behaviour we have seen from them in the past two years.

It doesn't matter what we think about whether those people should have lost their jobs, what matters is their right to test that decision in an industrial tribunal should they so wish.

[Betty girl]

Ottergirl agree with you totally.

I feel that we should all be working to the same standards. Either all hats or all no hats but you are totally right, the uniform looks great if worn correctly even without the hat. I just could not understand why they relaxed the original standards.

I have also read the appendix and I can also see why this is causing such a problem.

I am beginning to think that Willie Walsh does not actually want a settlement because he seems to be making it as hard as possible.

After a year of this hell, that many of us who have already left the union, are powerless to stop, I just feel like a pawn, stuck in the middle and hated by strikers because I worked and hated by posters like Hot Wings because I am cabin crew. Well that's how it feels anyway.

[Wheezyjet]

I know you might not think so, but I admire you enormously. You are clearly dedicated and professional, and display great clarity of mind. Don't stop posting, because you are thought provoking, your views are balanced, and I think you contribute a great deal to this thread. So I bet you've got a lot more support than you think!

[Betty girl]

Thanks so much Wheezyjet.

That has made me feel a lot better.

[ottergirl]

From the tone of some of Hot Wings posts, he may well have not had much time for us crew before all this started. :hmm: Oh well!

I think we are now officially at 'Deadlock'. Just like being on X-factor really. Given that there isn't much we can do about it, (despite all the helpful hints on this forum), then we have to concentrate on what we can do. We already have an advantage over the new crew because you and I have years of experience as well as the right attitude. Believe me, it is much easier to 'be outstanding' when you know what you are doing and not having to keep digging out your service manual. Do you remember what it was like to be new and having to keep asking the senior crew? Who do the new crew have to ask? Talk about being thrown in at the deep end!

Keep the faith, one day this will all be a bad memory and we'll still have the greatest job going.

[Betty girl]

ottergirl you are so right.

I am just going to continue, as I always have, and give the best customer service I can. Thanks for your wise words.

[Caribbean Boy]

There has been much one-sided reporting of Unite being unable to legally support their disciplined members. Let's get some facts.

BA has a disciplinary procedure, EG901, which includes the right of a disciplined employee to make two appeals. The appeals will result in the sanction being confirmed, rescinded or varied.

Following several sanctions, including dismissals, Unite complained repeatedly, so BA offered binding ACAS arbitration. Here is BA's offer.

Unite and British Airways agree that if any employee who has been subject to disciplinary action (in connection with the current dispute) by British Airways and whose name appears in the confidential annex to this agreement (a 'Relevant Employee') decides to bring an Employment Tribunal claim for unfair dismissal, then as an alternative to Employment Tribunal litigation, that claim will ordinarily be dealt with under the Acas arbitration scheme for the resolution of unfair dismissal disputes.

British Airways and Unite agree that the Arbitrator's decision will be binding and before entering the Acas arbitration scheme they will enter into an agreement to this effect, to which the Relevant Employee will also be a party.

Any arbitration hearing will take place only after British Airways' internal appeals procedure has been exhausted. In any such case British Airways will have the right to approve or reject the arbitrator proposed.The BA offer goes on to state: Where a Relevant Employee refuses to agree to the use of the Acas arbitration scheme, or initiates any legal action whatsoever connected to the disciplinary case which is not within the ambit of the Acas arbitration scheme, Unite will withdraw all direct and/or indirect support and assistance to that Relevant Employee, including any legal support, immediately and permanently.

An Acas review of all dispute related disciplinary cases that have been dealt with under British Airways' disciplinary procedures will also be conducted. British Airways is committed to giving full and fair consideration to any Acas recommendation arising from that review. Nothing in this section will be taken or cited as a precedent for any past or future cases.
So, the fuss is about BASSA not being able to legally support a member who declines binding arbitration after having gone through BA's disciplinary procedure or who wants to take legal action outside the the scope of the ACAS arbitration scheme. It's for this that BASSA wants to prevent their members from voting on BA's offer.

[Tiramisu]

Nov 12th, 2010 by admin
http://www.bassa.co.uk/bassa/NewsPictures/x.jpg
"And so this is Christmas
And what have you done
Another year over
A new one just begun"

-John Lennon, “Happy Xmas, War is over”

And so we are, one year after imposition and we are still very much at war with BA. Now the ballot has been “halted” we are back to where we were post Bedfont and have little choice but to initiate another ballot for industrial action as soon as legal issues are settled.

I have spoken to a lot of journalists/reporters over the last few days and they all ask me the million dollar question “what will it take to settle this dispute”? A fair question, which I tend to give 4 answers to.

The strange thing is that all 4 of my key points cost BA not a red cent, so as usual with BA this is not, was not, never has been about costs. It’s about humiliating and battering the workforce into accepting changes to their terms and conditions while along the way smashing the union by sacking, bullying and intimidating the reps using a variety of assistance whether it be the Daily Mail or US union busting companies. Once BA finally accept that they are not going to succeed in destroying us perhaps they also might like to ponder the 4 points below. Perhaps if they hadn’t banished all BASSA reps from the talks we might have got here before. They have to realise there is no point in making sweet talk with Unite or the TUC, BASSA/Amicus are the main bodies they need to talk with and agree with, no matter how much they may hate us.

These then are then just my fundamental thoughts on what would provide the basis of a deal that we would feel more comfortable presenting to you.

Firstly, there must be a complete return of staff travel with all its seniority. To accept a company have the right to punish people who legally withdraw their labour is to accept the end for trade unionism...end off. This punishment has already been in place 7 months now and, for people like Brendan Barber of the TUC to sit back and not address this fundamental attack on rights also undermines his position. (Also there must be a complete removal of any threats to remove staff travel in the future “at their sole discretion”).
Secondly, and I think this is one issue where we are nearly there - a binding and independent ACAS arbitration of all disciplinaries connected to the dispute. I’ll say no more on this for now.
Thirdly, either BA accepting those sick during strike action were genuine and redressing deduction from wages issues or accepting the matter be allowed to progress to the courts.
The removal of threats if a new negotiated facilities agreement cannot be reached within 8 weeks.

There you are in one simple paragraph, 4 no-cost measures which BA can accept which could very well unlock the door and start the beginning of the end. There are obviously other areas of concern but if BA take the above steps that will prove they are looking to genuinely solve this dispute and, in my opinion BASSA would be able to enter meaningful talks with that aim.

Will BA comply?

My gut feeling is No, the ingrain hatred of all things BASSA has rendered them almost incapable. Ever since Day 1 they have been on the offensive. I remember well when Bill Francis and James Ferran arrived in Cabin Services, Lizanne and I, in an effort to start on a positive note, invited the pair out to dinner one Friday evening and booked a table. When they arrived (late) the first thing Bill Francis said was “you can have two hours”. “Oh Dear” I thought, hardly the way to start an evening or lay a foundation on which good relationships could be established. When it soon became obvious, over our 2 hours together, that our waiter knew more about the job of cabin crew than James Ferran, it became obvious that BA were hell bent on pursuing Columbus and destruction of most of the corner stones of our agreement and were putting the people in place to achieve it. There has to be a basic philosophy change from where BA management were then and still are now. Perhaps it is impossible unless we have a change of leadership from their side. Perhaps the trenches have been dug too deep. They of course will say the same about us - we are famously dysfunctional, we can’t agree ever, we are militant Luddites etc etc. They may even believe it. However we have all been democratically elected, are (or in my case) have been crew ourselves for many years and you have continually given us a mandate to carry on doing what we are doing. As I see it they don’t have a mandate unless you count that of an Airbus captain who must forever more always remain nameless.

There I go, I hear BA management saying, “Holley, point scoring again - he can’t resist it”. Sorry it’s hard to keep anger out of all this - I have seen the hurt and despair the BA cabin crew work force are currently going through. I have seen and heard it in my own kitchen. I know crew literally too frightened to leave their rooms down route in case they get into a row with flight deck or VCC. I have heard of crew who won’t speak at their place of work for fear of being accused of bullying and harassment. I have spoken to crew who have been unfairly sacked for next to nothing who are making themselves ill and depressed. I hear of families being torn apart with divorces and life-long friendships broken never to be repaired. I see all around me the considerable stress and pain of a work force genuinely confused why a company who by and large were the best and most profitable should suddenly turn on the largest group of people who have put them there. And for what reason? Bigger profits - bigger bonuses. Yes there is anger, plenty of it - it has been nothing short of madness. But there has to be an end one day presumably, a solution and some steps back taken by both sides especially when it comes down to personal animosities. Are BA with Walsh at the helm big enough? Perhaps they just don’t want to?

I would urge BA to think seriously now, we are at another set of crossroads. Accept it is BASSA - alongside colleagues from AMICUS - who they simply have to do business with. They could start by facilitating reps to attend meetings, so bridges can start to be built or at least the bricks ordered. They could start by looking at my points above. BASSA are big enough to roll up sleeves in a serious effort to make peace but we are also equally prepared to carry on the fight if BA are not.

I'm a non-union member with no access to BASSA forum, the above was sent to me by email.

[essessdeedee]

I think we are now officially at 'Deadlock'. Just like being on X-factor really.

Shall we let the viewers (customers) vote and the lowest number (bassa) thrown out?:rolleyes:

Keep the faith interesting choice of words, Ottergirl, particularly as the strikers say it to each other.:*

[bar none]

Throughout this thread the word `Striked` has been used. Is this a word ?
I thought that `Struck` would be more appropriate.
Who knows !

[ottergirl]

Caribbean Boy - your post

In any such case British Airways will have the right to approve or reject the arbitrator proposed.

If BA have the right to reject any recommendation by the arbitrator, and they only commit to giving it fair consideration, then it's not worth the paper it's written on. It is still the legal right of the dismissed to test the verdict at Industrial tribunal and it remains part of their contract with Unite that the union should fund that challenge.

essessdeedee

Sorry if that is the case, it's a very common phrase that my kids use all the time so I had no idea it belonged to the Bassa faithful.

Tiramisu
I know crew literally too frightened to leave their rooms down route in case they get into a row with flight deck or VCC. I have heard of crew who won’t speak at their place of work for fear of being accused of bullying and harassment.
Thats a funny bit! They could always try being civil then they could go out like everyone else!

[Betty girl]

Can DH not see that he had all 4 of his conditions before he went on strike. Dose he not realise the irony of what he writes.

He seems perfectly happy with the actual offer now and it is more or less the same as it was before he took his members out on strike.
So why on earth did he do it and cause our company and employer to loose so much money?

Please one of you more sensible reps, call a meeting and ask him to stand down. He has lost the plot.

[Betty girl]

bar none,

In the UK we tend to say striked not struck, no idea if it is correct or not but it is common practice in the UK.

[Caribbean Boy]

ottergirl (http://www.pprune.org/members/307911-ottergirl),

There is a difference between an arbitrator and an arbitrator's decision.

And the arbitrator's decision is binding.

[Hot Wings]

Ottergirl,
I've got lots of time for the wonderful crew of EF but no time for the many arrogant and condescending WW crew that I met during my time as a young 2-striper on the 744! Coming from another airline, my first few months in BA were a real eye-opener - and not in a good way!!! Unfortunately, too many crew have been all too happy to swallow BASSA's anti-pilot rubbish. How would you all feel if BALPA had published similar material?

[ottergirl]

British Airways is committed to giving full and fair consideration to any Acas recommendation arising from that review.
So why this? It doesn't say that they will follow the recommendation just that they will consider it.

Is it appropriate for Unite to give away someone elses rights to settle a dispute that they are no longer party to or have the werewithal to vote upon?

Hot Wings
I hope I would have the wisdom not to tar you all with the same brush especially as I know many of you personally and like many of you very much.

[spin_doctor]

What struck me most about DH's latest is that he even admits himself that they want to drag the negotiation on and on and on...

When asked a straight question "What will it take to end this?" he comes out with 4 points (which, as has already been mentioned, they had to start with). However far from being an answer to the actual question he then goes on to say:

There are obviously other areas of concern but if BA take the above steps that will prove they are looking to genuinely solve this dispute and, in my opinion BASSA would be able to enter meaningful talks with that aim

So his idea of 'ending' the dispute is for BA to concede the items BASSA want and which are all a direct result of the industrial action, in order that they can then start talking.

In effect he wants to wind the clock back to pre-strike, and start all over again. Of course it's far too important to trust anyone else with so he'd have to stay on as secretary...

[Caribbean Boy]

ottergirl (http://www.pprune.org/members/307911-ottergirl), please reread my post, it will answer your questions.

[Hot Wings]

I'm sure that you do ottergirl.

The solution to this dispute may well lie in the hands of the silent majority. Sometimes in life you have to stand up and be counted. Too many are afraid to stand up to the militants - yet too afraid to leave BASSA.

[draglift]

I know crew literally too frightened to leave their rooms down route in case they get into a row with flight deck or VCC.

I have just flown with a CSD who is frightened to go out with cabin crew because she was a non-striker. Consequently she stays in her room, is lonely and has been reduced to tears on several occasions by deliberate and spiteful acts on the aircraft designed to undermine her authority. She has asked to downgrade her status to purser where she will be less of a target but this has been refused. She is very stressed, now dreads going in to work and is contemplating leaving the company after 21 years. At work she appears cheerful hard working and a pleasure to work with. What a waste.

[ottergirl]

As you say Hotwings, there is a stronger culture of fear on WW and many crew like draglift's friend who are scared to confront the problem crew. I live in the charmed world of Eurofleet where Flight and Cabin crew live in relative harmony, where we talk about our differences and hardly anyone sulks.

Most of us who disagreed have already left BASSA, (I left in 1997 so can hardly expect to have any say) but I do detect a different mood spreading amongst the crew. They are thoroughly hacked off with the lack of representation and I think the mood is turning. Keep talking to them, keep challenging their misguided views, make it alright to walk away, make them feel that there is a safety in numbers outside Bassa, they may yet surprise you!

[vctenderness]

Holly's holier than thou from the moral high ground twaddle makes me puke!

I have witnessed for years the vile attacks on everyone in the BASSA rag! Managers, colleagues, pilots, directors, union officials, CC89 reps everyone who does not fall at the feet on mighty BASSA has been vilified and bullied.

He was not sacked on a first offence he had a string of previous including written attacks on cabin crew colleagues who dared to question him.

He sent an email to all BASSA CSD's giving the name of a crew member who had questioned him on a subject with the message 'you know what to do if you fly with him'. However, as always, he's so thick he sent it to the victim as well!!

Needless to say BA just gave him a written warning.

Cabin crew please wake up to this and put an end to it now.

[keel beam]

Tony Woodley


But after Bassa's rejection, Mr Woodley said : "I will not under any circumstances recommend to our cabin crew members any offer that was not also recommended by our elected representatives."

He added "any sense that this offer is being presented to cabin crew over the heads of unwilling representatives would be deeply damaging to the union."


So Tony Woodley has confirmed that the members have no say.

Unite needs to get it's act together and bring under control the unions that were brought together under the merger to create Unite.

Wasn't that the idea of of a super union, to have a central command. At the moment Unite have a number of loose cannon unions in it's fold. BASSA obviously being one of them.

The solution? That will need a bit of thought.

[Hot Wings]

Or is Woodley about to remove DH and replace him with someone more willing?!

[Adi54321]

Quote:
In any such case British Airways will have the right to approve or reject the arbitrator proposed.

The way I read this is that it applies to the person making the arbitration decision not the actual decision (arbitration) itself. ie if BA felt the arbitrator was too biased they could reject their appointment

[BlueUpGood]

I have just flown with a CSD who is frightened to go out with cabin crew because she was a non-striker. Consequently she stays in her room, is lonely and has been reduced to tears on several occasions by deliberate and spiteful acts on the aircraft designed to undermine her authority. She has asked to downgrade her status to purser where she will be less of a target but this has been refused. She is very stressed, now dreads going in to work and is contemplating leaving the company after 21 years. At work she appears cheerful hard working and a pleasure to work with. What a waste

I have either witnessed or been aware of this sort of thing on SH. Whilst I have every sympathy for the predicament people find themselves in, as the CSD or Purser, then you are IN CHARGE of your cabin, and the crew members therein!
I have had to gently remind pursers on occasion that their job is to manage their crew, and if they come to me as Captain with issues, I would rather they did their job before I step into the fray.

Without question, strong leadership from the SCCM dictates the tone of a flight. I have had numerous fabulous crew, and have been very surprised to learn there are fairly hard line BASSA supporters amongst them, or indeed the SCCM themselves. I have absolutely no problem with that - they are doing their job as professionals, and (very pertinent at the moment) are genuinely exercising good CRM. The problem flights from a FC perspective are those where the SCCM is weak in asserting their authority over their crew members. That doesn't mean being dictatorial, but exhibiting a style of professional authority which doesn't give crew members the latitude to exhibit behaviour that could undermine them.

As I say, I have great sympathy with the CSD mentioned above. My personal style of leadership is the 'less is more' principle, that is to say, let people get on with their jobs, and I like to foster a harmonious atmosphere, with minimum intervention, but I have had to change my style on occasions as a result of this dispute, and assert my authority, which isn't my preferred style. However it is what I have to do sometimes in order to do my job as required.

[draglift]

BlueUpGood

I agree in principle to everything you said.

The CSD I referred to is on long haul, a strong character and suffers no nonsense. She is extremely company minded and has reported several cabin crew for attitude or infringements. It is because she has made a stand that she is being targeted. It would have been a lot easier for her to ignore certain events rather than rise to the bait. Unfortunately the malicious acts are usually anonymous and are wearing her down too much.

[MissM]

I have just flown with a CSD who is frightened to go out with cabin crew because she was a non-striker. Consequently she stays in her room, is lonely and has been reduced to tears on several occasions by deliberate and spiteful acts on the aircraft designed to undermine her authority. She has asked to downgrade her status to purser where she will be less of a target but this has been refused. She is very stressed, now dreads going in to work and is contemplating leaving the company after 21 years. At work she appears cheerful hard working and a pleasure to work with. What a waste.

Maybe this gives an indication to her, and everyone else, what you get from BA for giving them your support. Absolutely nothing. Management can't be bothered with its cabin crew.

On the other hand, why should they downgrade her status to purser? Many would oppose it because of the huge amount of surplus of pursers at the moment.

[dave747436]

MissM,

How you can read that & come to the conclusion that it's BA's fault is staggering.

[MrBunker]

Ah MissM, another blinding dose of BASSA inspired reality.

Of course, it's her/BA's fault that she's getting asinine or vitriolic comments from crew who went on strike, it's her/BA's fault that a proportion of crew do not know how to conduct themselves in a professional context given their belief that they represent the apotheosis of everything British Airways and, as such, are allowed to disregard any rule or convention they don't feel they should conform to, unless sanctioned by the increasingly histrionic Holley and his aggrieved ego. The fault, as much as it won't play with the man or woman on the BASSA omnibus, lies with individuals who don't know how to conduct themselves in an adult manner in an industrial dispute.

Like it or not, all the teddies that have been flung, all the foul words and all the insinuations of character have come from Unite, the sub-branches and their supporters. The worst you've heard from BA has been the word dysfunctional and I think that, at best, encourages debate and is not as insulting as 90% of the comms issued by the other side.

I do, however, agree with you that she should not be allowed demotion to Psr. The signal it would send to those determined to disrupt everything on the back of their grievances would be intolerable.


BlueUpGood

In essence I agree with you but the practicalities don't necessarily bear out in day to day working, partly for the reasons outlined above.

We're dealing, if you will, at times, with an asymmetric style of conflict in that many crew follow the beat of the BASSA drum and believe it's their moral right to attempt to subvert and undermine their superiors. The threats to CSDs carrying out upgrades at the behest of the Capt. still continue apace (certainly on WW) and, I can readily see after a while, why some CSDs just throw their hands up in the air and wonder why they bother (although it's noteworthy that many continue nonetheless at a cost to themselves of a good deal of energy and stress).

There's a signal failure on the part of many crew to accept that, on the day, they have on-board superiors in rank, be that purser, CSD, FO, Capt. and BASSA actively foster subtle dissent with their inflammatory rhetoric. I can vouch for the fact that most on-side CSDs are standing up but it must be noted that it is an actively draining issue dealing with individuals or cliques who think that their choice of insubordinate behaviour is justified by some sort of higher moral authority outwith their contractual obligations. Occasionally, no matter how authoritative the CSD, escalation to the Capt. is often the only way to dampen the militant fervour and, dare I say it, put the fear of formal action into the agitator.

After all, it's "BASSA 'till i die" for the new mantra. For goodness sakes.

MrB

[Caribbean Boy]

As usual, MissM, you miss the point that it is the strikers who cause much, if not most, of the aggravation in the CRC and down route. It's no wonder that those involved with MF find it a breath of fresh air, not having to deal with surly yellow pens.

[MissM]

Dave747436

Maybe because it's true?

MrBunker

I think you will find that most crew can conduct themselves in a professional manner. A CSD has obligations and responsibilites to his or her role. If this female CSD finds it difficult to work with a certain colleague there are ways to deal with it.

Caribbean Boy

It must be a breath of fresh air for those involved in MF seeing as the majority of MF cabin crew seem to be of the opinion that they would work to almost nothing just as long they get to wear a BA uniform.

[MrBunker]

MissM,

Most crew can. A significant number choose not to, especially when they think they can get away with it.

Moreover, any application of performance management seems to be met with cries of bullying and harassment. We're not dealing with some people prepared to adopt a professional level due to the moralistic indignation assumed by some strikers as I outlined above.

[Abbey Road]

It must be a breath of fresh air for those involved in MF seeing as the majority of MF cabin crew seem to be of the opinion that they would work to almost nothing just as long they get to wear a BA uniform. A BASSA adherent would say that. Have BASSA ever considered that those actively seeking positions in MF are doing it voluntarily, and because they feel it is a job worth having? Have BASSA ever considered that the salary in MF (aside from it being much nearer the 'norm' for the job) is welcomed by many who may have lost their jobs elsewhere, or are attempting to improve their lot? Contrary to twisted BASSA opinion, just because a salary is below that of some legacy crew, doesn't necessarily make it 'poverty wages'.

Finally, have BASSA ever considered that everybody else but themselves likes working with the MF crews, because those MF crews display qualities that should be the norm in the industry. An awful of of people are fed up with the attitude of the legacy BASSA die-hards - surly, obstructive, uncooperative,envious, miserable, insubordinate - such that the "breath of fresh air" that is MF will gain the upper hand. Undoubtedly.

BASSA are being bypassed, a fact that the rest of BA welcomes. And all because of BASSA's own actions - how ironic! The fault lies entirely with BASSA.

[MissM]

Abbey Road

People applying for MF are probably doing it for many different reasons but many are undoubtedly doing it because they get to wear the BA uniform and really don't care about the package itself. This has been discussed before but it should be interesting to hear BA's explanation to market rate plus 10%.

You say that an awful lot of people in BA are fed up with the BASSA militant die-hards. Did you ever stop to think that we are possibly fed up with other people interfering our dispute?

[MrBunker]

Abbey Road

People applying for MF are probably doing it for many different reasons but many are undoubtedly doing it because they get to wear the BA uniform and really don't care about the package itself. This has been discussed before but it should be interesting to hear BA's explanation to market rate plus 10%.

You say that an awful lot of people in BA are fed up with the BASSA militant die-hards. Did you ever stop to think that we are possibly fed up with other people interfering our dispute?

It's that protectionist, isolationist attitude that has made an awful lot of people fed up with BASSA die-hards, MissM. You cannot conduct a dispute which has such a material potential effect on the other employees of BA without expecting them to, at the very least, have an opinion and, for some, get involved in diminishing the impact.

Of course, I expect that your answer to that is the, now well-worn, answer that had no-one got involved then this would have been over months, if not years, ago. The fact is it may well have been but neither of us know for a fact how that may have looked. Your belief is that it may have resulted in a resounding "win" for BASSA. Mine is not. Neither of us can ever prove that so it remains no more than a supposition on both our parts.

It speaks volumes about the self-perception you appear to have that you think everyone else should've just sat back on the sidelines and watched whilst you attempted to implode the company from within. Just as you consider your dispute to be legitimate, so do those who have an opinion feel their intervention and opinion is just as legitimate.

You'd be breathtakingly naive or arrogant to assume you could, or should be able to, conduct it in a vacuum.

For the avoidance of any doubt I bear you no ill-will but I do think you tend to the philosophy of trying to write the ground rules of such issues to suit your argument and then argue from that starting point rather than debating the issues themselves as they present, not as you seem to wish to, i.e, apportion blame for your unhappiness in the manner of their presentation, or their very existence in the first place. It smacks of a lack of personal and collective responsibility to me.

MrB

[Hotel Mode]

You say that an awful lot of people in BA are fed up with the BASSA militant die-hards. Did you ever stop to think that we are possibly fed up with other people interfering our dispute?

Its not YOUR dispute. Its a dispute between you and BA. That makes it our dispute as BA staff/passengers/investors etc. Its this unwillingness to see beyond your little bubble that encouraged so many of us to replace you.

[Cough]

You say that an awful lot of people in BA are fed up with the BASSA militant die-hards. Did you ever stop to think that we are possibly fed up with other people interfering our dispute?

Ever thought the rest of the company are fed up with a single group threatening our livelihood and company?

[Caribbean Boy]

MrBunker (http://www.pprune.org/members/3493-mrbunker) wrote: For the avoidance of any doubt I bear you no ill-will but I do think you tend to the philosophy of trying to write the ground rules of such issues to suit your argument and then argue from that starting point rather than debating the issues themselves as they present, not as you seem to wish to, i.e, apportion blame for your unhappiness in the manner of their presentation, or their very existence in the first place. It smacks of a lack of personal and collective responsibility to me.Those ground rules include striking for the cause, like protecting existing T&Cs, even if it means that BA goes bust.

[RadarIdent]

You say that an awful lot of people in BA are fed up with the BASSA militant die-hards. Did you ever stop to think that we are possibly fed up with other people interfering our dispute?

Curious to know how you would react MissM, if the situation was reversed.

Lets suppose that you are a member of staff that, throughout the past five years, had adapted to change of working practise, witnessed job outsourcing, job cuts, increased workload etc etc, as indeed all your colleagues have witnessed.

Then you are mindful of a significant sized department that says 'no, no, no', refuses to negotiate, are also unreasonable in other areas, threaten strike action (again) and jeopordize the very company you work for and all that comes with job security/insecurity in an era of recession and global downturn.

Can you at least see a crumb of understanding as to why many are fed up with the 'BASSA militant die-hards'?

[Yellow Pen]

People applying for MF are probably doing it for many different reasons but many are undoubtedly doing it because they get to wear the BA uniform and really don't care about the package itself.

Could you explain why that is a bad thing?

[gingerminge]

Honestly yellow pen what a daft thing to ask.

The next point you will be making is people should be paying BA for the honour of wearing the BA uniform. :ugh:

[Sunshine Express]

Firstly, I would like to state that it is such a shame for all our really great Cabin Crew that we are in this situation. Next, that I really do feel that Unite/BASSA/Amicus have badly let their members down.

With regard to Duncan's latest posting....

This is the best written and convincing argument that I have read from him, however, please stop and think about what he hasn't written.

He lists 4 objections/suggestions to the present offer.

No mention of reduced crewing levels imposed by BA (the original dispute), so that is OK.
No mention of New Fleet/Mixed Fleet, imposed by BA since the dispute, so that's OK.
No mention of an improved pay offer which would be affordable as New Fleet cost savings are in addition to the targeted cost savings of the reduced crew levels.

Still with me? What does he actually ask for?

1. Reinstatement of staff travel with all perks immediately reinstated. [for when I get my job back and long into retirement].

2. I demand yet another hearing to get MY job back.

3. Sickness during strike. Probably doesn't affect "me" but worth a go

4. When I have MY job back, I want/demand as much time off as I choose for supposed union duties.

Read it again below and ask yourself, what is he asking for your benefit?


"Firstly, there must be a complete return of staff travel with all its seniority. To accept a company have the right to punish people who legally withdraw their labour is to accept the end for trade unionism...end off. This punishment has already been in place 7 months now and, for people like Brendan Barber of the TUC to sit back and not address this fundamental attack on rights also undermines his position. (Also there must be a complete removal of any threats to remove staff travel in the future “at their sole discretion”).
Secondly, and I think this is one issue where we are nearly there - a binding and independent ACAS arbitration of all disciplinaries connected to the dispute. I’ll say no more on this for now.
Thirdly, either BA accepting those sick during strike action were genuine and redressing deduction from wages issues or accepting the matter be allowed to progress to the courts.
The removal of threats if a new negotiated facilities agreement cannot be reached within 8 weeks."

[Chesh01]

Will the mixed fleet haters do one!

The facts are they look better, work harder and are more willing to serve our customers who are the most important element for BA. Good luck and welcome to our Mixed fleet brothers and sisters

Its time for us legacy crew to respond in the right way. Correct uniform standards and putting the customer first in everything we do.

Mixed fleet is here to stay and I for one will not be out performed by any of them. Punctuality, sickness, duty free commission and looking the part. Lets justify our existence in a positive way and "stop da bitchin."

Game on!

[CaptainBarbosa]

Chesh01
Amen, Brother.
In my opinion, that is the way to protect pay and conditions in these accountant driven days. Make the company think that you are value for money ... by providing more value for money. Striking and moaning, disrupting and sticking to the letter of agreements rather than applying a bit of common sense and a touch of empathy for our pasengers will only make a work group look expensive.
Displaying a sense of entitlement is probably a fairly rapid way of losing that entitlement. I hope my pilot collegues realise this too as I think the company will be asking all employees to take on more responsibilities and more accountabilities, both inside and outside the sphere of our "day job." Those departments who are willing will be seen as valuable (and, I believe, will get more satisfaction and enjoyment, out of work life.) The others, I imagine, will be fighting a rearguard action all the way to a sidelined existance firmly in BA's "costbase."
Regards
Barbosa.
(All my own opinions and not those of my employer.)

[Yellow Pen]

Honestly yellow pen what a daft thing to ask.

The next point you will be making is people should be paying BA for the honour of wearing the BA uniform

Au contraire! If people are more interested in working for BA than the package it means BA have access to a vast pool of applicants from which they can select the best candidates. That leads to a situation in which people do the job because they like it, and when they don't like it any more they leave. Contrast that to todays employment situation in IFCE in which a sizeable element are trapped in a job they dislike with an employer they despise because they at least have the sense to realise nobody will employ them on such lucrative terms elsewhere. Which example is going to lead to the greatest customer experience? Join the dots up gingerminge.

[Flap 80]

In simple terms which hopefully even the most entranched die hard union member will understand...having operated a flight this week with my crew being new fleet....without hesitation I can say that atmosphere/enthusiasm/professionalism of the whole new fleet crew was exemplary.

ALL highly experienced and motivated ex VS/BMI

A refreshing change and looking forward to BUD and the rest:

[TOM100]

Refreshing post Chesh01 - a good way to fight back and with some integrity.......if the GPM's for MF start to outperform legacy, you know what is coming and more quickly..........if they don't the reverse is probably true......

[gingerminge]

Yellow Pen you my find that although there is a vast pool of people for BA to recruit from I have just had a really interesting conversation with a friend in who works in recruitment.

1000's of people have applied for the new roles agreed. Hardly and I mean hardly are being taken on though.

Mixed fleet growth has been cut right back from the anticipated projection and they are now going to be asking for 3 years previous airline experience.

I honestly believe the legacy fleet as it is now refered to will be around for quite a while yet.

[Colonel White]

A couple of thoughts.

Regarding recruitment. Could I float the suggestion that the reason that so many applicants for MF got turned down was because the standard expected is quite high. Maybe despite the undoubted enthusiasm of a lot of candidates, they didn't quite make the grade in what BA wanted and the only way to now reduce the paper sift is to go for candidates with at least some flying experience.

This in itself should sound warning bells to those cabin crew who believe that they are hard done by and are contemplating strike action. If there are folk out there who have experience as cabin crew and who are applying to BA for MF jobs, doesn't this suggest that it is an employer's market ?

The other thought that has been bouncing around of late is the way that cabin crew refer to the people on the plane. It seems that the general approach is to refer to them as passengers. A passenger is largely a person who is carried on a vehicle, it's a passive role. BA doesn't have passengers, it has CUSTOMERS. They are the people who spend hard earned bucks on a ticket to carry them from A to B in a reasonable standard of comfort and service. It might seem a little thing, but passengers don't expect service, customers do.Without customers, BA would not exist. The way that we can differentiate ourselves from other airlines is by the standard of customer service offered. Now I'm sure that a lot of crew do refer to our clients as customers and do deliver excellent customer service, but I can't help but feel that one of things that may differentiate the MF folk is that they are thinking customer (not passenger) from the outset. It's a little thing, but it makes the world of difference.

[Hot Wings]

Gingerminge,
Sorry to nip your rumour in the bud but in December MF recruitment will be open to people with NO ie. ZERO airline experience! The previous requirement of 3 months was just to shorten the training course to get the fleet up and running.

[TorC]

Chesh01

I'm right there with you on this.

But while those of us who are engaged and professional enough can do what we can individually, the effects of it is sadly at risk of being diluted by those of our colleagues who choose not to bother. I'm thinking here of me, recently on a 767 with 6 others, none of whom, as Colonel White suggests, were "thinking Customer" but merely going through the motions (and in a couple of extreme cases, not even managing to do that).

Like me, you have probably experienced the blank stares (or worse) when you've said something pro-BA, or just something positive in general. On many occassions I've been told that I'm too keen, and that I didn't have to do this, that or the other for a customer. What the heck else could I possibly do, stuck on a Boeing for X hours? Oh yes, silly of me .... I should be reading the Daily Mail I suppose. It's even worse on the occasions that these sort of comments come from the SCCM, the very one who's there to set the standard, and manage it!

Going through the terminals, I'll willingly stop to offer assistance. But of course, then I'm told to hurry-up as I'm delaying the crew in their mad dash to the car park. A lot seem to forget that they are wearing the BA uniform and are therefore still representing the company, even after having left the aircraft. I've worked with many who seem to think the job is over and done with at the "Doors to manual" call.

So, what to do? Yes, certainly individually we can raise our games, but will have to be prepared to take the flak for doing so. Quite ridiculous, and so very wearing, to be constantly submersed in such a negative environment.

To my mind, for far too long now, the wheat and chaff have been mixed together. Can we look to BA to help us seperate them I wonder?

(I'll quickly just add that while much of the ethos of MF appealed to me, the LH flying and people management (as I'd have gone for CSM) aspect didn't).

[Pornpants1]

gingerminge

I honestly believe the legacy fleet as it is now refered to will be around for quite a while yet.

I agree, and so do most posters on this forum, its only BASSA and their diehard supporters that would have you believe in 2 years time that all "legacy crew" will be given notice and re-employed on 11,000 pa:ok::ok:

[Colonel White]

TorC

I suspect that the winnowing of older contract crew will occur when BA start instituting performance management across the board. It is worth noting that large parts of the airline have been operating this for some time and it is one of the features of MF. It can only be a matter of time before it is rolled out across all of IFCE. I'm sure there will be those who will wish to resist it. They'll probably be the ones with most to lose. Anyone who is at the very least pulling their weight has nothing to fear from it. The backsliders and teflon shouldered ones (and they occur in all organisations) will need to shape up or ship out.

[ottergirl]

Colonel White

Just a couple of points you have raised are ill-informed.

Cabin Crew are, and have always been, performanced managed to roughly the same standards (uniform excepting) as the new Mixed Fleet. Attendance, sickness and performance are all managed in the same way as the rest of the company. The on-board performance is assessed by the SCCM every 120 days and, while I accept that the standard of the assessment varies from person to person, I suspect that the same will apply to MF. It seems that you have been misinformed on our Performance Management process.

With regard to the distinction between customers and passengers. In Customer Service training they are of course given the sobriquet of 'customer' as you prefer but in SEP, and all things safety related, they are referred to by the JAA, the CAA, the pilots, the new Cabin crew and ourselves as passengers. The result is that the two names are interchangeable. Historically, they were all passengers until the mid 90's so anyone who pre-dates that time will lapse into that automatically.

Ultimately, it doesn't matter what you call them it's the way you treat them that will keep them coming back.

[DeltaMikeCharlie]

Traysurfer....hi there. Apologies if you have mentioned this on previous posts but I just saw a post by you a few pages back that you left BASSA.

Did you join Amicas or are you not part of any union now? Was just curious as I have spoken to someone else who did the same some months ago. Cheers.

[Hubert Davenport]

Copied With permission from BASSA forum...

It is clear that Willie Walsh and the Board members of BA who appointed him, are out of control. They represent the worst excesses of Capitalism not seen since the banking disaster. Where the banks got involved in a crooked exploitation of the financial system, BA has sought to profit through rigging fuel surcharges and cargo pricing. In both cases, British Airways has been heavily fined on either sides of the Atlantic, and as far away as Australia. Yet apart from one fall-guy, a hapless BA senior manager by the name of Keith Packer, who was jailed in the USA for 8 months over cargo price fixing, no other senior members of British Airways have taken responsibility for their illegal actions and activity. There is absolutely no doubt that the Board of British Airways and the Leadership Team, have made some disastrous decisions and the company has suffered through fines and huge losses, plus over £1bn lost in inappropriate fuel hedging positions. The negative publicity for British Airways and the damage sustained to the brand and the companies image, is unimaginable

A "dictatorship in a democracy", why? Because Willie Walsh has been recruited by the Board of British Airways, not because of his business acumen or previous success as a CEO, he was hired because he is willing and able to say and do absurd things.

He started in this vein as a union rep for IALPA, where he was quoted as saying: "in negotiations, you get nowhere by being reasonable". He has tried to orchestrate a'coup d'etat' on the unions in BA and BASSA in particular, using the recent recession as an excuse to drive down wages and conditions of ordinary employees in the airline, whilst his own pay and that of his co-directors soars.

Willie Walsh represents as the CEO of British Airways, greed, exploitation and failure. He failed at Aer Lingus in his attempt to organise a Management Buy Out, he failed the airline by putting it in the low cost model and he failed to leave Aer Lingus in a viable state. He has also failed at British Airways. Industrial relations are the worst in the companies history, the share price is depressed because of his actions, and rather than riding high out of the recession, there is a sense of doom amongst employees at the airline. You hear it from the engineers who haven't got the spares or manpower to fix the planes, you hear it from the ground staff who struggle to deal with the volumes of customers as their own numbers are reduced and you hear it from the cabin crew.

It appears that the Board and LT of British Airways have great instincts for personal profit, but have no values or concern for the majority of staff that generate those profits, and who now work harder for the same money, or less in some cases. Where are the profit sharing schemes for ordinary employees in BA? When was the last Share Save scheme?

BA's cabin crew are being victimised solely for the profit motive. And we tacitly accept this "dictatorship" every time we turn up for work. What is worse, is that we have seen in our own dispute Capitalism trumping democracy. Democratic ballots for industrial action, have been overturned by the friends of Capitalism in the High Court. Judges who are supposed to use common sense and intellect in their deliberations, have cast aside legitimate and lawful democratic ballots because of flimsy technicalities. That is where we are as a democracy in the United Kingdom and it stinks. Unscrupulous employers use this avenue to fight a dispute that they have deliberately created though imposition, using High Court judges to bust unions.

And in this warped void of a capititalistic society that people like Willie Walsh congregate, it is perfectly acceptable to make people poor. Witness the Mid Fleet. No agreement there to work to, only a "framework". No decent wages or conditions, just exploitation of unemployed people or others, who thought that BA is an honourable employer and things 'will get better'. But the fact is that MF should be a glaring example of what life would be like in BA, without union representation. For all those crew who went to work during the dispute, this ultimately will be your reward.

Our dispute with Willie Walsh has now evolved. This is not about imposition and the false premise for that reduction in crew complements that BA was in a "fight for survival", this dispute is now a revolt against management greed, incompetence, bullying and harassment. It is a defining moment.

Are you prepared as decent people to allow this dictatorship in a democracy to continue? Is it right that you are coerced and bullied into accepting inferior pay and conditions, AFTER the company has turned the corner and is once again, as predicted, making substantial profits? Is it right that your democratically elected union representatives and your union, are trampled over by the mantra, ego and dogmatism of one person? Is it right that colleagues have been suspended and sacked just for supporting the dispute?

Then it is your duty to vote NO at the next ballot.




Thoughts and opinions welcome.

[Hotel Mode]

Then it is your duty to vote NO at the next ballot.



Given the suspension of the consultative ballot is that what they meant? :ok:

[Hand Solo]

So Mixed Fleet have only been flying 14 days and they are already complaining about their salary? Really?

[License to Fly]

If I had a £1 from all the people in BA (excluding pilots or cabin crew) who has mentioned over the last week that any militant/striking members of the cabin crew should be sacked (and that is the polite way of putting it), I would be a very rich person(almost like DH is from the BASSA subs!).

It is amazing/sad that many of the BASSA members do not know the strength of feeling in BA ...

Mixed fleet are the future of BA and they are already an asset and whilst it cannot be easy for them at the moment, the must hold faith that they will be the future. There are many people applying to be crew in MF and if they are good, (long term) they have a good career ahead of them :ok:

Its BA train set, adapt or leave - harsh perhaps but we are in a different world now to 19(cc)89 ...

LTF

[Abbey Road]

A couple of suggested changes to the first paragraph of the BASSA message from Hubert Davenport's post might make it more accurate:
It is clear that BASSA are out of control. They represent the worst excesses of Trade Unionism not seen since the 1970s. Where the banks got involved in a crooked exploitation of the financial system, BASSA has sought to bring down their employer through hissy fits, petty disputes and largely failed strikes. BASSA has a hapless senior rep, who has lost his BA job over his outrageous behaviour, but he still refuses to acknowledge responsibility for his vile actions and words. There is absolutely no doubt that the BASSA and Unite have made some disastrous decisions and the company has suffered through lost bookings. The negative publicity for British Airways and the damage sustained to the brand and the company's image, is unimaginable

[Dutchjock]

So what about last weeks " as a union we wouldn't like to tell you what to do so it is up to you to decide if this offer is acceptable bla bla"

How can anyone with a single brain cell not see how often they contradict themselves, lie, manipulate, cheat and bully?

[spin_doctor]

So, this is what BASSA choose to publish to get their desired result:

No mention of what the strike might be able to achieve or how, given UNITE reps have already stated the latest offer was 'the best available in the current climate'.

No mention of how they intend to de-link this ballot from the last strikes in order to keep the strikers legally protected.

Re-hashing the tired old argument about fuel hedging. Extra bonus point to anyone from BASSA who can explain clearly what fuel hedging actually is, how it works and what BA use it for. Go on, try and explain it rather than just repeating the 'we lost money one year' line.

Admitting (finally) that the strategy all along has been 'keep saying NO until the figures get better, than shout loudly about how cost savings are not needed any more'.

Peddling the myth that BA has an anti union agenda and that IR in BA is at an all time low. No, that's just BASSA. Other parts of the airline are still able to get positive results on areas of concern by engaging and negotiating.

Trying to make their members believe that everyone in BA feels like they do. We don't. The vast majority of BA employees are on the side of the management, not the cabin crew. (VCC anyone?)

Re-hashing the myth that this is about forcing crew onto inferior terms and conditions. Really? I thought they'd been offered a pay rise, unlike most departments.


Well done BASSA, well argued and not at all emotive ill-informed drivel.:rolleyes:

[Juan Tugoh]

"Playing the man", i.e. a personal attack on the opposition rather than addressing the issues under discussion has always been a weak rhetorical tool. It tends to suggest that there is no counter argument that will withstand close scrutiny. It also attempts to garner support to oneself based on an emotional rather than a rational basis. Sadly and most critically for BASSA supporters it is a tacit admission that the cause is lost and that it is time for last gasp measures, a desperate last throw of the dice.

It is also interesting that this is now "a revolt against management greed, incompetence, bullying and harassment." Perhaps an attempt to pave the way for a ballot on issues that are not linked to the previous strikes. I doubt it will succeed but it seems they will try. Trouble with a revolt is that it cannot succeed unless the regime is changed; there is little to suggest this will happen.

[Wirbelsturm]

It is clear that Willie Walsh and the Board members of BA who appointed him, are out of control. They represent the worst excesses of Capitalism not seen since the banking disaster. Where the banks got involved in a crooked exploitation of the financial system, BA has sought to profit through rigging fuel surcharges and cargo pricing. In both cases, British Airways has been heavily fined on either sides of the Atlantic, and as far away as Australia. Yet apart from one fall-guy, a hapless BA senior manager by the name of Keith Packer, who was jailed in the USA for 8 months over cargo price fixing, no other senior members of British Airways have taken responsibility for their illegal actions and activity

Willie Walsh wasn't the CEO at the time of the fuel surcharge price fixing, neither was he at the helm during the cargo price fixing. The board were not aware of the telephone discussions being made by senior managers of ALL THE AIRLINES INVOLVED. VA got away without fines as they were the whistle blower for the fuel surcharges and LH got away with the cargo scandal as they blew the whistle on that. ALL OF THE AIRLINES INVOLVED WERE DOING THE SAME THING. The US DOJ was livid as they claimed that these 'cartels' as they described them were unfair whilst the european carriers (not allowed Governmental assistance under EU law) were competing against American carriers that were operating bankrupt under the US Government protection. Fair playing field? I think not. Once again BASSA give a good SWP rhetoric without including the full story.

plus over £1bn lost in inappropriate fuel hedging positions.

Lacking a little in fact again BASSA. The figures posted by BA to the markets show that BA has made a significant gain in its fuel hedging policy even when the policy is not there to make money. Fuel hedging allows the company to 'budget' its fuel bill and removes market volitility over the long term. It is expected to make losses and gains. But lets not let that get in the way of BASSA 'cherry picking' shall we.

the share price is depressed because of his actions, and rather than riding high out of the recession

I really don't understand this one. The share price during the economic collapse was £1.05 at the lowest, that share price this week was running at £2.80 for a company that has only just shown a profit in a market which is still very tenuous and suppressed. These are the BASSA brains that refused to look at the confidential figures as they 'weren't accountants' and thus not interested.

Where are the profit sharing schemes for ordinary employees in BA?

The share schemes as offered to all the other employees during negotiations including the CC but were rejected by BASSA?

BA's cabin crew are being victimised solely for the profit motive

BA cabin crew have enjoyed over inflated T's & C's for many years now. This has been a market correction. Whilst painful it has been, in they eyes of all of the other BA employees who have accepted change over the past decade, necessary.

Judges who are supposed to use common sense and intellect in their deliberations, have cast aside legitimate and lawful democratic ballots because of flimsy technicalities. That is where we are as a democracy in the United Kingdom and it stinks. Unscrupulous employers use this avenue to fight a dispute that they have deliberately created though imposition, using High Court judges to bust unions.


A paragraph direct from the Socialist Workers handbook. Flimsy mistakes? The chairperson of the BASSA board advising members who were not entitled to vote to return the votes anyway as long as they were for IA? Flimsy mistakes? We lost the court case therefore the world is unjust not our case. Sheesh. Wait until Len McKlusky gets his best friend Hugo Chavez over here then we will see the power of the Unions rise again!!! Except we won't. Land grab sharing is all well and good when the people are motivated, trained and diligent. Socialism doesn't work, look at the former Soviet Union where, after the collapse, 99% of the States wealth found its way into 1% of the populations pockets.

But the fact is that MF should be a glaring example of what life would be like in BA, without union representation. For all those crew who went to work during the dispute, this ultimately will be your reward.

MF is a shining example of how just about every other airline in the world does it. The problem is that the BASSA ivory tower has been built so high for so long they can no longer see the ground through their rose tinted clouds. Those on MF do a great job for renumeration that they accepted and signed up for.

Are you prepared as decent people to allow this dictatorship in a democracy to continue? Is it right that you are coerced and bullied into accepting inferior pay and conditions, AFTER the company has turned the corner and is once again, as predicted, making substantial profits? Is it right that your democratically elected union representatives and your union, are trampled over by the mantra, ego and dogmatism of one person? Is it right that colleagues have been suspended and sacked just for supporting the dispute?


The final rabble rousing thetoric of the piece! Have BASSA even allowed their members to see, decide and vote on some of the suggestions? Have BASSA held a poll of members to see what, during negotiations, would be acceptable and what not? Have BASSA been open and fair about supporting ALL of the crew from the most junior and not been insitant on protecting the rights of a few who fell foul of the disciplinary process by their own purile actions? Have BASSA really tried everything to reach an acceptable solution, ones that were put to them not by BA but by their own Unite paymasters? Is it right that the rest of the company employees should have to stand by idly and watch the company acquiesce to a beligerent, bullying and intimidatory Union?

This is why VCC exist, this is why none of the rest of the company support the BASSA line. I don't have any axe to grind with the CC personally, I have always maintained they do an excellent job on the whole. I have flown with MF and they are, indeed, excellent. But then so are 99% of our normal crew as well. Whilst I fully recognise that SH crews are generally not as militant as the LH crews it always seems a shame that the majority get such a bad reputation by the sad, purile and nasty actions of the minority.

I really hope we are seeing the end game play out here and the demise of BASSA will lead to something good with proper, correct and sensible representation for the CC.

[Scapa]

This is the most far out post by BASSA so far, this dispute is far from over IMO.

However I don't think this is not a good thing for crew, its a bit like slipping down a steep hill, ballets and offers are an opportunity to dig heels in and resolve the problem.

Unfortunately My Holley and co are sliding down on their backs with their legs in the air, hurtling towards the cliff.

Oh and one more thing:-

No decent wages or conditions, just exploitation of unemployed people or others,

2500 duty hours, minimum estimated wage is 17k. Thats a MINIMUM of 6.80 for EVERY hour away from base on average, so thats every hour at work and asleep downroute! UK minimum wage is 5.93, and I don't think the people who pay that will pay you for being asleep! :ugh::ugh:

[GS-Alpha]

Scapa

I don't think you know what a duty hour is. It does not include time down-route. It is only the time that you are actually working. I agree that it still amounts to £6.80 per hour if you assume 2500 duty hours, but it does not include time in the hotel. If it did, then it would be a cushy job indeed.

If a cabin crew member pays £50 a month for their mobile telephone, but then finds the same deal for £20 a month, are they going to stick with their current provider or move to the new contract? Why should BA be forced to stay on the old contract? I agree that it is unfair to just cut a current employee's salary, but they are not doing this. Crew seem to be fearful that this will happen in the future due to the new contracts being so much more efficient. I have to agree that there is some threat of this happening, but this is precisely the reason why BASSA should have recognised that letting New Fleet in the door needs to be avoided at all costs, and they should have been biting BA's hand off to renegotiate the current contracts. Had they allowed BA enough, New Fleet would not be here.

If BA can get people to do the job to the standard that they require, for the salaries that they are offering, then that is the end of the discussion in my opinion. If they think they can earn more elsewhere, people will leave, or even not apply in the first place. It is known as market forces, and that is how the real world works.

[CC Forum Moderators]

As you all know, this thread is not for discussing the pilots´ remuneration.

To refresh certain posters' memory, their posting rights have been suspended for a few days.



----------------------

CC Forum Moderators

[Scapa]

My understanding of a duty hour as it applies to Mixed Fleet is any hour from check in to check out, this includes those asleep downroute.

Hence BA's estimation of renumeration is based on 2500 duty hours at 2.40 per hour.

If these 2500 duty hours were solely spent 'at work' I would imagine most crews would hit their 900 flying hours per year legal limit fairly quickly!

[Betty girl]

Scappa,

I take it you are not flying crew.

If we used your calculations on E/F some current cabin crew and pilots would be working in ecess of 100+ hours a week, which would be more like 4000-5000+ hours a year. On WW fleet it would be even higher.

So NO duty hours do not include the time we are in the hotel.

[essessdeedee]

The on-board performance is assessed by the SCCM every 120 days and, while I accept that the standard of the assessment varies from person to person, I suspect that the same will apply to MF.

Every 30 days on Mixed fleet. plus an annual review for every crewmember

I also believe that their £2.40 per hr is swipe in - to clear.

[GS-Alpha]

Scapa

2500 / 52weeks = 48hours per week. If your definition of duty hour is correct, that would mean a 10am report on Saturday to be back at base again at 10am on Monday, and have the rest of the week off thanks very much.

Something tells me BA are hoping for a little better efficiency than that.

£2.40 from swipe in to clear I agree with, as that is the way that Gatwick currently do it. My point though is that these hours are not duty hours, and so will be a lot more than 2500 per year.

[MIDLGW]

Flying hours = 900hrs
Duty hours = 2500hrs (MF). 2000hrs (Other fleets)

Duty hours are whilst on company time, whether flying, downroute or in the office.

MF will have the same pay system as LGW, where hourly pay is paid from check-in to clear, regardless if it's a one day 2 sector trip or longer where a nightstop or two is involved.

Edited to clarify: the 900/2000/2500 hrs numbers are the MAX per year, not a minimum.

[Betty girl]

MIDLGW,
You are not correct. Duty Hour are the hours you are on duty.

It does not include the time you are down route in the hotel.

If it did we would all be doing 5000 hours a year.

The hourly meal rate IS however paid for all the time between check in to check out and this dose include the time in a hotel but this is not DUTY HOURS. They are two different things.

Flying hours are from chocks to chocks.
Duty hours are from check-in to either check out time or 30 mins after chocks if you are down route.

[The Blu Riband]

To clarify

The hourly rate is paid from check in to check out for the whole trip.

eg. Check in at midday on tues to check out on midday thurs is 48 hours.

48 x 2.40 = 115.20 , so MF can earn up to 67.60 per day.

Strictly speaking, using CAA terminology, a duty day is from start of briefing to chocks on of last sector.

You are confusing different use of the term "duty" day.

[Cough]

Just for clarity, the pilots receive TAFB payment, that is Time Away From Base.

It starts at check in and ends when you check out after your last duty of the tour. It is this payment that I believe the MF crew will receive. Whether it is by the same name is another matter!

[Scapa]

I have reproduced the term from elsewhere which was not an official source so I agree the term 'Duty Hour' is confusing in how it is applied.

The point i was making was that the MF wage is not as poor as BASSA are making out.

BA are using 2500 hours swipe-in to swipe-out per year as a base for their estimate of 17k. Well GSAplha as you have quite rightly said thats not many per week (I would use a 48 weeks as a base for my calculations rather that 52 as people do have to have leave). I would fully expect MF crews to exceed 2500hrs and earn more.

If you worked out the hourly rate based solely on time from report to clear then it would be significantly higher than my previously posted one.

[Neptunus Rex]

The Blu Riband
Sorry mate, your sums are wrong. 115.20 ÷ 2 = 57.60, not 67.60

I trust you are not a pilot (just kidding.)

[Betty girl]

British Airways are kind enough to actually tell us our DUTY HOURS on our rosters.

As an example on my latest roster I did a two day, six sector trip.
I reported at 10.30 Local on Tuesday, did three sectors and then night stoped in a hotel, doing a further three sectors and then cleared at 20.15 local on Wednesday.

The total time I was away was 33 hours and 45 mins.
The duty hours I did, as worked out by BA were 20 hours 45 mins.
The time that was not included in the duty hours was the time I was effectively in the hotel.

It is these duty hours, that we can do a maximum of 2000 a year. Flying hours are 900. The hours that M/F can earn the 2.40 on is far more than 2500. It is for any hours working and dose include the time in a hotel.

Having said all that, on some days they may only be doing a quick there and back so might only get 8 hours of hourly pay but on other trips they may be away for a few nights.

[Cough]

This 2500 duty hours are a red herring. It is illegal according to the European Working Time Directive to work more than 2000 duty hours per year.

Please see ere (http://www.working-directive.co.uk/2000-aviation-directive.htm)

[Boondocker]

Colonel White:

I suspect that the winnowing of older contract crew will occur when BA start instituting performance management across the board. It is worth noting that large parts of the airline have been operating this for some time and it is one of the features of MF. It can only be a matter of time before it is rolled out across all of IFCE. I'm sure there will be those who will wish to resist it. They'll probably be the ones with most to lose. Anyone who is at the very least pulling their weight has nothing to fear from it. The backsliders and teflon shouldered ones (and they occur in all organisations) will need to shape up or ship out.ottergirl

The on-board performance is assessed by the SCCM every 120 days and, while I accept that the standard of the assessment varies from person to person, I suspect that the same will apply to MF. It seems that you have been misinformed on our Performance Management process.essessdeedee

Every 30 days on Mixed fleet. plus an annual review for every crewmemberI think the Colonel is talking, not about IFA's (inflight assessments) which by the way are to be completed every 90 days not 120 as BASSA claim (another instance of BA being unable to run their own business) but more about the performance management that should be happening on a continuous basis whilst you are at work including downroute.

Historically SCCMs, both CSDs and Pursers, have been poor at this preferring to 'overlook' even the most basic issues such as missing name badges etc. Indeed, extend this inability/unwillingness to manage such trivia to other areas e.g. standards of product delivery and customer service then you will not be far off understanding why BA is so inconsistent.

It is also one of the reasons Messrs Talling-Smith and Hassell decided to remove the upperdeck Purser whilst at the same time orchestrate the removal of another at some point in the future. They didn't believe the Purser role contributed anything onboard and that is why MF only has one supervisory grade.

Interestingly, the CM has performance related pay in this regard and will have to demonstrate an ability to manage their crew and follow up any performance isssues through the Crew Management System, not just complete an assessment form every 30 days.

On MF this will help to ensure that the non-performers are managed out of the company. As the Colonel's post implies, the sooner current SCCMs have to do the job they are paid to do and are themselves managed accordingly, the better.

[TorC]

Historically SCCMs, both CSDs and Pursers, have been poor at this preferring to 'overlook' even the most basic issues such as missing name badges etc. Indeed, extend this inability/unwillingness to manage such trivia to other areas e.g. standards of product delivery and customer service then you will not be far off understanding why BA is so inconsistent.

On the occassions that I've asked SCCMs about these kind of examples, the most often given reply is along the lines of "not wanting to cause an atmosphere", "not wanting to upset anyone", or "well, maybe it's just a one-off". In other words, total avoidance of responsibility. Especially sickening considering the salary they are on, and the job spec they supposedly understood and accepted when going for the role.

To be fair, I do also ask if the SCCM feels that they get the required support from the company if they feel a crew member is under-performing, and seemingly, most of them feel that they don't.

I take my IFAs seriously, but often feel that they are rendered useless by the "I'm really sorry, but I HAVE to say something negative" attitude of (I'm very sorry to say) most SCCMs. Where is the backbone, the leadership, the inspiration? If I'm doing something well, tell me. If I'm underperforming, tell me. But please, whatever the case, just tell me HONESTLY, record it on the IFA, and let it be dealt with.

To be honest, Performance Management as it currently seems to exist, just leaves me feeling that I'm in a vacuum, isolated from reality. The system seems to serve no purpose (with a few noteable exceptions) other than box ticking (ie: CSDs/PSRs need to complete X number of IFAs per month).

[TorC]

15th november 2010 - AMICUS UPDATE - Unite Meeting 16 Nov

A select group of senior reps from the joint negotiating committee will be meeting with Tony Woodley and Co tomorrow to discuss the way forwards.

It is clearly unacceptable for the same offer documentation to be rehashed and re-presented for acceptance, or rejection once again. As we have said in earlier updates, for a successful resolution to this dispute, the company would need to recommence discussions with the local representatives from both AMICUS and BASSA with headline items from both sides featuring equally and settled by mutual consent.

Definition: Negotiation - mutual discussion and arrangement of the terms of a transaction or agreement.

In view of the recent impositions which fly in the face of agreed and required negotiation principles, the company would need to now clearly demonstrate their genuine willingness to be “committed to beginning the process of restoring and improving relationships at all levels” as contained in their latest offer, under Working Together.

In order to restore the relationship and for us all to recognise the merit of that intent, as we understand it, the issues that BA now need to resolve are very simple: (i) return to the collectively agreed crewing levels (BA has spent far more on this dispute than removing crew was ever going to save);
(ii) acknowledgement that collective agreements will not be broken by BA and will only be varied by further negotiation and collective agreement;
(iii) reinstatement of all lost staff travel benefits to strikers (including accrued seniority/status tickets etc);
(iv) no victimisation (including full reinstatement of all those dismissed, and restoration to their former positions of all those otherwise penalised in this dispute – (the foregoing are now identified in the current offer documentation as “relevant employees” and “processed employees”);
(v) in view of how the dispute came about and how negotiations since have been conducted, a recognition that the AMICUS/BASSA are the elected representatives of the cabin crew with whom all future negotiations will be conducted (save where existing collective agreements or AMICUS/BASSA otherwise expressly agree in advance).

I'm starting to lose the will to live!

[Caribbean Boy]

So, anyone who was dismissed for victimising fellow cabin crew members should now be reinstated under a "No victimisation" agreement. The mind boggles.

[Colonel White]

Well, well, well. I thought that one elected reps on the basis that they were intelligent folk who one believed would be best able to represent the views of members t management. Yet here we have a bunch who clearly have taken off their thinking heads and replaced them with manky manglewurzels. This hapless bunch would lead the BASSA membership directly into a strike that would see them all sacked.

How on earth can they be so pig headed foolish ? Almost every single item in the list of demands is an exact copy of the rationale behind the previous dispute or has during the course of it been cited as a reason for its continuation.

(i) return to the collectively agreed crewing levels (BA has spent far more on this dispute than removing crew was ever going to save); Let me get this clear. a high court and then an appeal court have both said that BA acted fairly. But BASSA want to turn the clock back.
BA made a profit because it had started to make inroads on its cost base, part of which is attributable to lower cabin crew manning levels, but BASSA want the clock turned back
Does BASSA also want these selfsame crewing levels imposed on LGW flights ? Sorry, I can't hear that response. It was a deafening silence

(ii) acknowledgement that collective agreements will not be broken by BA and will only be varied by further negotiation and collective agreement;

Um... so you not only want the clock turned back but you also want those wicked management types at BA to go stand in the naughty corner until they are truly sorry and promise never to do it again...yeah right...
(iii) reinstatement of all lost staff travel benefits to strikers (including accrued seniority/status tickets etc);

Gadzooks, wasn't this what was in the current offer ?? So why did you reject it ???

iv) no victimisation (including full reinstatement of all those dismissed, and restoration to their former positions of all those otherwise penalised in this dispute – (the foregoing are now identified in the current offer documentation as “relevant employees” and “processed employees”);

Duncan wants his job back and the right to rule - even though he and the other staff sacked were done for gross misconduct. BA should say sorry and of course let them back. Bullying and intimidation is fine if you are a union rep oh and the normal rules don't apply to them - they are 'special'.

(v) in view of how the dispute came about and how negotiations since have been conducted, a recognition that the AMICUS/BASSA are the elected representatives of the cabin crew with whom all future negotiations will be conducted (save where existing collective agreements or AMICUS/BASSA otherwise expressly agree in advance).


This one really takes the biscuit. So the two branches are saying that BA should not deal with Unite and that Unite should have no further say in any negotiations regardng cabin crew. The sheer arrogance is breathtaking. I can see Unite turning round and saying 'Yeah baby, you're on you're own now' Unite would love to dispense with BASSA and CC89. This bunch of half baked fools have cost them millions over the past year- far more than they have contributed in membership dues. Unite have been the people who have steered them clear of making complete asses of themselves and walking into huge litigation costs. It has saved the collective bacon of the members by ensuring that at least a legitimate strike ballot was held. Without Unite, the strikers could well have been sacked on the spot. Meanwhile BA would probably dearly love to only have to deal with CC89 and BASSA. Within 6 months both branches would be bankrupt because of their stupidity.

I seriously wish all BASSA members the best of luck. With this witless, brainless ship of fools leading them they have at last earned my sympathy. Never in the field of human endeavour have so many been led so abysmally by so few. This really is the point at which the BASSA membership need to rid themselves of the current bunch and get some decent representation. There are only two sane alternatives, to vote against strike action or to hand in one's cards and would the last person please turn the lights out. BASSA and CC89 are now an irrelevance.

[GayGourmet]

(i) return to the collectively agreed crewing levels (BA has spent far more on this dispute than removing crew was ever going to save);


Does this mean they want a return to having 16 on the 747 and 13 on the 777?

After all, before this debacle, they kept bleating on about the No 16 being removed as a temporary measure post 9-11 - so that's clearly what they think was collectively agreed - they claim never to have agreed to 15 on a jumbo as a permanent change.

Sheesh, this is getting hysterically funny.

I also like the bit about a "select group of senior reps" going to meet Woodley.

Anyone know exactly who they are?

GG

[Wirbelsturm]

As much as BASSA/AMICUS want to blame BA for intransigence it would seem that the only ones who really want to prolong this ridiculous dispute is BASSA/AMICUS themselves.

A return to the status quo was/is an never will be on the cards.

Interesting that they post a definition of negotiation, perhaps they should read it themselves.

[Wirbelsturm]

What BASSA/AMICUS fail to understand (well, one of the many things they fail to understand) is that the rest of the BA employees who have understood the situation, have rationlised their working routines and pay and have moved with the times, will NOT allow the company to allow BASSA/AMICUS to return to the 'old' days.

Whilst the BASSA militants like to portray themselves as a 'majority' I think they would find themselves very quickly in a big minority if they try and push a return to the status quo on BA.

Personally I would support the company 110% in the fight against BASSA. I feel that the CC deserve and require good, intelligent and proactive representation. Sadly BASSA/AMICUS do not provide such a service.

BA will be in trouble if they cave in to such ridiculous demands and I am certain that they, as a company, are well aware of the depth of feeling within those employees who have supported the company throughout.

[Juan Tugoh]

It may be that the dismissed have just looked at the law and seen that the only way they will now get their jobs back is if they are given them by the company.

There are stringent time limits for bringing claims in employment tribunals. These vary dependent on the type of claim being brought. For some claims, the time limit is three months. Employment tribunals do have the power to extend these time limits but only exercise this power in exceptional circumstances.

Full details here:

Employment Tribunals (http://www.contactlaw.co.uk/employment-tribunals.html)

[Sonorguy]

Even had they got the ET applications in on time I doubt it would have made any difference. ETs can't force re-instatement, only compensate if they feel the dismissal is unfair.

[Juan Tugoh]

ET's can make reinstatement orders which cannot be enforced, however if made will increase the compensation payment made when the employer does not honour the reinstatement order. The extra compensation ranges from a minimum of 26 weeks upto a maximum of 52 weeks pay.

[Wirbelsturm]

no victimisation (including full reinstatement of all those dismissed, and restoration to their former positions of all those otherwise penalised in this dispute – (the foregoing are now identified in the current offer documentation as “relevant employees” and “processed employees”);

Perhaps they should consider the fact that maybe we as operating crew, both FC and CC, don't want these individuals working beside us. As they have displayed such amazing acts of misjudgement and idiocy I do not feel that I would want any of them working on my aircraft serving passengers or flight crew.

Re-instate them to what? Constant off loads as they have demonstrated that they are not deemed suitable characters to continue to work in the role to which they have been employed.

[Neptunus Rex]

Wirbelsturm
What BASSA/AMICUS fail to understandI think that they understand very well. The problem is their 'Hidden Agendae," which are not disclosed to the masses.

cf: Epsilon

One who belongs to the lowest caste in Aldous Huxley's book Brave New World. Known for inferior intelligence, yet indispensibility. After death, they play a crucial role. In short, a useful idiot.

[Sonorguy]

Exactly what I wrote, they can't enforce re-instatement and I've never known them to make this order precisely because it's un-enforceable and bridges have been well and truly burnt by that point anyway.

[dolly bird]

TorC

I completley agree with you, I too take IFA's very seriously and often follow up with the crew members CCM. However, I have often been met with indifference or the CCM has not replied to my e-mails or voicemail so it can be extremely frustrating.

Many crew cannot or will not accept developmental feedback, whether it's regarding their behaviour or uniform standards. I've also been accussed of bullying and harassment by a crew member over a uniform issue.

It's very frustrating that there is at times too much inconsistancy within IFCE both on and off the aircraft, onboard it's usually because a few crew adopt the attitude of 'it's my way or else':=

[Ice&Slice]

It may be a shining example but not for the Cabin Crew who have to work on pretty awful salaries and a lousy contract. Fine if you are 21years and living at home. And please, do not say that accepting the job is their choice - it is not - MF are taking advantage of Cabin Crew. They will leave in their droves when other airlines start advertising and they have had their taste of flying... doen't sould llike good business to me.

[Flap62]

And please, do not say that accepting the job is their choice - it is not

Can you please explain this statement? If it is not their choice to accept the job offer then who is forcing them to do it?

[yellowdog]

It may be a shining example but not for the Cabin Crew who have to work on pretty awful salaries and a lousy contract. Fine if you are 21years and living at home. And please, do not say that accepting the job is their choice - it is not - MF are taking advantage of Cabin Crew. They will leave in their droves when other airlines start advertising and they have had their taste of flying... doen't sould llike good business to me.

Don't see many people leaving LGW....it's not disimilar to the MF contract when it comes down to it.

We come in do our job, have fun, give great service and just generally get on with it. And you would be shocked just how much I earn as a Cabin Manager, I'm sure CSMs will be very equal, looking at their package.

In fact posters on here seem to have forgotten that we exist - it isn't just legacy fleets vs MF:rolleyes:

When I read, "it's been a pleasure to fly with MF" it hurts. It's been a pleasure to fly with us too, especially since we started doing mixed flying. It's what I hear every trip from the B777 flightdeck.

Please remember us!

[blue____]

Ice and slice,

you have said that once other airlines start recruiting, crew on MF will leave.

Other airlines ARE recruiting. Flybe, easy, ryan etc. Why would someone go there since they pay less? Plus most of the MF crew are ex crew coming from those or similar airlines.

One thing we should all remember, is that those crew are happy to have a PERMANENT job, in an environment that they are not bullied, harassed or discriminated, and they can come and do their trips having fun and not spend their rest in the bunks crying.

I don't know which contract you are on, but people who have been around, know that BA is the best place to be, regardless of which contract they have. The only thing that makes people's life hard in BA are the militants.

Now if you are referring to middle eastern airlines, well this option is applicable to certain people only, and as the climate in those airlines is similar to the climate they have experienced when they were doing their temp contracts, many people would avoid that.

Mixed fleet is the "happy fleet" at the moment and for as long as this will be the case, I don't think anyone will go anywhere soon. I know that maybe not everyone is happy on MF, but I can only say that from MY experience, most of the CC are or at least look happy. What will happen in a year, is something we will all have to wait and see.

Yellow dog, you are absolutely right. I am very often on a LGW flight on staff travel and I have always admired your standards. And my only question when chatting with the crew was "why every time I am on a LGW flight, the crew seem genuinely happy?" Now that I have joined MF, I think I have found the answer!

Thanks Yellow dog and keep your standards high!

[Wirbelsturm]

They will leave in their droves when other airlines start advertising and they have had their taste of flying... doen't sould llike good business to me.

And go where exactly?

Ironically the business model points to the low time/financial cost to train CC and the lack of necessity to retain crew on a long term basis except those crew the company wish to retain as FTC or the CSM based upon their performance management. This, in the long term, significantly reduces the cost overheads associated with incremental payscales and the attached NI and pension contributions. The company is actively looking at an increased turn around of crew which will be to the benefit of the customer in the long run as fresh, enthusiastic crew work the aircraft instead of an aircraft full of older, disguntled crew who can't get the same pay for any other job anywhere else.

As I have already said previously the MF crews have been excellent so far (early days but the outlook seems very positive for the future) but then so are the vast majority of our usual 'legacy' crews. The biggest difference from my point of view is that, in disruption, I don't have to pussy foot around the BASSA 'laminated card/Rabid Reps' and can concentrate on getting our paying customers to their destination. Hopefully the days of the CC being on more restrictive working practices than the FC are well and truly over. 48hours local diversion rest anyone?

Does that make better business sense to you?

[spin_doctor]

They will leave in their droves when other airlines start advertising and they have had their taste of flying... doen't sould llike good business to me.

Firstly we'll see if this actually happens or is just another BASSA exercise in wish fulfilment. I remember being told the only people applying to MF would be "skanks" and useless incompetents who couldn't get a job anywhere else. Now that we've seen them and they're actually very good, the next line of attack is "they'll all run off to the mythical better contracts freely available elsewhere ASAP". Again, we'll see.

Having said that I accept that what BA are trying to do is move the job of cabin crew away from being a 25-30 year career and into the area of short term (2-3 year) employment. With relatively low training costs and a large pool of applicants, this is, on the contrary, very good business.

[GayGourmet]

BA union opts not to recommend offer to cabin crew

From Reuters

The union representing cabin crew at British Airways said on Tuesday that the management's last offer in a year-long dispute could not be recommended to members.

"I am therefore contacting the company with a view to reopening discussions to seek to achieve a recommendable settlement to be put to cabin crew," Tony Woodley, Unite joint-general secretary, said in a statement.

A planned ballot of staff on the offer was suspended last week because a number of cabin crew representatives felt they could not recommend it, a union spokeswoman told Reuters.

And from the Press Association

Tony Woodley, Unite's joint leader said: "I met today with BA cabin crew representatives. It was unanimously agreed that the last offer tabled by British Airways management in the current dispute could not be recommended to the members".

Reuters (http://www.reuters.com/article/idUSLAL00455920101116)

Press Association (http://www.google.com/hostednews/ukpress/article/ALeqM5hYUdncvptI2vVT6SgbVCncJww7RQ?docId=N010295128992072221 4A)

[stormin norman]

By not letting the membership vote on the offer Yes or no, the bassa leadership have surely distanced themselves from the members they have been elected to serve.

[Colonel White]

Stormin' From the outside one would think that not allowing a vote on the offer would put the BASSA executive and reps in deep do-do with the membership. But we are not talking about rational people here. We are talking about either died-in-the-wool militants who would march over a cliff if Duncan asked them or souls who will meekly accept everything the union says because they must know best, after all, that's what reps do isn't it ?. I would bet that the clear sighted members left way back. In some respects it helps both Unite and BASSA not to hold a ballot right now. If they did they would be forced to reveal the true membership figures. Might be a touch embarassing. In times of industrial unrest, the norm is for union membership to rise. During this dispute Unite have seen their membership figures plummet. At the last count they had lost over 10% of the figure they had in Feb this year.

[TOM100]

You have to laugh at how hypocritical they are.......they have the audacity to put a definition of 'Negotiation' in their statement, which they clearly fail to understand themselves. 'Mutual discussion' - didn't they on the famous show of hands mandate no further negotiation.........

What are these people doing.........WW needs to end this whole sorry saga as it is just going round in circles and backwards.

[fruitbat]

Oh dear, the two Union branches fall out...AGAIN!!

16th November 2010 - AMICUS UPDATE - Report Back (Unite Meeting)


In a surprise turn of events today AMICUS have been branded terrorists by Unite and Tony Woodley in particular. The BASSA Branch Committee have now twice verbally ejected us from the negotiating committee because, apparently, our views are “too radical”, “too direct” and “not subtle enough”. They have “lost patience” with us.

The day started with a message from BASSA saying that our update of last evening (15th November 2010) was not helpful in its content. Despite a request for reconsideration, the day has ended in much the same way.
We have yet to establish why, though we accept that we have sought to address the matter of imposition, and that is where we differ from the various communications the BASSA Branch Secretary has posted.
It now appears that our friend's personal blog has somehow become the joint committee's final position – arrived at without discussion or debate. That in itself is not an issue, however, everybody and both branches are entitled to input and opinion - and in the face of that, without further debate or discussion, we, the AMICUS “branch of Unite” have, by personal communication from the BASSA Branch Secretary, been excommunicated from the BASSA negotiating team. In no uncertain terms, we have been told there will be no "joint" business from today.

So why?
We have no idea - but have the feeling this is about more than just words.
We offered to do a joint communication, but this too was declined. We hope that decision will be reconsidered by the committee as a whole, but we cannot condone a less than honest and truthful position.
We are deeply saddened and disappointed that this has happened. We have offered a line of further communication on the subject, but this has also been rejected.

The outgoing joint general secretary of Unite also today branded us as “terrorists”.
Why you ask? Because firstly we would not support the farcical ‘recommendation’. Having previously shared our intentions with our BASSA colleagues (who at that time disagreed with our position), we bit the bullet and were honest with you and Unite about this. In our humble opinion, a recommendation of the current BA offer and its Litigation appendix is morally indefensible. Unite chose to ignore our protestations about the offer, so we were left with no choice but to formally reject it.

It has subsequently and reluctantly been agreed by all parties that the consultative ballot is now dead in the water. It is our understanding, as ALL parties had previously AGREED (and is indeed promised in Unites intended letter of recommendation) we would now go straight to an industrial action ballot. This is therefore what AMICUS proposed today. We did suggest one proviso - that being, we should use the ballot period to determine if British Airways were minded to engage your reps from both branches on our issues, including the primary reason we took industrial action in the first place: IMPOSITION AND A UNILATERAL DISREGARD FOR OUR AGREEMENTS.
It is clearly unacceptable for the same offer documentation to be rehashed and re-presented for acceptance, or rejection once again. As we have said in earlier updates, for a successful resolution to this dispute, the company would need to recommence discussions with the local representatives from both AMICUS and BASSA with headline items from both sides featuring equally and settled by mutual consent.
Needless to say our point of view was again ignored. It then became once again apparent that it is not about the logic of our argument, but the weight of the numbers we represent. On basis that only 40 AMICUS members claimed strike pay, versus 7000 BASSA members, our democratic right to an opinion and our ability to represent you is extinguished. We can’t help but feel that this sounds a little like life in British Airways. Long live democracy…?

It was stated that we, the AMICUS section committee do not represent the membership, even though in an unprecedented move we took a valid and necessary stand to protect your rights which ultimately reflected the mood of the joint membership. It was not comfortable for us to do this alone, especially as we have stood shoulder to shoulder with our BASSA colleagues thus far. But we wholeheartedly believe it was the right thing to do. We have supported industrial action for the first time in our history. With clear consciences, we took the brave step of rejecting the ridiculous offer that was being pushed on you.

So where do we stand?

Our BASSA colleagues would like Tony Woodley to go back to British Airways and propose that if the points in the BASSA Branch Secretary’s latest blog are met then the deal can be salvaged as it stands. 3 of the points relate to the full reinstatement of staff travel, binding ACAS arbitration for all disciplinaries arising out of the dispute (see our earlier update on this) , and the removal of threats if a new facilities (reps) is not agreed within 8 weeks. It is also means that all the toxic elements of the deal which ultimately benefit the company will remain in place, no doubt including the litigation section, bar the stipulations in the blog regarding those off sick during the dispute and those who had pay deducted. In short, all other aspects of litigation are surrendered, including our appeal to the Supreme Court on the contractual issues of our collective agreement – the original basis of our dispute, imposition. Unite declined to comment upon the progress or intention to support any such appeal.

We then suggested, at the very least, we should put a time scale on Unites “return to talks”, and the reason for that limitation as an undertaking is because British Airways have a notorious track record for delaying. We also pointed out that we believed it is unacceptable to be constantly running to British Airways trying to resolve the dispute that British Airways initiated in its unreasonable approach and behaviour. This is even more difficult to stomach as British Airways are now in profit in spite of our industrial action, the ash cloud and numerous hefty fines being imposed for malpractice and unlawful conduct. Needless to say were any of the required "permanent structural cost savings" actually necessary?

So where do we go now?

We believe it is appropriate to offer you, the membership, the opportunity to tell us if we are not representing your best interests. Call it a vote of confidence if you will. If you don't want us to maintain the position we have taken, or indeed if you wish us to adopt another approach please communicate with us via our website. The alternative is that we withdraw from the debate altogether to allow our BASSA colleagues to determine our collective futures should you wish it.

Our previous communications did not reveal this unfortunate, untimely and quite suprising dischord as we hope that it would resolve itself quickly. However, it seems we are not being heard, and the true reasons for this are still as yet unknown.

We will in the meantime continue to represent you with humility, integrity and above all naked honesty. We will continue give you our collective opinion; we feel you deserve the direction a lot of you have been asking for and require – in fact you pay for it, and we will strive to do this subject to being involved in the proceedings.


The Amicus cabin crew section/branch
Of Unite the Union.

[JUAN TRIPP]

Betty and the hats

Before I go into my main topic, I would like to say I TOTALLY agree with Bettygirl on this subject. I wrote to Bill Francis recently regarding this and made the following points.

1) One of the biggest if not THE biggest complaint in
this company is a lack of consistantcy. Here we are
proactively going out of our way to make a divide between
the current fleet and the new one. What will the customers
think when a small number of crew are seen walking through
T5 wearing a hat and yet both the ground staff and current
crew dont. The same can be said about boarding the a/c.

2) I find it strange that we allow our current staff both
on the ground and in the air to have ALL sorts of uniform
standards. Would it not have been better to sort out our
own house first and then move onto the new fleet. I'm
sure there are many of our current female crew who would
like to wear a hat but are denied.

3) Finally has anyone actually thought about how this
will no doubt provoke situations happening in the current
climate. I'm sure if things are said for example to a
mixed fleet crew member, it will quite rightly be
reported, but do we need MORE problems at this difficult
time?. I was on Mid fleet in the 90's and can tell you
there were situations happening regularly from the other
fleets that we as SCCM's had to deal with.


Personally its being perceived by many non strikers in
particular that its a bit of a kick in the teeth to alienate the
crews so much straight away. I know its the beginning of
something very differant, but it seems to a lot of us who
support BA in the present crisis, that we are now second
class crew. I'm SURE thats not the intention but thats the perception.


Now back to my main point.

I have to be honest and say that I'm feeling pretty low at the moment - probably the same as many crew. The problem as I see it, is that this could go on for years IMO. Only the other day I spoke to one militant CSD who TOTALLY went along with what DH says. They just spouted the same old rhetoric/myths/lies/crap and subjective nonsence that Mr. Tomorite does. In fact he was even worse - I know thats difficult to believe but its true. At the end of our 'convesation', I said the inevitable. ' So you HATE WW, HATE the LT, HATE Bill Francis, HATE the VCC's, HATE the temps, HATE the pilots, HATE any managers in BA, HATE the scabs, HATE corporate greed, ( these were his words), so do you not think its time to leave and find something else to do. His reply was, ' You have to be joking, I'm going to milk this company for everything I can get, do as little as I can and go on for as long as I can' !!!!!!!!!!!

Then there was the conversation I overheard from a well known purser on EF who had a VCC on his crew, and was going to make it VERY difficult for them in the briefing room. Lo and behold they were offloaded just minutes later.

So here is the problem. There are many many Miss M's around and there is nothing it seems we can do to get rid of them. I personally have had enough. In the new year, I'm not messing about with these people any more. I have a good reputation ( apparently) so I'm not phased by these b******s ( sorry Mod) any more. The main crew that want to mess about with me with their yellow pens and crap will be no more. Don't get me wrong, I will do this properly and professionally. I have always trodden on egg shells when it comes to IFA's, worried about this and that, and when I have dealt with problems, have been sadly but understandably let down by some CC managers. But I feel the tide is turning and I for one will move up a gear or two.


Finally the reason I'm waiting a few weeks is that I'm hoping that TW gives Bassa their strike. Then hopefully WW will push the nuclear button, because as far as I'm concerned Bassa need to be totally eradicated from this earth once and for all.

I apologise if this is all a bit 'subjective' but quite simply I've had it with these 'co-workers' once and for all. I feel this is 'car crash TV', and I'm the fireman called to sort out the mess. I have been on the personal end of Bassa's abuse for years, and I'm hoping that 2011 will move us ALL on from this mess.

RANT OVER AND OUT!

[Tiramisu]

JUAN TRIPP,
You and me both!
I too, have had enough of these childish tantrum throwing unprofessional strikers who sadly, give us all a bad name. Today, one of the worse days so far in terms of disruption, CRC was heaving with these macho types who think they own BA.

I saw Ottergirl today and had to point out to a group of them who were at it with their usual intimidatory tactics.

I have to add that regardless of hats, Mixed Fleet crew do look fantastic with their impeccable uniform standards. Crew on current fleets could learn a thing or two about looking smart and having pride in their appearance.

[JUAN TRIPP]

I have to add that regardless of hats, Mixed Fleet crew do look fantastic with their impeccable uniform standards. Crew on current fleets could learn a thing or two about looking smart and having pride in their appearance

yes have to totally agree with you on that one. Only this morning I witnessed an array of differant winter coats comin into CRC!!

[MrBunker]

Juan Tripp, Tiramisu,

Don't be disheartened! Juan, I absolutely get where you're coming from WRT the hats but, as you'll know well enough, good, experienced crew (and especially SCCMs) can rise above that and provide (and have) a great experience. At the risk of being flippant, if nothing else, it means that the coiffure can always remain immaculate!

As for the rest, can I just wholeheartedly exhort you to do as you say you will in the new year. In my perception, one of the biggest problems for those who backed BA is that they have, on more than the odd occasion, tended to be a little reticent in the face of the yellow pen wavers. You, quite rightly, recognise that you're employed by BA and are not in the CRC, or the aeroplane, as an extension of Duncan Holley's will. I genuinely look forward to more people with the mentality you and Tiramisu display and the firm and correct management of those who think their moral outrage usurps their obligation to abide by the professional requirements of their contract.

Happily, I'm hearing of more and more like you who have finally decided that enough is enough.

Stick with it and know that there's plenty of support out there for you, both moral and professional.

MrB

[BlueUpGood]

As for the rest, can I just wholeheartedly exhort you to do as you say you will in the new year. In my perception, one of the biggest problems for those who backed BA is that they have, on more than the odd occasion, tended to be a little reticent in the face of the yellow pen wavers. You, quite rightly, recognise that you're employed by BA and are not in the CRC, or the aeroplane, as an extension of Duncan Holley's will. I genuinely look forward to more people with the mentality you and Tiramisu display and the firm and correct management of those who think their moral outrage usurps their obligation to abide by the professional requirements of their contract.

Hallelujah!!!

Good on you guys for saying enough is enough.. heartening news for swathes of BA staff.. I hope this attitude grows and grows.
:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:D:

[BASSAwitch]

How lovely to once again publicly see the disunity (as described in the judgement of Holland J) between CC89 and BASSA here. (http://uniteba.com/LATESTNEWSUPDATES.html) It comes only a day after CC89 wrote this;

A select group of senior reps from the joint negotiating committee will be meeting with Tony Woodley and Co tomorrow to discuss the way forwards.

And the next day we have this;

we, the AMICUS “branch of Unite” have, by personal communication from the BASSA Branch Secretary, been excommunicated from the BASSA negotiating team. In no uncertain terms, we have been told there will be no "joint" business from today.

So no more "joint negotiating committee". :=

That said they make the valid point that Dunc's blog now seems to be the negotiating strategy for the whole (striking) cabin crew workforce. Oh dear. :E

How we laughed :p

On a serious note however, I believe this is a very significant moment in this dispute. "Dysfunctional union" has been aptly demonstrated in the past 2 weeks. First a consultative ballot that was going to be endorsed wasn't- by either committee. Then said ballot was "suspended" and now CC89 and BASSA fall out on the whim of the BASSA branch sec.

I believe the latest BA offer has done exactly what it was designed to do. Split the membership, split the support but most importantly split the 2 branches.

Game over.

[Chigley]

So we've now come full circle. After reading the above it seems we are back to were the imposition started - not talking and excluding each other from meetings. Wake up members, your union is taking you for complete fools! This behaviour is what started this farce with the so called 'no negotiation from BA' although your reps from both sides couldn't even sit in a room together.

So much for staying united. BASSA clearly can't stand the fact that Amicus took the lead with rejecting the proposal and left DH and LM with egg on their face.

You really couldn't make it up? What a joke.

KTF, looks like it will be an XXXXXmas to remember.

[dolly bird]

Juan Tripp,

Thank you for your post. as a SCCM I have had enough of the XXXX, yellow pen and the blinded devotion towards DH by the BASSA Militants. I cannot understand why, if they hate BA and all it stands for so much, that they are still here. The sense of their percieved entitlement is unbelievable!

[vctenderness]

Most interesting thing is what will BA do now?

Are the DH 'tablets of stone' having been passed down from the mountain and handed to Moses Woodley going to be slightly altered and give the Unite leadership a way out of this mess?

When a previous TGWU/BASSA Branch Secretary was sacked a negotiation went on between BA and the TGWU Gen Sec. and a package of money and reinstatement of his staff travel was arranged allowing the dispute to be ended. is this what will happen again?

BA will never re-employ DH but it could pay him a wad of money and give him his retirement entitlements to ST and move on.

Food for thought.

[strikemaster82]

Maybe this whole thing was only about one man and if BA bought him off he'd fade away...

...wouldn't fancy his chances of getting an upgrade though!

[jetset lady]

I do know that this is not going to be popular and I'm not sure how to word it without causing offence but feel it has to be said.

We are constantly being told how bad it is up at LHR. Strikers claiming they are being intimidated by non strikers/the company and non strikers claiming they are being intimidated by strikers. Accusations of bully and harrasment are being thrown about like confetti. And then I see comments such as ....

Today, one of the worse days so far in terms of disruption, CRC was heaving with these macho types who think they own BA.

I saw Ottergirl today and had to point out to a group of them who were at it with their usual intimidatory tactics.
(my bold)

I'm sorry Tiramisu, but if you had to point the group out, they can't have been that intimidating. Why point them out? Why not just ignore them? It seems to me that the two groups are actually feeding off each other and keeping the tension artificially high. Could it possibly be that BOTH sides are a little oversensitive at the moment and possibly seeing things that aren't there on some occasions?

I know. I'm LGW. What could I possibly know? Well, I can say that during SEP at Cranebank recently, I was chatting to crew from both sides of the dispute and had no problems at all despite making it abundantly clear that I did not strike. I do appreciate that it was just one day out of the year but if it's really that bad, surely I would have seen something? Or felt the tension?

I don't deny that there are some nasty people about, probably on both sides of the fence. But I do think they are in the minority. And I do think that SOME people, again from both sides of the fence, are actually looking for anything that can make them feel offended or intimidated. (That's not aimed at you, Tiramisu.) And so the whole circus rumbles on and on and on, fueled as much by perceived "slights" as it is by concerns for the future.

Tin hat on...

[Tiramisu]

I'm sorry Tiramisu, but if you had to point the group out, they can't have been that intimidating. Why point them out? Why not just ignore them? It seems to me that the two groups are actually feeding off each other and keeping the tension artificially high. Could it possibly be that BOTH sides are a little oversensitive at the moment and possibly seeing things that aren't there on some occasions?

jetset lady,
Far from it. Being over sensitive is something I'm not as I've had to develop a skin thicker than most having been on the receiving end of some pretty nasty stuff during this dispute. No one 'sees and looks' for things that are not there.
Most of us get on with job and serve our customers in the way we've always done, that is what we are there for at the end of the day and that is my priority.
In doing that you also have to motivate and inspire your crew to work with you to deliver excellent customer service.

However, if malicious untruths are being spread about you which turn the people you work with against you, than the job gets a little harder.

I'm not going into detail about bullying and harassment here, there have been endless examples and definition of what it entails. It was simply an observation on my part at the time and couldn't help pointing it out, that's all. As it happens, I did ignore them.
The attitude I have is now one of a zero tolerance to any childish juvenile behaviour from anyone regardless of who they are, whichever side of the fence they are.

Just to add that as an in charge crew member, I recognise excellence from anyone who exhibits such behaviour and performance, and have completed more 'bravos' in the last few months than I have for years.

[BlueUpGood]

When a previous TGWU/BASSA Branch Secretary was sacked a negotiation went on between BA and the TGWU Gen Sec. and a package of money and reinstatement of his staff travel was arranged allowing the dispute to be ended. is this what will happen again?

BA will never re-employ DH but it could pay him a wad of money and give him his retirement entitlements to ST and move on.

Not on this Chief Exec's watch, nor Keith Williams' either!

[HiFlyer14]

In simple terms which hopefully even the most entranched die hard union member will understand...having operated a flight this week with my crew being new fleet....without hesitation I can say that atmosphere/enthusiasm/professionalism of the whole new fleet crew was exemplary.

ALL highly experienced and motivated ex VS/BMI

A refreshing change and looking forward to BUD and the rest:


Flap80

The majority of cabin crew who post on this cabin crew thread ;) are non-striking and hardworking. We have years of experience between us which I know includes EF, WW, MidFleet, Concorde, Recruitment & Selection, Training and VIP crew (with hats!) amongst other things. In addition, many of us are ex-nurses, ex-police, ex-ambulance service, ex-groundstaff, and other equally valid professions.

I would be interested to know what examples you can give then, on a shorthaul flight, to show that the "atmosphere/enthusiasm/professionalism" of Mixed Fleet differs to that that we give onboard to compel you to post that on here?

I would also like to say that I find it deeply concerning that it appears you have already segrated the two fleets by viewing it as "refreshing" (without giving any evidence of why) and are "looking forward" to your next flight with MF. If professional pilots, who I have the utmost respect for, start to "dread" the "legacy fleets" and "look forward" to the Mixed Fleet flights then we should all be very worried indeed about the state of CRM within our company.

What on earth has happened to us all? :uhoh:

[GS-Alpha]

If professional pilots, who I have the utmost respect for, start to "dread" the "legacy fleets" and "look forward" to the Mixed Fleet flights then we should all be very worried indeedThen be worried.

[jetset lady]

We have years of experience between us which I know includes EF, WW, MidFleet, Concorde, Recruitment & Selection, Training and VIP crew (with hats!) amongst other things.

I guess LGW (with or without hats) comes under "amongst other things". :rolleyes:

I would be interested to know what examples you can give then, on a shorthaul flight, to show that the "atmosphere/enthusiasm/professionalism" of Mixed Fleet differs to that that we give onboard to compel you to post that on here?

So is the atmosphere amongst "legacy" crew good? Or is it intimidating? You can't have it both ways.

[HiFlyer14]

JetsetLady

Perhaps I didn't make it clear that I was referring to fleets, not bases so certainly didn't mean to leave LGW out. I could have used the outdated terminology of longhaul and shorthaul but then that would show my age! :{

I don't recall that I have ever said anything about the atmosphere onboard being anything other than the usual professional high standard. In fact, if I haven't already said it, then I will say that since the strike standards have improved and everybody, striking or non, seems to have raised their game.:ok:

[essessdeedee]

I will say that since the strike standards have improved and everybody, striking or non, seems to have raised their game

Certainly not uniform standards from what is evident in the crc:suspect:

btw you could have used SHAG - Short Haul At Gatwick:E:eek:

[PC767]

I know essessdeedee.

But I did read a piece in a recent flight ops news, (or whatever it is called), by the chief pilot, asking flight crew to at least try and meet basic standards. Ties, lanyards, bags and hats etc.

:)

[ottergirl]

Juan Tripp

So here is the problem. There are many many Miss M's around and there is nothing it seems we can do to get rid of them. I personally have had enough. In the new year, I'm not messing about with these people any more. I have a good reputation ( apparently) so I'm not phased by these b******s ( sorry Mod) any more. The main crew that want to mess about with me with their yellow pens and crap will be no more. Don't get me wrong, I will do this properly and professionally. I have always trodden on egg shells when it comes to IFA's, worried about this and that, and when I have dealt with problems, have been sadly but understandably let down by some CC managers. But I feel the tide is turning and I for one will move up a gear or two.


I reached the same point as you a couple of weeks ago and I have not been messing around either. I have had a complaint about me already but I think that goes with the territory. To be fair, there haven't been too many times that I have needed to give any feedback and, in the last couple of days my crews have been outstanding both in terms of uniform and attitude. Yesterday I was looking at the Eurofleet standby crew who piled out of CRC to watch the McFly concert and had to admit they all looked pretty good - certainly McFly thought so! Lets manage the few bad apples so that they realise the only way forward is to raise their game!

One thing that is not helping is the Uniform stores refusal/inability to replace worn out items. It's much easier to look smart when you have a brand new uniform than once it is a few months old and is shiny and saggy. Telling a crew member that his shirt is grey and him saying that he's tried and can't get any replacements is most frustrating.

[Flap 80]

HI flyer 14
Yes very refreshing to fly with MF...positive..optimistic...professional. Of course the majority of the existing Eurofleet crew deserve similar epithets but the fact remains a significant number of disruptive individuals lurk amongst them which makes for challenging CRM and a less than ideal atmosphere on board and down route.
Anyone who has flown with MF crew on the PSA/LED/PRG sectors will say the same and will have driven home with renewed enthusiasm for the future.

I imagine the majority of MF crew joiners are highly experienced and to accept a job with lower remuneration than that which they left , to me , indicates a optimistic vision for their future promotion prospects and the success of MF.

Unless you have flown charter on a 230 seat A321/757 and seen the environment in which the CC work and demands upon them ...it is very easy to see why they relish the Airbus/777 mixed flying and have joined BA.

[Sporran]

Hi Flyer 14,

I have not had the pleasure of flying with the new MF crews yet - and am not rostered to fly with any at present. EVERYTHING that I have heard from flight crew colleagues has been positive about them.

The vast majority of EF crews are very good, lots are excellent, BUT ............. there is a sizeable number who are pretty awful. Like bad apples they spread their 'disease' amongst the good crews.

Pilots are NOT saying that existing EF crews are bad / not as good / less professional (delete as rqd) as MF crews, but whereas there are a significant minority on EF (and even more so on WW) who are pretty awful - the introduction of new people on MF means that there is none of the nasty poisonous element present.

I too have been much more 'up front' recently in my dealings with the more unsavoury elements in the cabin crew community.

I WILL NOT ALLOW THE NASTY MISERABLE MINORITY TO SPREAD POISON ON MY WATCH!!!!!!!

I believe strongly that those who care about the future of OUR airline also need to ensure that the nasty miserable minority are not allowed to spoil work and life for the hard-working on-side majority.

[shon7]

Same story at some outfits the other side of the pond. CC keep chanting, "i hate this place, i hate this place, we've been screwed, no one appreciates us wah wah wah."

Then ask them how long have you been here - 35 years (and those are the younger ones!)

I would love to see BASSA (or any other similar union) pool their resources and try to buy and run an airline. Would make for a great reality show!

[Flap 80]

Sporran

Well said and glad you identified with my comments and recognised that i am not criticising the solid majority of EF Members.It is highly refreshing to be able to leave T5 with optimism and a deep feeling that the day has been enjoyable.
Not saying that the EF days are all bad, far from it, but pleeeese how does one cultivale CRM as Hi flyer 14 suggests when EF do one out, standover, one back...eg ..LIS,ATH,HEL...etc, and maybe the perceived enthusiasm for MF is because they enthusiastically want to see places and not just complete the hotel check in process with the immortal words "see you at pick up"

[jetset lady]

btw you could have used SHAG - Short Haul At Gatwick

Hmm. I think I like it, essessdeedee! It's going to go perfectly with our new LGW union, the British Airways Gatwick Stewards/Stewardesses....:E

One thing that is not helping is the Uniform stores refusal/inability to replace worn out items. It's much easier to look smart when you have a brand new uniform than once it is a few months old and is shiny and saggy. Telling a crew member that his shirt is grey and him saying that he's tried and can't get any replacements is most frustrating.

That's actually a very valid point and is a major problem at both of the Uniform Stores and not just with replacement uniform. I had one crew member that had a uniform so big, she looked like she'd been in her Mum's dressing up box. When I asked her about it, she said that the lady in Uniform Stores insisted she have a uniform that size as flying makes you bloated. Not that much, it doesn't! (She was a size 8, the uniform was a size 14!) It was only when I stood the crew member in front of the managers, with her agreement, and insisted that they sent an email to the stores that she managed to get a uniform that fitted properly.

Yes, we do have issues with uniform standards, (although it doesn't help when BA's own brand new MH training video features a girl who's hair style breaks every rule in the book), but this is something that really needs sorting urgently, particularly as already mentioned, when it comes to replacement uniform. There's only so many times you can bleach a shirt before it falls apart. I'm starting to think the staff there work on some sort of reverse commision!

Finally, good to hear that others are also cracking down on behaviour too. Let's just hope that BA back us up on it, something that historically, they haven't always been very good at. The boast from a now ex crew member of three charges of gross misconduct bears that out!

[Caribbean Boy]

. LATEST NEWS UPDATES (http://uniteba.com/LATESTNEWSUPDATES.html)

[SlideBustle]

I would just like to add a few things.

First off good for those of you on here (especially SCCMs) who are saying they don't stand for any Bullying&Harassment. The atmosphere in the CRC and the tension from some crew can be VERY intimidating, as Tiramisu etc have said. It is very sad how it has come to this, really it is! :{ Feelings and emotions are high, people from BOTH sides have very strong opinions - fair enough, but unfortunately some delight in creating an awful atmosphere. I hope we can repair this as a community soon! My feeling is, whatever happens with future strikes/no strikes/offers we get - is it will take a long time!

Secondly, I know there are some ex-temps and crew who are now on MF and I say good luck to you if you are starting and hope you are enjoying it if you have started. You do look smart in the CRC.

One thing though, is there are a mixture of strikers/no-strikers on here, however for ANYONE on Eurofleet/Worldwide (and I suppose LGW too but to alot of people they lump LGW in with MF!) it is not helpful to see comments from pilots who say they prefer MF - bring it on, they are much better than us, they are much better at their jobs etc etc.... We are ALL crew no! And I would like to think the majority of EF/WW crew are professional and do a good job - it is certainly my experience anyway. Yes, we have SOME crew who look scruffy, yes we have some crew who are complacent, and don't care but you will always get that!!! ALL airlines have that problem!

Also the tranfer of work from Mixed Fleet is a worry for most of us on current fleets. So I do find it rich that many people on here ''find it reasonable to want crew to work for only 2-3 years'' or ''£1100 a month is acceptable as other airlines pay it'' (my friends at some other airlines get more than Mixed Fleet and they are Main Crew!!) or our salaries are ''overinflated''. I'm sure you guys wouldn't like it if you had your job berated all the time and the wages you earn. So just a bit of respect is being asked from us EF/WW crew. Rather than being called overpaid and being treated as burdens as we want a career rather than a gap year job!

Hopefully the tension will lift soon. I am always professional as I always think most crew are, lest CRM be affected (although CRM is not all fluffy and being nice and hugging each other - BUT a barrier to good CRM is ineffective communication - hostile working relationships, bullying and harassment does restrict free communication somewhat)

[Dingbaticus]

I believe all would like tensions lifted.

Unfortunately the involvement of other departments has made that harder to achieve.

I am very mindful this is a very public forum but I would say that achieveing reconciliation requires BOTH sides working to build bridges.

Until a settlement is achieved, I don't feel I can be successful in my attempts to heal the rifts.

I hear tales of some who chose to work displaying luggage tags with four ticks in diamante - they want a badge of 'honour' too!

The madness has to end!

I am with Ottergirl and Jetty Betty on uniform standards but I am terrified of enforcing them, as I personally feel I could face b&h charges - instead of being empowered to manage, I feel vulnerable to false accusations.

We all know how important CRM is, it is time to reclaim it.

[moo]

Attempts to lay blame at the doors of other departments for the failings of a totally dysfunctional 'union' is quite frankly laughable.

From the uniteba website:

17th November 2010 - AMICUS UPDATE - The Facts



The AMICUS/CC89 Committee would like you to be aware a few supportable and provable facts in the face of smooth talk and diversionary personal slights.



1. The BASSA Branch Chair was not present at yesterday’s meeting, or the last 3 negotiating committee meetings.



2. The AMICUS/CC89 senior reps were denied access to the meeting yesterday on the instruction of the BASSA Branch Secretary. If they attended – he would not attend.



3. The reaction you have witnessed to the AMICUS/CC89 article of 16th November 2010 is a direct result of the BASSA Committees nervousness about support (on their own forum) for AMICUS/CC89 and our views, supported by the majority of their membership. We put this down to human nature – but you still deserve the truth.



4. ALL AMICUS/CC89 reps have been barred from the BASSA Forum and committee emails.



5. The BASSA branch secretary has now twice ejected CC89 from the committee. The last time was yesterday, as a result of our article of 15th November 2010 – when apparently, without debate, his own blog was the FINAL position of us all. Democracy? What’s your view?



6. The BASSA branch committee ALL wished to accept the BA deal offered on 15th October, bar a handful of the newest reps who had to lecture the committee about their “principles” at a recent All Reps meeting in London.



7. Remember, these points are all supportable – many in print.



8. The BASSA Branch Committee allowed Unite to control and write their members communication on the subject of the offer. The review the offer itself content and the litigation review was controlled by Unite – the people who wanted us to recommend it. This was a watered down version of the truth – and you deserve more. We disagreed with their approach. You deserve the TRUTH together with clear indication as to the impact those items would have on your present and future career.



9. The BASSA Branch Committee wanted to continue with the recommendation of the offer – until we published our withdrawal and rejected the offer – and you responded with your approval of that position. Their hand was forced and they had to respond by following suit.



10. It was at this point AMICUS/CC89 published their 3 main articles (starting with the Formal Rejection on 3rd November . FRONT PAGE HOME PAGE (http://www.UniteBA.com) ) but maintained a face of joint harmony between the committees within those articles, even though we had been `ousted’ and castigated for our view. Whilst we are committed to telling you the TRUTH, we felt that the BASSA committee ought to be given some breathing space, cut some `slack’ since their track record should and might eventually make them see sense. Written communications between us confirm this. The very next BASSA statement piggy-backed the extent of that courtesy because they KNEW they would be criticised by you if they did not. Their member’s forum posts helped them `see sense’ – but the praise for AMICUS was clearly a little too much for the BASSA committee to stomach.



11. The BASSA Chair has now clearly stated online that the BASSA Committee “did not agree with” the view of the AMICUS/CC89 committee. We would like to suggest that you re-read the last 3 AMICUS/CC89 articles on this website so see exactly what it is that BASSA do not agree with. (. FRONT PAGE HOME PAGE (http://www.UniteBA.com))



12. The BASSA Committee DO NOT AGREE with the following statement (amongst all others since 3rd November 2010):



In order to restore the relationship [between the trade unions and BA] and for us all to recognise the merit of that intent, as we understand it, the issues that BA now need to resolve are very simple:



(i) return to the collectively agreed crewing levels (BA has spent far more on this dispute than removing crew was ever going to save);



(ii) acknowledgement that collective agreements will not be broken by BA and will only be varied by further negotiation and collective agreement;



(iii) reinstatement of all lost staff travel benefits to strikers (including accrued seniority/status tickets etc);



(iv) no victimisation (including full reinstatement of all those dismissed, and restoration to their former positions of all those otherwise penalised in this dispute – (the foregoing are now identified in the current offer documentation as “relevant employees” and “processed employees”);



(v) in view of how the dispute came about and how negotiations since have been conducted, a recognition that the AMICUS/BASSA are the elected representatives of the cabin crew with whom all future negotiations will be conducted (save where existing collective agreements or AMICUS/BASSA otherwise expressly agree in advance).



13. AMICUS/CC89 have been offered a merger with the BASSA committee. We do not feel it is the right time for this to be considered, since we do not believe that the views of the BASSA committee are entirely representative of the whole joint membership. This has become clear in the last 3-4 weeks.



14. Any rep who sought to join BASSA did so under the impression that they would need 2 years membership in order to be considered a rep if there was to be a merger in the future.



15. We have been told by Unite, in no uncertain terms, that any rep who thinks we can address the matter of imposition now is on “a different planet”.



16. A member of the AMICUS/CC89 Committee has been told directly by Lenny McCluskey and the BASSA Branch Secretary to `wind his neck in’.



17. The BASSA position, as of yesterday – in the meeting with the JGS Tony Woodley was that the 4 points outlined in the BASSA Branch Secretary’s email were indeed the only 4 points required to end this dispute. The BASSA forum posts have provided a wishful get out clause, when hoping for the best i.e. that they were only just a starting point. Read the blog again. This is/was not the case.



18. Sometimes, it is human nature for individuals to think their past experience in different circumstances and different times is faultless and above reproach. We all admit that BA is a different animal these days and one which nobody from the TU side has ever experienced before. It is not important to be right, or to know best. It’s important to do the right thing for the membership and listen to their voice. According to the forum posts, we did this.



19. It is very easy to dismiss ones short comings by turning the issue in to a `personal attack’ as the BASSA Branch Chair has done today, rather than focusing on the actual issues. AMICUS refuse to make any of this personal. We will simply give you supportable facts and truth – and sometimes, that is uncomfortable to hear.



20. TW did indeed call an AMICUS/CC89 rep a “terrorist” and this was not challenged by any member of the BASSA Committee.



21. AMICUS/CC89 have requested an IA ballot to commence and whilst this is underway, talks can recommence to address all of the points in (12) above. This was denied. AMICUS/CC89 requested a time limit for the intended `return to talks’. None was given.



22. All costs of this dispute are carried by Unite.



23. AMICUS/CC89 will live through and weather any opportunistic personal attacks designed to undermine us and our position – but it will not change unless you wish it. The BASSA Branch Committee had lost touch with your views; do not want AMICUS/CC89 to be the ones who haven’t, and now for them, it’s become personal. Fibs, or half-truths have short legs.

We implore the BASSA Committee to lay down their swords against us, listen to the members, stop the personal and diversionary slights and get down to business - together.



24. AMICUS/CC89 will continue to tell the TRUTH no matter what is thrown at us. YOU deserve it, WE deserve it, and the BASSA Branch Committee deserves it.



25. This is no trivial storm in a tea cup – it is an indication of who or what is leading the BASSA Branch Committee. We sincerely hope they humble themselves and see the error of their ways, for all of our sakes.

[Hand Solo]

What an interesting response from Amicus. Frankly I don't know what to make of it! I was told the BASSA Chair launched a fairly personal attack on the Amicus reps today, essentially accusing them of not being committed because none of their reps had been sacked. Perhaps in her view refusing to turn up for work or attempting to redirect BAs web traffic towards hard core gay porn are the true measures of commitment? On the other hand, according to Amicus, BASSA were willing to accept BAs offer, the CC89 militants (what a peculiar concept!) wouldn't accede, and DH told them to wind their necks in! What a volte face! I truly pity our crew now, with this shambles of a union what hope do they have?

[Juan Tugoh]

I have a great respect for our CC, whether they are legacy crew or LGW or MF, they are all my colleagues and it is usually a joy to work with them. However, if you take the time to read the passenger forums one thing that has been a repeated moan has been the variability of the service given. As MF has only just started, it is essentially legacy crew that have provided this variable service. So what are they moaning about? Sullen crew, crew that seem to find serving passengers a pain or they rush the service and then become invisible - either rushing to the bunks or hiding in the galleys. That said they also laud the excellent service they get, they praise the crew where they have gone above and beyond.

The point is that while many crew are excellent and work very hard and are a shining example of the best of BA. Sadly many are the opposite and this ranges from main crew all the way up to CSDs. Interestingly I suspect that those who post on here and other none union forums are in the engaged, exemplary group purely on the basis that they care enough to defend BA and their "weaker" colleagues. Stating that "Yes, we have SOME crew who look scruffy, yes we have some crew who are complacent, and don't care but you will always get that!!! ALL airlines have that problem!" is simply an admission of defeat.

Having worked in 3 other airlines before BA I can also tell you that not ALL airlines have the same problems that BA do. The reason is quite simple; BA have for years created an environment where crew come to BA and settle for life - once in the salary and T&Cs soon prevent people from going anywhere else. I flew with a girl that had trained as a teacher, less than 18 months out of college she was earning more as EF maincrew that her friends that had gone on to teach. She was, incidently, excellent. However, those that for any reason become disaffected cannot leave because they have neither the skills nor the gumption to get another job where they can earn as much and have such an easy life.

The problem that BA has faced for years is this variability of service and unless the crew themselves deal with this issue then it will not ever be dealt with. It is heartening to see CSDs stating that they have had enough and were getting tough on yellow pens, uniform standards etc but will these same CSDs still allow (insist) bunk rest on a daylight JFK? or will they insist that the crew have their legal break and then are back on duty, visible in the cabin, perhaps doing a juice and water round? Will their IFAs genuinely reflect that someone was lazy and sullen and risk potential dislike or will they gloss over the issues for the sake of CRM in its most hideously distorted image?

As I said at the start, most of the crew are good, but there is a significant number of crew that are lazy, sullen and view passengers as a damn nuisance. The entitled attitude of "I don't work down the back," has to stop, just because seniority allows you to always work in F does not mean you are better than the public that can only afford Traveller seats. Those are that attitudes that need stamping out.

At the moment MF is bringing different attitudes and work ethics to our customers, uncorrupted by the sullen and workshy. That is why some pilots look forward to working with them - that and novelty. Novelty will wear off but if the same attitude still prevails in a year, then it will be legacy crew that have failed to "up their game", the ball is in your court.


For those crew at LGW, I apologise if this is LHR centric, I seldom fly from LGW and not since the introduction of SFLGW. I cannot comment either way about the service and attitudes there, except that I hear good things about LGW from my friends flying on business.

[Chigley]

I have to say that I really admire this stance they are taking against DH. They dare to challenge him where as the BASSA membership just hang on his every word. However, surely any members still left in the union can now see that this infighting and squabbling is doing them no favours, in fact it was this behaviour that resulted in the imposition in the first place.

BASSA have lied and misled it's membership, lets hope this is the wake up call they need to move forward leaving this union behind. This has never been about the members for BASSA/Amicus/Unite, they have never had their best interests at heart. This is solely about certain people's ego's, saving face and looking good. Sadly, it has all backfired on them, whilst they have been playing god with their members livelihoods. I genuinely feel for those members who have loyally followed this shambles.

[spin_doctor]

I would like to think the majority of EF/WW crew are professional and do a good job

The problem is not so much one of being unprofessional or failing to do their job, it's an attitude. Some (and yes it is only some) crew seem to actively hate having to come in to work, complain about having to do any more that 1 sector a day, never do anything downroute apart from order overpriced cr@p on room service and are at best barely civil - at worst downright bl00dy rude.

I'm sorry if you don't agree with me, but that is my experience in BA from 10 years or shorthaul. Much like the customer feedback my biggest impression is one of complete variability between really nice, decent normal crew and bitter, cynical sullen crew.

The reason MF has been getting so much praise is not that they are better at their job than others, just that they are much less variable in their interactions. So far, at least, they are all enthusiastic and pleasant.

[HiFlyer14]

This dispute was originally about imposition - of one crew member off an aircraft. That's it. The majority of us didn't support the union. I personally voted no last year, left the union and crossed the picket line, several times.

We were lauded for doing so. Everyone spoke about how fantastic *the crew who worked were, how immaculate our uniform standards are and customer compliments and satisfaction improved enormously. Ww and bf wondered around crc saying they would have to find a way to recognise crew who came to work. To date, they haven't.

Then MF started. Suddenly there seems to be an all out war on current crew. Sloppy service, sloppy uniform standards, lazy, sullen blah blah blah. Judging from the posts on here I detect that the enthusiasm for MF is more about their enthusiasm for going out down route, than their professionalism in the cabin.

Well if we are that bad, why didn't ww address it all a year ago? Why didn't he introduce a uniform check in the briefing and performance targets?*

The 80 percent of us who came to work have relied on our flight crew colleagues enormously throughout this dispute. I said months ago that they were an absolute rock of support to us. I did a flight last week - all strikers plus me plus two vcc crew. How can we focus on uniform standards and more importantly the customer when we are having to play peacemaker and diplomat extradoinaire amongst the crew? I looked then and will continue to do so to my captain and fo for support and also laughter or else I would go mad.

So please stop this all out war on all things cabin crew. We are not legacy crew- we are your colleagues who respect value and need your support no more than ever. We don't want recognition for Backing BA - we want to be valued and respected for the job we do.
*
And I don't call you Nigel or flight deck so please don't call me legacy.
I have absolutely no idea who she is.

[yellowdog]

The problem is not so much one of being unprofessional or failing to do their job, it's an attitude. Some (and yes it is only some) crew seem to actively hate having to come in to work, complain about having to do any more that 1 sector a day, never do anything downroute apart from order overpriced cr@p on room service and are at best barely civil - at worst downright bl00dy rude.

Just out of interest, spin_doctor, what percentage of crew "have an attitude"; how many times have you flown with those crew members; have they been the same every time you've met them; what about the converse percentage?

never do anything downroute apart from order overpriced cr@p on room service

And this is a problem because.......

The reason MF has been getting so much praise is not that they are better at their job than others, just that they are much less variable in their interactions.

and you can tell this after how many flights with MF crews?

So far, at least, they are all enthusiastic and pleasant.

and after 3 weeks would you expect any difference.....come back after 15 years and if they are still the same then you can make that point.

[Betty girl]

Hyflyer,
I agree totally with you.

I have spoken with many Flight Crew recently and told them how upsetting some of the posts on pprune are.

The reply I have got from ALL of them is that, it is a certain type of pilot that posts on pprune, particularly the cabin crew thread and to take NO notice because you get good crew and bad crew and most pilots will judge you on how YOU perform.

I come on here, to read things that I would otherwise have no access to, as I am no longer in the union and I am badly affected when I read all this stuff about how great MF is and how wonderful it is not to be working with us but after speaking with my flight crew colleagues I now just skip over these unhelpful posts.

Mixed Fleet has only been going for just over a week and they are bound to be extremely keen to please. I know in my heart that I give a great service to our customers and that I have a great working and social relationship with all the pilots that I work with and that's what matters. The fact that some of them want to come on here and tar us all with the same brush is sad but I am not going to let it bother me anymore because they are a very small minority out of thousands of great flight crew who DO enjoy working with us. So I recommend you do the same, just skip over them.

As for all this bad feeling and bullying, I am personally not seeing it. I do see the odd yellow pen and at first it did upset me I but have found that, despite having a yellow pen, they have been very good cabin crew and have been lovely to the passengers and professional in their job, so I have just decided to ignore the pens and accept that although I don't agree with their views, they have a right to a different view to me and I just let my crews get on with giving good customer service. Which, in my experience, is what the vast majority of BA cabin crew do despite us being demonised on here.

[Wirbelsturm]

The reply I have got from ALL of them is that, it is a certain type of pilot that posts on PPRuNe, particularly the cabin crew thread and to take NO notice because you get good crew and bad crew and most pilots will judge you on how YOU perform.



Hmmm, a bit of a sweeping generalisation there Betty Girl.

I think you will find that many who post on here, myself included, have always supported the plight of the CC. As I have stated before it is not the CC who have, individually, acted in such an atrocious manner, it has been the actions of your so called representitives and a tiny minority of the more militant crew. I would suggest that many who do post on Pprune probably wouldn't tell you they do anyway.

MF are the company deciding to leave BASSA behind and are thus of current interest. Yes they are keen and everything is shiny and new but that begs the question as to how long before the veneer wears off. All of the crew, bar one or two small exceptions, on EF are generally superb and I thoroughly enjot flying and socialising with them.

Wirbelsturm, one of the ALL :E

[Betty girl]

Wilbelstrum,
Thanks for your nice comments about E/F.

When I said ALL pilots, I was referring to all the pilots that I had talked to about pprune and that amounts to about 6 sets of two, so about twelve. I obviously don't know how all pilots feel but just how the ones I have talked to feel and they all said, that the views, that I was upset about, were the views of a minority and all of them recommended that I ignore them. Which I will.

It was their view about the type of person that posts on here not mine. Being a poster myself, I think you get all sorts posting, some thoughtful and some not.

Thanks for yours though.

[ottergirl]

spin doctor
never do anything downroute apart from order overpriced cr@p on room service and are at best barely civil
I get the impression that you (and some of the other pilot posters on here) take it quite personally when your crew don't want to socialise with you so I thought I'd give you a different way to look at it.

On a 3 sector day we will have said hello and goodbye to about 400 people, we will have been talking to each other for 9 hours and already have the small talk and life stories out of the way, some of us will also have had numerous adhoc conversations with our customers about their life stories as well. In fact part of our job description is 'chat'. After all that chat, what we crave sometimes is a bit of peace and quiet. The thought of coming out to a noisy or smoky bar, that we have been to a dozen times, with your good selves and making more small talk is sometimes (not always) just too much. Add in the fact that many shorthaul crew are mums with young families and perhaps the lure of the quiet hotel room and a bit of room service is not so strange.

I do understand that your work day is different, that a lot of your conversations in the Flight deck are routine and procedure driven and so you can't wait to relax with a beer and a bit of idle chit chat. I don't imagine you want to get the Xbox out and start playing Flight Simulator games which would be the closest equivalent. There's no malice intended when we don't come out, no deliberately being boring, no hermit tendencies; it's all in the type of day you've had.

[dave747436]

Thank you, Ottergirl, this particular pilot hadn't appreciated that!

It is a shame, though.

On a recent SEP management 'chat' a room full of pilots wanted to know why those CC that showed such loyalty to BA, at such a personal cost, where not being recognised & rewarded.

The reply from a very (very) senior Flt Ops manager was that BA would dearly love to reward these crew, but singling them out for reward was made impossible by legal & IR constraints.

Be assured that your flight deck colleagues, and the rest of non-BASSA BA, greatly appreciate what you did, though.

[Betty girl]

Thanks Dave,

That is really good to know. I personally don't expect to be rewarded but just recently I have felt a bit unappreciated by my employer.

I'm sure that they do still appreciate us, it's just that with everyone going on about MF and how special they are and how awful all the rest of us are it gets a bit depressing.

I nearly always go out with our flight crew and I have just had two great trips when all the crew went out, pilots, non strikers and strikers and we all had a lovely time.

Thanks for your nice post.

[Slickster]

On a 3 sector day we will have said hello and goodbye to about 400 people, we will have been talking to each other for 9 hours and already have the small talk and life stories out of the way, some of us will also have had numerous adhoc conversations with our customers about their life stories as well. In fact part of our job description is 'chat'. After all that chat, what we crave sometimes is a bit of peace and quiet. The thought of coming out to a noisy or smoky bar, that we have been to a dozen times, with your good selves and making more small talk is sometimes (not always) just too much. Add in the fact that many shorthaul crew are mums with young families and perhaps the lure of the quiet hotel room and a bit of room service is not so stra

Ottergirl,

I fully appreciate your stance. Indeed, being a bit of a "thinker" on occasions, I came to exactly the same conclusion. Some CC want nothing more than to get away from the public, and have some peace and quiet, having dealt with them all day, whilst us pilots have been "locked up" all day, and like to get out. Having done the CC role (albeit briefly) I fully appreciate the need to escape sometimes, and find some "downtime". And of course, for some it is "me time" away from a hectic home life.

I don't take it personally, and indeed was always grateful to hoover up all the free beer vouchers going begging in JFK! :)

[JUAN TRIPP]

Ottergirl - what a great post. Its so true, and also I often feel with some 'cabin crew' too, I simply cant be asked to go out. Its just the way it goes. Really fancied a pizza the other night in Milan, and went out as all the crew, both pilots and cabin, were lovely.

However have to disagree on one point

Add in the fact that many shorthaul crew are mums with young families and perhaps the lure of the quiet hotel room and a bit of room service is not so strange.

Us dads too!!! Sorry couldn't resist that:)

[VSOP Fables]

The reply from a very (very) senior Flt Ops manager was that BA would dearly love to reward these crew, but singling them out for reward was made impossible by legal & IR constraints.

Dave 747346 I thoroughly applaud this! As former CC I know what good service is when I am pax, and from helping out during strikes I know how hard it was for some CC to come in to work. Let's hope BA find a way.

[spin_doctor]

OK, maybe not the best post I ever wrote.

The point I was trying to make was that the reason MF are getting a lot of positive press at the mo is purely because they are keen, fresh and enthusiastic. That's all. Some people were getting upset about the perceived anti crew statements and starting to think that they were being run down. It's not about how well you do the job, or even, for most crew, how you behave. It's just that spending you time at work with a miserable, bitter colleague is no-ones idea of a good time.

I don't take it personally when crew don't want to go out. I sometimes don't want to go out myself. What I take personally is asking the question to a group of 4 crew in the hotel lobby who (literally) cannot be @rsed to even reply. Not an exaggeration for dramatic effect, just a reality with some crew. I did make the point in the original post that is was only some, but that seems to have got a bit missed.

Anyway having tried (and probably failed) to explain myself I'll be off to the irish bar for a kebab before watching the free porn, or whatever stereotype behaviour I'm supposed to display.

ps. some of the pilots I fly with are cynical, bitter gits too, I just didn't mention that earlier as this is supposed to be a crew thread.

[From Tunbridge Wells]

On the subject of not going out - with me it's never been personal against going out with flight crew - just sometimes long haul is physically so knackering and depending on what time I got up, how long the flight is and how demanding the flight is, sometimes the lure of room service, a "heavenly" bed and a film is just too much :O

[flapsforty]

spin_doctor, regarding your observation "this is ... a crew thread".

For clarity, here on PPRuNe we tend to use the definitions commonly used in most airlines around the world.

Cockpit crew = pilots
Cabin crew = flight attendants


Together they form a crew:

definition 1: the personnel working aboard a ship or an airplane.
definition 2: a group of people working together to perform a joint function.

[Smell the Coffee]

For those not currently on MF (the vast majority), the best way to prove your worth is to continue to act professionally onboard, with regards to safety, security and all of the interactions with your company colleagues and of course, the customers.

When at work, focus on your own performance and that of the team, and let MF look after themselves. :ok:

[JUAN TRIPP]

Just a few facts about the last couple of days. I am in the US having bought a 700 pound tkt to get home for my part time, the meeting was called at short notice, so I could not attend, but was in contact with the BASSA Committee. Duncan is going to Manchester to give a lecture – at the request of the academics - at Salford University tomorrow about our dispute so we can’t always jump in to reply upon demand or be near a computer 24/7.

Tony Woodley and Len McCluskey are 100% behind the BASSA Branch Committee and the decisions taken by The BASSA Committee. I gather Len feels misrepresented by a post on the forum and he has at lunch-time left a message for that person to contact him again.
This whole situation has been brought about by a member of the ex Amicus section spitting their dummy out, because at yesterdays meeting at Unite no one agreed with him. There were less than 40 very brave Amicus members that went on strike and will no doubt go on strike again. We salute them but….

The BASSA Committee are responsible over 7000 that took that brave decision. For your added information, most of the Amicus reps resigned and worked during the strike, make what you want from that. There is very limited experience on the Amicus side. Also as I said before Amicus no longer exist they are all Unite now Some more facts, not one of the Amicus reps that stayed for the dispute have been sacked or suspended and as far as I am aware not one of their members have been disciplined either. So it is all very well shouting the bit about what you stand for when you have nothing to lose or are only responsible for 40 odd strikers. Please be wary of brave rhetoric.

The BASSA committee put out a statement to inform you that we are going back to the company with the four points in Duncan’s blog to see how serious the company are about resolving this dispute. If the company do not respond then we go to ballot simple as that. The 4 points are not to settle the dispute but to test where we stand with BA ie do they want peace or do they want to continue the fight. We are prepared for both options.
This is a trivial storm in a tea cup initiated by someone not prepared to go about things in a sensible calm manner, it is not that important in the greater scheme of things. Please save your anger and energy for the fight ahead and trust BASSA we have not and will not let you down.

Whether you love or hate Unite they are supporting us and are with us for the long haul. We must stick by them for the length of the dispute…. to do otherwise would be absolute suicide. Ripping them apart serves no purpose. The time for recriminations will be afterwards and remember we will soon have a new broom.

The BASSA reps are all flying and dealing with disciplinaries they cannot drop everything to come on here everytime this individual has a hissy fit.
Please calm down , I am very calm with where we are at and so are the rest of the committee and reps.
When decisions have to be made you will all be involved.

I will also talk to Duncan about having a meeting for the members, however this will only happen if we can get derostered.

and

Amicus have not been excluded from any of the meetings, nor will they be, they are very welcome, so that clears that up. As I have said before Amicus and the TGWU have joined to become UNITE. BASSA have always been a Branch of TGWU and continue to be a Branch of UNITE. This in effect means that Amicus no longer exist. BASSA are self funding the ex AMICUS section were not. BASSA have spent 100.000.00 on this dispute Amicus have not spent anything as they are not self funding. The ex Amicus reps have been invited to join BASSA and so far two reps have submitted their applications to do so.
I agree with you they should not have gone public on something that is still being discussed. As I said before this was a temper tantrum. I feel a lack of experience here also.
Not the first and certainly not the last disagreement but that is what happens in highly tense talks.
TW did use the word terrorism in an analogy I am told, not in the context that was stated in the statement from Amicus.
Crew want me to be honest and the posts are honest what can I say. Now that I am off the jet I will be online, the other reps are just to busy with day to day business.
Anyone else coming on here to answer questions would just not be appropriate.
It was also stated to Tony that the reps be at any future meetings that are held with the company and he is in agreement with that. To think that he went into any meetings previously cold is not what happened we were either in the building or in communication with him at all times.
Everyone needs to keep calm and KTF.


So LM bought a £700 ticket home? Why? thought they had their ST back now?


But the biggest mystery is our Dunc giving, at THEIR request, a 'lecture to academics at Salford Uni. Whaaaaaaat!! Whats the lecture on? Perhaps its ' Tomato growing for beginners in the south of England' ( Sorry Mod) But seriously and I truly mean this, I thought I'd heard it all, but this is just laughable. I don't have the time, but perhaps someone could find a link as to what exactly this was really about. I'm truly speechless.

As for the rest of it, I find its once agian 'car crash TV' stuff. As I have mentioned before my only hope for this ALL to totally finish, is for Bassa to implode. Well you just might make my dreams come true at this rate.

[Hotel Mode]

Manchester Industrial Relations Society - Meetings (http://www.business.salford.ac.uk/mirs/meetings/index.html)

Thursday 18 November 2010, 6pm

The British Airways Dispute: The Strikers’ Perspective
Duncan Holley

British Airways Stewards and Stewardesses Association (BASSA) branch secretary, Unite the union



Teensy point, but its not the strikers perspective. You had to be employed by BA at the time to be a striker.

Gutted I missed it!

[Betty girl]

'' most of the Amicus reps resigned and worked during the strike''


Very interesting and that explains a lot.

I just could not understand, the moderate reps that I knew, suddenly becoming so militant and now it's clear that most of them left Amicus and Unite and just a few militant ones are now there.

[ottergirl]

That explains a lot for me too Bettygirl. Clearly this journey that BV decided to take Amicus on was as unwelcome among the reps as it was to most of its members. In my resignation letter I told them that if they had let the Amicus members have a separate ballot the answer would have been a resounding NO! Clearly if only 40 took IA and those not even reps then I was right and we should never have been taken into this dispute at all. On past form, Amicus should have hit the negotiating room and come out with an agreement which we could have signed up for and BASSA would have had to live with (rather like 1997). Poorly done Amicus!!

[Betty girl]

Totally agree ottagirl.

Just cannot understand how the current Amicus reps can think they have a mandate to say and do what they have just done, if only 40 people including themselves went on strike.

So pleased I left them. Can't think that they can actually have many members now anyway.

[ottergirl]

Seems total membership is in the tens of people! PCCC get ready to steal!:) The message on the website is inviting those few members to offer a vote of confidence, hope they haven't put too much time aside for the counting!

[Betty girl]

I think it is clear that Unite have cut them adrift now and two of the remaining reps have jumped ship already and joined Bassa, so I think that's the end of Amicus and that is truly a shame.

I don't agree with what they have done during this dispute but since Amicus and Bassa both became part of Unite, Amicus had lost it's voice more or less. It is now obvious that most of the more moderate reps jumped ship along time ago as I expect their more moderate views were not being listened to by the Bassa majority. Now the ones left have actually ended up causing Bassa no end of trouble!!

[Colonel White]

Under Unite's constitution it can force the merger of branches. There was a comment in the CC89 recent posts on the UniteBA site that suggested that this had been mentioned in recent meetings. I think that it may have been pushed through. It makes life a bit easier for Unite in that there is only one branch to try and deal with - BASSA. The meberhip don't have a say in this at all. It just has to be agreed at Regional or Excutive council level. Net result is likely to be that the remaining CC89 members jump ship, but that is no skin off Tony Woodley's nose.

I do get the impression that BASSA are expecting Len McCluskey to romp home in the Gen Sec race and then to support them. They really haven't got a clue about the legal aspects of strikes, poor dears. They want Duncan's List to be the start point for negotiations. Anyone with a happ'orth of common sense can see that BA will not blindly accept these items. BASSA expect that if BA don't come up with a deal that accommodates them, that Unite will allow them a strike ballot. But they haven't exhausted all avenues, so the union would be in deep brown smelly stuff if they allowed the branch to go for a strike ballot. Why ? Because they failed to put the previous offer to the membership. Then there is the small issue of the reason for any further strikes. Looking at Lizanne's diatribe it seems she is thinking of using the same reasons as deployed last time around. Unite won't wear that as they don't want to get saddled with yet more expensive litigation and loss of income. Frankly I am amazed that someone who sits on the Unite Executive committee can come up with such a load of tosh.

It's going to get very messy. If BASSA do go for further strike action, expect the BA legal team's kid gloves to come off.

[MIDLGW]

In regards to the big song and dance about MF. My view is this: if you're confident that you provide the best service you can (regardless of fleet), you socialise when you can/want, you use CRM to its purpose (the real purpose, not the huggy fluffy version) and you show respect to everyone you work with/meet on your travels etc - why get so upset by the few pilots on here going on about how marvellous MF is?

Yes, we all know that MF crew are fresh, keen, eager to please and not forgetting - on probation. These crew will show their best side to all concerned. Heck, I remember having a permanent cheesy grin on my face for a long time when I started flying. My grin isn't as cheesy and cheerleader-like these days, but it's genuine. I still do really really like my job, and I do want to do the best I can.

My point is: for those who get upset with some people on here posting negative comments about non-MF crew, just be your professional self. Be courteous, polite, show respect and great customer service. Show them what you're made of. Prove them wrong. Simple as that. There's no point saying on here how great you are and how great our fellow CC are. Have the confidence to prove it. Inspire those who need it. Motivate those who aren't "feeling the love" just now.

Positives breeds positives. Pretty much everyone likes to be around happy people. Let's show them how it's done.

I know it can be hard and tiring, but we can do it. Just for the record, I don't live on cloud 9, but I believe that if we all start small we'll get there sooner than we think. I just want us to do our very best. Join in, make it happen!

I will get round to the other issues later - I just wanted to post something that I hope will be inspirational and positive.

[Bridchen]

I totally agree, midLGW. That was a very good post. It's not about hats or other people's opinions of you. Stop worrying. If you do the best job you can, and are proud of yourself, you don't need a hat or other people's rubber stamps to underline it.

I really love my job (well, like everything, it has it's moments! ;)), and I also love coming home and my life outside my job. Try not to live in this current problem for most of the time, or it'll be difficult to keep a balanced view on it, and you will worry unnecessarily. Take opinions and criticism from people you trust and admire.

This dispute will end, and the nastiness will stop. The bitter people who won't let it go, or try to find a realistic solution, will be the real losers. Who wants to live like that indefinitely?

[Betty girl]

Thanks for that MIDLGW and Bridchen,

I think you are both right. I have been upset by some of the postings but as you say, it's best to trust those that you know and after talking to pilots on line I have realised that I have been silly to let these things get to me.

Thanks for your wise words.

[Noonday Gunn]

Betty I'm surprised that noe one noticed that you made the sunday times business section this week. The heading was "Trolly dollies in hat spat" and it referred to your posts on here. The funniest bit was the cartoon.

There was a picture of an FA in a BA hat, standing next to a Qantas stewardess in her hat. I know they don't have them either, I guess that's why the Qantas girl was wearing a firemans hat. Hilarious.

[vctenderness]

Under Unite's constitution it can force the merger of branches. There was a comment in the CC89 recent posts on the UniteBA site that suggested that this had been mentioned in recent meetings. I think that it may have been pushed through. It makes life a bit easier for Unite in that there is only one branch to try and deal with - BASSA. The meberhip don't have a say in this at all. It just has to be agreed at Regional or Excutive council level. Net result is likely to be that the remaining CC89 members jump ship, but that is no skin off Tony Woodley's nose.

This is very interesting as it is not quite that simple.

CC89 merged with the AEEU in much the same way that the TGWU has merged with Amicus to form Unite.

A much smaller merger but a merger non the less. Amicus/CC89 is just the BA branch of CC89 which also represents Virgin, BMI, Monarch and dozens of other airlines.

They form part of what is known as the FPA (Federation of Professional Associations) which is a separate organisation within the Amicus part of Unite.

Unite would like to get rid of it but it is not that simple.

Merging CC89 and BASSA could lead to a legal case if it was done without the consent of the members of CC89.

The current reps in Amicus/CC89 have not got the knowledge or the skills to do this or, indeed, to resist it.

Good old Lenny; will steamroller them if he is elected as 'Grand Poo Pah' of Unite though.

So lets wait and see:E

[Betty girl]

Hi NG and DG,


Did not see the article. Can you post it?

If it makes me look like an idiot don't bother though, had a bad enough time, when I mentioned it the first time!!!

Maybe the Quantas girl had the fireman's hat because of the engine problems!!

[Noonday Gunn]

hi Betty
it didn't make you look like an idiot, it was a cartoon and only we know it was you. You are right the Qantas girl had the fire hat on because of the recent problems they have had. It was funny!

[CC Forum Moderators]

Following further information and a review by the site moderators, user Dingbaticus's first post (http://www.pprune.org/6068431-post1397.html) dated 18th November has been reinstated. It seems he/she had been caught in the crossfire of a recent spate of troll-registrations. Apologies.

If anybody is thinking of registering just to troll this forum, then please don't; it wastes our time, your time and the time belonging to all the serious contributors to this thread.

CC Forum Moderators

[Dingbaticus]

One of the reasons you have heard little reasoned argument from Cabin Crew is fear of dialogue, especially through the internet. Whilst the ‘Bassa mentalists’ enjoy a good rant, the more moderate crew are wary of posting, due to the danger of dismissal for breaking Company regulations.

The Facebook debacles sadly taught us the dangers of expressing our thoughts in a public arena. The very public nature of pprune means it is considered by some to be ‘extreme surfing’, only for the very brave or very stupid! The hat debate making it into the newspapers as a cartoon proves how much we need to take care of what we post!

They say the first casualty of war is the truth and I personally believe both sides have employed the use of spin. There is disagreement about the exact number who took IA but I really want to bust the myth that it is just a ‘nutty minority’.

Just because the CSD does not brandish a yellow pen when you introduce yourself in the briefing or come marching into the flight deck waving a Unite flag when they give you their security checks does not necessarily mean they came to work!

Incidentally the yellow pen signifies support for the suspended and sacked, not that you took IA. Unfortunately others do not understand its meaning and then it unwittingly becomes become intimidatory.

Along with a number of my peers I feel it is important for CRM that every member of the team can look to me for support and trusts me. I believe in our industry it is vital that individuals feel safe and valued. That starts in the briefing where both the CSD and Captain set the tone. It has to be a balance between establishing the rules without alienating the team – a very tricky balancing act. If a CSD makes it obvious they took part in IA in the briefing, they have instantly alienated crew with a different view which is bad for CRM.

I don’t know the exact number who took IA but just because someone did, don’t assume they are unprofessional and don’t care about their Company or customers. It’s far more complex than that and with such a diverse community you will find a variety of motivating factors.

The postings made by Dingbaticus on this site are my own thoughts, feelings and beliefs and don’t necessarily represent my employers positions, strategies or opinions.

[Yellow Pen]

YP, as made clear here numerous times, what goes on on other forums does not fall within PPRuNe´s remit.

Discuss posts made here on their own merits.
If you are unable to do so, do not post.

CC Forum Moderators.

[Flap62]

Dingb,

You say

Incidentally the yellow pen signifies support for the suspended and sacked

Can you not see why "support" for CC, some of whom were dismissed for outrageous intimidation and bullying, could be a problem? While it may be the case that some offences were less serious than others, the banding of "all disciplined crew" together does your cause no favours.

Also interesting to see that Len M got just over 100,000 votes. Were all of Unite's 1.4 million members not eligable to vote? If so, that's less than 10% of the membership publicly backing him.

[Pornpants1]

Dingbaticus

One of the reasons you have heard little reasoned argument from Cabin Crew is fear of dialogue, especially through the internet. Whilst the ‘Bassa mentalists’ enjoy a good rant, the more moderate crew are wary of posting, due to the danger of dismissal for breaking Company regulations.

Rubbish, only the naive would not know how to hide their identity.

Incidentally the yellow pen signifies support for the suspended and sacked, not that you took IA. Unfortunately others do not understand its meaning and then it unwittingly becomes become intimidatory.

Dress it up how you want, but you should know B & H is all about perception of the person who receives it, try putting yourself in their position:ok:

[Dingbaticus]

If you read my post you will see that i do indeed understand how something like a yellow pen, which is not intended as a symbol of intimidation but one of support, can be perceived as intimidatory. That is why I consciously don't wave one around.

I agree that some of the sacked and suspended may be guilty of acts which have deservedly seen them ejected from the Company.

I would point out though that I strongly believe that some have been caught up as collaterol damage, something that is not uncommon in industrial disputes.

I believe that is why there has never (as far as I am aware) been a call to reinstate all the suspended and sacked, I believe DH 's request is for ACAS arbitration in the cases.

As for keeping identites secret, allegedly two of the sacked are due to postings they made under pseudonyms on a private forum. That is why many are now fearful even to post on private forums let alone a public one like this.

The postings made by Dingbaticus on this site are my own thoughts, feelings and beliefs and don’t necessarily represent my employers positions, strategies or opinions

[Sporran]

Dingbaticus,

The 'personal nature' of this dispute has only come from one side - that of bassa.

For WW and the LT it has all been about business, business, business:
- the business of ensuring that management run the company,
- the business of ensuring that bassa does not run the company, and
- the business of ensuring that cabin crew make their allocation of cost savings - JUST LIKE EVERY OTHER DEPARTMENT.

I certainly hope that Keith Williams, the new CEO, keeps up the efforts to ensure that bassa are firmly 'put in their place'!!

[Wirbelsturm]

Well,

Didn't Len get a good turn out. Not only do BASSA call IA on a majority of a minority even the parent Union can't motivated their members to vote on a simple little, non important vote such as the leadership. 100,000 votes from a membership of 1.4 Million? It beggars belief!

As for keeping identites secret, allegedly two of the sacked are due to postings they made under pseudonyms on a private forum. That is why many are now fearful even to post on private forums let alone a public one like this.



Just for clarification (I run a forum) as a forum operator you are required to keep a record of all members, their E-Mail addresses and their ISP/IP numbers. These information files must be made accessable to the relevant autorities for, I believe (or at least I keep them this long!) two years. That makes all posts traceable and all threats, libel etc, accountable. If you read the forum small print you will find it all there, anonymity doesn't exist.

The colour yellow was touted, originally, as a colour that could be used to 'define' those taking part in the strike. The 'call to arms' from BASSA for the Kempton/Sandown park meetings was to show solidarity and wear yellow. It was only afterwards that the idea of yelloow 'supporting' the loss of life at Manchester was used. That never was, nor has ever been the original purpose of the 'yellow' which enables those who took part to recognise each other in a way that the company cannot influence thus enforcing the 'them and us'. To take it as anything else is naivety.

[vctenderness]

Well,
The colour yellow was touted, originally, as a colour that could be used to 'define' those taking part in the strike. The 'call to arms' from BASSA for the Kempton/Sandown park meetings was to show solidarity and wear yellow. It was only afterwards that the idea of yelloow 'supporting' the loss of life at Manchester was used. That never was, nor has ever been the original purpose of the 'yellow' which enables those who took part to recognise each other in a way that the company cannot influence thus enforcing the 'them and us'. To take it as anything else is naivety.

Actually I believe the first bit of 'political Yellow' was the disgraceful use, by one BASSA member, of the yellow Star of David with BASSA instead of JUDE written on it.

[Yellow Pen]

It appears another striker has been suspended. BASSA are claiming he/she has been punished for daring to collect money to help out other suspended and sacked strikers. BA, naturally, have not stated the reason for the suspension. I wonder what the truth is?

[Dingbaticus]

YELLOW PEN


Did the forum rise up as one in to protest feeling intimidated by this pseudonym?

Did one forumite raise so much as a whimper of complaint to the mods about how this pseudonym made them feel and ask it be changed?

Of course not – British culture is globally famed for its dark humour and satire.

Should I feel offended by its use as a humorous pseudonym?

Of course not, I may believe I have been robbed of my dignity, respect and justice but I still have my sense of humour and most importantly I can still laugh at myself!

All around me I see posters, phone numbers and even road shows to support the bullied and harassed. To be fair to employers, new employment law that came into force in October mean employees can sue the employer if they do not protect them from bullying and harassment form both fellow employees and customers.

Personally I wish politicians thought these things through, banter and humour are great stress relievers and I fear we are in danger of losing our British sense of humour – I feel I am being turned into a drone, Stepford like, smiling on the outside and screaming on the inside. No wonder so many workers complain of stress!

I feel that instead of dealing with the underlying cause of issues such harassment and homophobia, many employers find it easier just to sack the culprits. I believe this removes the symptom of the cancer, without addressing the root cause and successfully changing behaviour.

This dispute did feature homophobia and the feelings among the Cabin Crew were so high that, although they felt gagged from talking to the press, they organised a Silent Pink Protest on the last strike day , even Len McKlusky turned up in a pink shirt to support it.

In frustration at my own and my gay friends’ personal feeling that the underlying homophobia has not been satisfactorily addressed, I do the only thing I can do. I carry a pink pen.

Perhaps Yellow Pen would like to take a step in building bridges between our communities and change their pseudonym to


PINK PEN

The postings made by Dingbaticus on this site are my own thoughts, feelings and beliefs and don’t necessarily represent my employers positions, strategies or opinions

[Dingbaticus]

Wirbulsturm, if you read my posts again you will see I never suggested our identites were secret.

It was Pornpants1 in post 1437 who states

'only the naive would NOT know how to hide their identity'

I feel it naive to believe you can't be identified. I believe it is very likely my employer knows my identity and I believe what I post is monitored very carefully.

That is why few dare post (guess I am an andrenaline junky) and why I add a disclaimer at the bottom of my posts.

The postings made by Dingbaticus on this site are my own thoughts, feelings and beliefs and don’t necessarily represent my employers positions, strategies or opinions

[who came first]

Someone was going round the CRC this morning in uniform with an upturned hat asking for money for BASSA.

I couldn't understand why the BASSA leadership had not impressed on it's members the danger that this sort of thing presents, together with handing out yellow pens at briefings, wearing BASSA lanyards etc etc. Certainly all the well known reps have been squeaky clean. Why not the members?

It wouldn't be that this is really now a personal vendetta by a certain leader who is more interested in prologing the misery than safeguarding his members' jobs, and that continuing suspensions keeps the pot simmering?

[mohitomaster]

The person suspended, by all accounts, was not asking for donations. Crew in the know were approaching her to offer money to help her cause, to provide Christmas gifts to children of sacked / suspended colleagues. Hardly a huge crime? certainly not bullying and harassment as charged!
I can't help thinking this is slightly ironic, and only supports the views of the majority of the cabin crew, that current BA management are out of control.
The Witch hunt continues.

[The Blu Riband]

If a CSD makes it obvious they took part in IA in the briefing, they have instantly alienated crew with a different view which is bad for CRM.
Which makes the csd who was suspended - but not, I believe, sacked - for saying at the start of his briefing

" anyone who voted NO can XXXX off now"

a poor advert for the crm qualities shown by some strikers.

don’t assume they are unprofessional and don’t care about their Company or customersAbsolutely, I'll make up my own mind. But don't forget that we have flown with many sccm's, including during the strikes, and you would be surprised how obvious it usually is!

I believe that is why there has never (as far as I am aware) been a call to reinstate all the suspended and sacked, I believe DH 's request is for ACAS arbitration in the cases.Allow me to refresh your memory.

(iv) no victimisation (including full reinstatement of all those dismissed, and restoration to their former positions of all those otherwise penalised in this dispute – (the foregoing are now identified in the current offer documentation as “relevant employees” and “processed employees”);
By the way Dingbat, do you ever mention your well documented problem with "Captain's Authority" during your flts?
I am informed that several crew - encouraged by Bassa reps and colleagues - felt they could challenge that authority; which unfortunately led to offloads and suspensions.

I agree that many of the disciplinary issues have arisen as a result of the dispute. But the cabin crew unions and leaders have continually made poor leadership decisions, and have frequently taken the view that the rules don't apply to them!
Many crew have mistakenly relied on Bassa and their reps, and other senior crew for advice and information which has either been misguided or , occasionally, deliberately misleading.

eg. The campaign to undermine staff travel, and the captain's authority, has directly led to several crew getting into serious trouble.

[Yellow Pen]

We only have BASSAs word on the reason the individual has been suspended. She could have been suspended for something entirely unrelated, but we know how BASSA like to whip their loyalists into a frenzy.

[The Blu Riband]

It has been a surprise to many that the "mis"- use of social networking sites could cause so much trouble. But it has!

Even before the list of crew-trained pilots was being passed around there was evidence of serious, and widespread, bullying and harassment.

We have all been briefed during SEP and other training courses to be conscious of the unacceptability of certain behaviours, and to understand how b & h is defined.

Many crew may now feel too "intimidated" to post on forums and networking sites, but they simply need to be knowledgeable about what may cause offence, and what BA may deem to be unacceptable.

Most of my colleagues have been quite shocked at the personal nature of the attacks on BA and its executives.
If Bassa and its members had stuck to the facts ,and less to rabble rousing rhetoric, they wouldn't be in the mess they are now.

[The Blu Riband]

It wouldn't be that this is really now a personal vendetta by a certain leader who is more interested in prologing the misery than safeguarding his members' jobs, and that continuing suspensions keeps the pot simmering? 23rd Nov 2010 15:15

On the SLF thread 'Safety Concerns" , which some believe is Duncan Holley's pseudonym, quite clearly explains that this is only about union politics now.

A few crew martyrs would do the job nicely.

There is a big difference between being sacked , and suspended.

I'm sure, like many of us, I worry that BA is being heavy handed, but I don't believe this to be the case.

If anyone complains ( another crew member or staff member perhaps) then BA are obliged to take action.
They cannot, under guidelines agreed with Unite, ignore a complaint.

[Lib Dem]

Once again, according to earlier posts today, Bassa appear to have encouraged some silly behaviour in their members and then complaining that they have been suspended by bullyboys at BA for "doing absolutely nothing" or "doing no more than....." or "simply being a good rep/union member....".

Last post copied on here, if it is ver batim, quotes the Bassa Chairperson as asking for calm and accusing other reps in Amicus of having "hissy fits" and describing the accusation from Mr Woodley of an Amicus Rep being a "terrorist" as a simple "out of context" comment.

The Bassa Chairperson then goes on a lot (sorry, but I couldn't somehow paste it) about how personal namecalling needs to end and the infighting needs to stop and we must all keep the faith. Is this the same person that has either stayed silent (or perhaps completely supported)with regards to the Bassa Secretary when he goes on another one of his public rants where he names and shames members and ex-members with derogitory and hurtful remarks on his forums ??

Is this the same Bassa Chairperson that supported the Bassa Secretary's latest drivel regards the Bassa & Amicus vs BA & Unite conspiracy? Now she wants us all to forget everything that the Bassa Secretary has previously broadcast and now take sides with Unite and start a BA & Amicus vs Bassa & Unite wrestling match ?

Who are the Tag Team Champions these days? I've been away for a few days.

I guess it's better than Monday Night Raw (but only just) IMHO.

[Dingbaticus]

The Blu Riband, I assume you are referring to our refusal to break what at the time was Corporate procedure, punishable by instant dismissal and possible police prosecution?

Correct, the Captain is Commander but they do not have the authority to order me to break the law or face police prosecution! Now the rules have been changed(funny that), I comply. If it don't get me sacked not a problem!

If you saw my postings I hope you enjoyed them. I hold my hands up to making some pretty vicious ones too.

Why? I was angry at alleged spying on our private crew forums which allegedly had led to a couple of crew sacked over what was meant to be humour in a private environmemt.

I decided to give the snoops something to read, don't come trolling and expect to be greeted with hearts and flowers!

I actually have the greatest respect for pilots, I couldn't do your job and I trust you with my life!

BA pilots are a highly trained skilled work force. If you actually read all my posts you will see I have defended your terms and conditions in matters like use of jumpseats.

What has angered me is whilst I am expected to respect your terms and conditions I feel you have stomped all over mine!

It's true that you could train a monkey to open and shut doors and serve food. However, whilst I am not a pilot, I do know people, what makes them tick, what pushes their buttons, what makes them happy which is a skill too.

Customers may load their suitcases in the hold but they bring all their emotional baggage into the cabin. Our competitors may have better seats, IFE and food butI believe it is the Cabin Crew who keep customers coming back to BA.

Recognising a businessman is grumpy not because he did not get his meal choice but because he his business deal went wrong, offering TLC and a listening ear, quelling rowdy gamblers off to Las Vegas, offering compassion to someone travelling to a funeral - these are some of the skills that are what I believe make our brand different to the low cost carriers.

We were not fighting for more, we offered cuts yet the Company sought to impose, you may believe it was because our Union was squabbling and being difficult but my view was that it was an attack on my Union's right to collectively bargain on my behalf. We were balloted on that imposition and I went on strike over that imposition. Don't expect me to be happy at your actions - I would never like to see a return to 70's style striking but if I can't withold my labour I may as well be a slave.

Like the female Ford employees in 1968, I am fighting for my job to be recognised as skilled. You can lower the wages but I believe you will find it hard to keep the skills required that I percieve to be a vital componant in our identity.

The postings made by Dingbaticus on this site are my own thoughts, feelings and beliefs and don’t necessarily represent my employers positions, strategies or opinions

[The Blu Riband]

What has angered me is whilst I am expected to respect your terms and conditions I feel you have stomped all over mine!I don't expect anything from you other than honesty and courtesy.
Perhaps you could clarify how you think I have "stomped" all over your terms and conditions. In what way have they changed at all?

I decided to give the snoops something to readRubbish, you were / are conducting a vindictive campaign to undermine the commander's authority and to attack our staff travel privileges and to make them as uncomfortable as possible for those cabin crew who hadn't lost their staff travel.

Now the rules have been changed(funny that)The jpm's have been clarified.


I hold my hands up to making some pretty vicious ones tooAbsolutely so! Do you still feel so angry and bitter, if so , then who with?
Surely you must be very disappointed with your reps.

my view was that it was an attack on my Union's right to collectively bargain on my behalf. We were balloted on that imposition and I went on strike over that impositionAnd it was my right to disagree with those actions as selfish and unnecessary, And it was BA 's right to try and manage the business as best it could. And it was the right of many crew not to strike.


If we're talking of rights, then I'm cross with Bassa for behaving so terribly irresponsibly and undermining all workers, particularly BA staff, to take industrial action in the future.
You've screwed it up for yourselves, and for everyone else!

An industrial dispute has to justifiable and democratic, yours has not been, in my opinion.

If I'm supporting BA crew than I'm supporting ALL of you, including those who came to work.

[Bengerman]

Dingbaticus, you said....


We were not fighting for more, we offered cuts yet the Company sought to impose, you may believe it was because our Union was squabbling and being difficult but my view was that it was an attack on my Union's right to collectively bargain on my behalf. We were balloted on that imposition and I went on strike over that imposition. Don't expect me to be happy at your actions - I would never like to see a return to 70's style striking but if I can't withold my labour I may as well be a slave.

Like the female Ford employees in 1968, I am fighting for my job to be recognised as skilled. You can lower the wages but I believe you will find it hard to keep the skills required that I percieve to be a vital componant in our identity.


Just a few points there that I would like to take issue with!

The cuts offered by BASSA were insufficient to achieve the requirement from IFCE, they were also only offered as a loan! Every other workgroup in the airline saw the need for savings and contributed, YOU DID NOT!

Imposition came about after countless attempts by BA to negotiate a settlement with unions who refused to sit in the same room! With unions who were offered the opportunity to inspect the company's confidential financial data, but refused! Imposition came after the baying hordes at Kempton racecourse were seen on national tv screaming NO NEGOTIATION!!

At no time have BA tried to lower your wages or tried to end some of the ridiculous practices in use. The management of the airline (no particular friends of mine, I may add) have remained mostly controlled and reasonable throughout this sorry episode, contrast with the rantings and ramblings emanating from BASSA HQ.

BA have never tried to personalise the dispute, despite immense provocation from those supposedly leading the shambles of a union that you appear to belong to, a union that put in front of a high court judge a steward complaining about the newly increased workload that was being suffered, despite the fact that he had never worked with the reduced crew compliment!

Finally, communications from your leaders appear to go to great lengths to explain the ramifications of accepting the company's latest offer. They are somewhat quieter about the ramifications if it is not accepted!

[Wirbelsturm]

Now the rules have been changed(funny that)

As has been stated the rule governing this particular 'spat' have not been changed. The aircraft Captain (the aircraft commander) has ALWAYS had and will always retain the right to move, seat, upgrade, downgrade, offload anyone onboard his/her aeroplance as long as the reason to do so can be reasonably justified.

The abject refusal was that certain groups within the company decided that the way the rule was worded made it illegal as it was tantamount to 'fraudulant' practice. The rule was never intended to be taken the way that it was interpreted but was used by many BASSA reps as a way to ensure that a 'barb' was placed within the Captains authority.

Thus the rule has been clarified to ensure that there is no more confusion although I, personally, have had some difficulties in making myself understood and have taken to carrying a copy of the clarified rule with me. Interestingly on one flight I found that a CC member had been moved from the back to the front without permission as they were a friend of the pursers. No mention had been made of it but, after politely discussing it with the Purser and explaining that it would have been better (legal) if I had been informed the Purser involved apologised, said that she would ensure that permission was always sought in the future. Her friend stayed where she was, I was content as was the Purser.

Just because there is a minority carrying around yellow pens, bags, ribbons and XXXX crewmember tags doesn't mean that we don't have to support one another during our day to day business irrespective of our viewpoints. Sadly the only members of the crew who I have found to be less than enthusiastic with working are those who took part in the action which achieved nothing. If we have to work then, when the wheels leave the ground, lets at least conduct our business with some common courtesy to each other.

[Dingbaticus]

Th Blu Riband, I stand corrected on the demand for the reinstatement of all the sacked and suspended. That would be impossible. This dispute has brought out the best and worst in us all (myself included) and some people have no doubt done things that are worthy of sacking and even police investigation.

Duncan now wants ACAS to deal with them which I think we are all satisfied with (except a few notable BSSSA supporters no doubt?

Yes, I am angry.

Angry at BASSA for not recognising earlier we needed to let the Company be able to manage without needing the reps approval for every little change, not recognising our agreements needed to be simplified and more user friendly. They took me by surprise at the amount of effort and ideas they had when asked for the savings, I was relieved as I believed it would all be amicably settled. You may have your world view but I believed the imposition was a deliberate attempt to undermine my Union's right
to collectively bargain for us.


I was angry at the pilots but as I have mentioned before there has been little dialogue. I have now had a chance to talk to pilots who volunteered and I do understand they were genuinely fearful they would loses their jobs in BA's 'Fight for Survival', with the airline being about to tip over the financial abyss. My anger has now passed and I always still socialised as I take people as individuals. Ironicly some of them have expressed a little anger themselves that we survived strikes and ash clouds and managed to post a profit and then pay some pretty hefty fines.

Most of all I am angry at myself for appreciating what our Union had won for us over the years but not being more actively involved. A modern Union has to allow business to change, grow, succeed. I believe both sides have learnt and with new faces coming into power I sincerely hope we can dust ourselves off, pick up the pieces and emerge from this period wiser.

Are you angry with me? If we can't bury the hatchet (preferably not in my back) then we will never heal the rifts. I can see we are never going to agree as you don't seem to grasp why I went on strike. What I will say is even you have a Union and with the merger of 3 airlines you may find yourself relying on your Union to protect what it has won for you.

************

I was referring to the FRAUD policy which our own managers were telling us to uphold.

Non compliance could mean gross misconduct, instant dismissal and possible police prosecution.

The line regarding fraudulant upgrading of friends or employees was originally in the policy and our managers told us were to uphold it or face dismissal and police prosecution.

Once they decided to remove that line the policy no longer applied to upgrading and our management changed their guidance to the Cabin Crew. I am still a little uncomfortable with suitability of some of the choices but I do not question, I only obey.

The postings made by Dingbaticus on this site are my own thoughts, feelings and beliefs and don’t necessarily represent my employers positions, strategies or opinions

[Right Engine]

Dingbaticus,

Really glad to hear a measured pro-BASSA voice.

Just one point I need to make.

The 'upgrade fraud' problem was down to IFCE management. They took it upon themselves to emphasize the ambiguities of the missive from Asset Protection a couple of years ago. It was aimed at station staff down route who were taking back handers to upgrade pax prior to boarding. It was not meant to bugger up the upgrade for staff on board.

No one changed the rules but sadly the XXXX brigade managed to cut their noses off to spite their face and forced 'Asset Protection' to remove the subtle powers of SCCM's and place them firmly in the hands of the skipper.

If it's worth knowing, most skippers when asked, will honor any 'upgrade' you propose. So in effect nothing has changed, apart from (insensitivity unavoidable) the fact that a great number if crew have no ST. Just get your Union to accept the proposal and we'll be back to a more formalized square 1 on upgrades.

[Dingbaticus]

Thank you Right Engine.

It may have been a mistaken understanding but we had to go by what our managers were telling us. In light of the latest suspension, allegedly for collecting money for the sacked and suspended's kids for Christmas through Santascrew which I noted was talked about on here ,you can understand why no CSD in their right mind, striker or not was going to go against what our managers were telling us.

I did not intend to air dirty laundry in public as that might be considered bringing the Company into disrepute. Once another forumite brought the topic into the public domain, I felt I needed to defend myself and and it gave me the opportunity to set record straight. Writing vicious posts or getting into power struggles are not in my nature but wars, even cyber ones can cause people to step outside their usual comfort zone.

I would also like to thank pprune for letting me post. Along with many crew I have been dismissive of this forum and after a shaky start, where I was banned for being a troll and stomped back to the BASSA forum to whinge, I appreciate the opportunity to put my side of the story.

It is a story that Cabin Crew have felt unable to tell. We are gagged from talking to the press. Instead we have vented on our forums. Facebook and texting had resulted in suspensions and sackings and even our forums are risky places with writs allegedly being presented for names.

It is a story of spying trolls, I believe deliberately looking for evidence to present as bullying and harasssment. A cyber war out of the public domain where crew laughed, cried and wrote mad things, even addressing threads to the spies to release tension and keep spirits lifted.

I feel the lid is finally lifting on the story and to me pprune have played a part as firstly it has proved to me my posts were spied on.To me it has also legitemized pprunes piece of Real Estate in cyber space by allowing me to present a different view, whether you agree or not I feel listened to.

As for the deal Right Engine. I don't think after the latest suspension any of us would give up any legal rights of redress against the Compnay.

Duncan has presented Willie with a deal, could you persuade him to agree to it?

We can then hold a massive pool party in Waterside with lego bricks either side of the river to build a bridge of unity and get over it.

Perhaps not, socialising and having a bit of banter down route without fear of being suspended for bullying and harrassment would do most of us. This is all getting very sad. We all want our airline back.

The postings made by Dingbaticus on this site are my own thoughts, feelings and beliefs and don’t necessarily represent my employers positions, strategies or opinions.

[Dingbaticus]

vctenderness, on the subject of the star of David being worn by a sacked crew member I suggest you google'The Jewish Chronicle BA Steward Sacked'

Sorry, I am not a pilot, can't fly planes and I can't do 'clickys' either.

Read the article and understand more about the sacked and suspended.

The Blu Riband is right, I have only lost one thing that was imposed to my T&Cs, no thanks to his efforts. I believe one thing our strike did achieve is ensuring the rest of our T&Cs remain untouched.

It's my personal belief if we had not stood up and backed our right to have collective representation then the rest of our T&Cs would have been drip drip drip, irrigated away until all we had left was our contractual basic pay, Mixed Fleet without even the hat to feel elite!

We do have a Union but I don't wish to rush for another strike. It really is the nuclear option when all else has failed. This could be settled but provocative suspensions and those that I believe troll our forums deliberately looking for things to report as bullying and harrassment have got to stop.

I did write vicious and stupid things - I said I know how to push buttons! I believe they have screen shots of everything I wrote, desperately trying to find a reason to report me to the police or management to identify me and have me sacked.

I believe being vocal makes me a target but I refuse to be bullied into silence, just as I refuse to be bullied from taking part in a legally balloted for strike.

I will not sign any deal that takes away my legal right to fight injustice and I don't believe many of my colleagues would either.

The postings made by Dingbaticus on this site are my own thoughts, feelings and beliefs and don’t necessarily represent my employers positions, strategies or opinions.

[Wirbelsturm]

Just to put the 'upgrades' confusion to bed, it has always been the case that the Captain can authorise upgrades when the passengers have boarded and the doors are closed.

The ambiguity came when the asset protection clause failed to add that into the wording. The case still remains that no-one can be upgraded without the permission of the Captain (although it is, in my case, rarely refused) what they may not do is enter the bookings system and change seat allocation through the TRM, neither many the TRM upgrade without the permission of a management grade employee.

Hope that clears it up.

This whole sorry episode could have been avoided if BASSA had chosen to negotiate instead of sticking out for demands to reduce the numbers of redundancies way back at the start. BA offered the same starting point to all Unions based upon previous negotiations and the potential cost savings associated with each department. Those that had more 'fat' to trim were required to provide more savings. BASSA, being the victim of its own success, had more, as a Union representing IFcE, to give than many others. Instead of understanding the rationale behind the system they went onto the offensive and merrily overlooked all the good they could have achieved.

The CC are not to blame for this mess, apart from backing a lame duck, they have been badly treated by both their Union and the Management in a war of words and communication. Sadly though I, personally, feel that BASSA, as their representative, has totally lost the plot and Unite has lost control of BASSA. A dangerous place to be as those in the BASSA heirarchy are rapidly getting to the point where they, alone and personally, have very little to lose but the mass of sensible BA CC employee have alot to lose.

The next few months under 'Red Len' could be telling.

Good luck.

[123breath]

You said previously that you believe that "imposition was a deliberate attempt to undermine my Union's right to collectively bargain for us (members)"

Quite an accusation, which conveniently ignores the fact that BA made it clear to all groups of staff in the spring of last year that failure to negotiate a deal to achieve the required departmental savings would result in imposition of changes to conditions for that department. BASSA knew that at the time, but did they communicate it to you? BALPA told it's members. I suspect that the answer is that BASSA did not tell it's members, and as we all know it then failed to reach agreement (or even negotiate!!!) by the deadline of 30/6/09, and subsequently issued a strike ballot over the issue of imposition.

My finger is still firmly pointing in the direction of BASSA.

[DextersLaboratory]

DB

Good, eloquent posts and a welcome contribution, where to start?

FWIW Re job skills, I wholeheartedly agree. I would much rather have an experienced SCCM. Safety training is easy, a rule based response which you can try and teach to anyone with no idea of their competency until an incident occurs. People skills are acquired and I've had several potential incidents caused by junior crew defused by a wiser head. Good, experienced crew are a huge asset to BA.

Pilots weren't the deciding factor in the success or failure of IA, most of us were flying planes believe it or not. Sadly, this is another result of your union comm's being rather imaginative. On the flip side, several P's have partners who have 'lost staff travel'. It's not the black and white divide that your union would have people believe.

A lot of this could have been avoided if people HAD talked more before the strike, the confusion was horrendous e.g. I could have explained to the young guy that he wasn't going on strike against a pay cut, "No, that was your union's proposal".

You say that you think the strike prevented further attacks on your T's & C's, I have to disagree. BA was going to walk away after the crew cuts, the savings were made, end of story. Most of the junior crew seemed happy with that "I'm not working as hard as did at my last airline" or "at least we haven't had a pay cut". That would have been it for a couple of years until the next time. Yes, the reality of business is that there will be regular negotiations, for the rest of our careers, some good results, some not so good. Similarly some more senior crew saw the changes as reasonable and the lesser of many evils.

Everything else that has happened is the result of the strike and the appalling PR. Dismissing the issues behind this, what do you think most peoples response would be seeing a Jewish star on a jacket with BASSA written inside? My jaw hit the floor! I haven't met anyone who thinks the '12 days of Xmas' was a tactical masterpiece. As one attendee said "they showed the cheering at the ballot result but you could have heard a pin drop when they announced the dates". Another (striking CSD) said "we are now more unpopular than paedophiles, 'she' only got 5 pages of hate comments (on the news website).

Where to now? You say DH has an offer. Looking back at the letter I don't see it. Quotes: "There you are in one simple paragraph, 4 no-cost measures which BA can accept which could very well unlock the door and start the beginning of the end." or: "They could start by looking at my points above". This seems like four points he wants conceded before further negotiations. Mind you, what interest does he have in a resolution? He may be out of a job then?

UNITE have lost c. 500.000 members over the last couple of years and several of their senior figures have stated publicly how damaging this dispute has been for their image. Your cause was unfortunately hijacked for various candidates leadership campaigns. TW was about to present a fantastic offer, share options etc when A.N. other announced the strike thereby pulling the rug and BA rescinding the offer. Does it not worry you that DS described the BASSA negotiating team as 'a bunch of clowns' and 'they haven't a hope of winning this dispute'.

The court case over imposition has now been put to bed. Three Court of Appeal judges ruled unanimously that BA could impose the changes, no leave to appeal further was made, so that avenue is gone. UNITE were hit for costs which I would guess (from our own debacle) run into the millions. BASSA/AMICUS need an exit strategy, not a vague wish list and a few moans. We are now nearly two years downstream from when 'negotiations' started with no end in sight. Meanwhile BA have loads of new crew, are still training VCC's and the strike option (which personally I don't believe UNITE will allow) will be ineffective. Has BA been reducing the headcount of existing crew as 'New Fleet' comes online or are we presently over crewed... just in case?

I hope things are resolved as many friends, strikers included, have been let down by their unions handling of this. Good luck in salvaging a decent result.

[Abbey Road]

Dingbaticus,

This dispute did feature homophobia and the feelings among the Cabin Crew were so high that, although they felt gagged from talking to the press, they organised a Silent Pink Protest on the last strike day , even Len McKlusky turned up in a pink shirt to support it.Homophobia? Thats a new one! I haven't heard that mentioned before, with respect to this dispute. Has anyone else?

[gingerminge]

The homophobia being referred to I believe is around the rather unsavoury comments made on facebook from one or two of BA's flight crew community.

[Yellow Pen]

Ah yes, the 'homophobia'. That would be the orchestrated display of outrage deliberately staged in an unsavoury attempt to get somebody sacked. And who deliberately gave that information to the Daily Mirror I wonder? I don't know which was worse, the feigned offence at the comments or the genuine gnashing of teeth when the complainants realised BA would not play their silly game. The comments were no worse than the regular derogatory descriptions of flight crew or the CEO, or even non-striking crew one can find elsewhere.

[flapsforty]

Two wrongs don`t make a right Yellow Pen; try and raise your debating a notch. ;)


The incidents in question were extensively discussed at the time they occurred.
Please do not re-hash them yet again.

Thank you.

_________________________________________


flapsforty
Member of the PPRuNe Moderating team.

[Abbey Road]

The incidents in question were extensively discussed at the time they occurred.
Please do not re-hash them yet again.Crikey, Flaps, I must have missed that. I really am surprised the subject even surfaced. :confused:

[Eddy]

I can't wait until the Christmas period is over and all of my striking colleagues have had their friends and family away with them on Christmas trips! It won't be long after that that the strike talk starts again and, almost invariably, we see another walk out!

Well, now I'm at Gatwick, I'll be first on the list to put my name down to volunteer to do a cheeky little Shanghai!

[dave3]

OH dear Eddie crm at its best.. this will all be over one day how on earth can you gloat over such a serious situation!

[Locked door]

Dave3,

It's not gloating, it's an observation about the crass double standards of the strikers.

LD

[Colonel White]

There was some discussion earlier in this thread about what Duncan was getting as his honorarium as branch sec. I came across a statement by him where he said that he pulls in £50,000 a year, but that he hands back half of it to Unite. So he's picking up close to the equivalent of a maincrew salary on top of his BA pay packet. Details on Red Pepper Blog.
I presume the mods added the following comment.
He no longer receives a salary from BA. He was sacked!
I would point out that he was receiving this sum regardless of other earnings. I can only surmise that even in the current stuation he continues to draw it. I just wonder whether those BASSA members believe they are getting value for money from him in that respect.

[gingerminge]

Eddy - please don't antagonise an already fragile situation with your comments. You made the decision to go to LGW enjoy it

[dave3]

locked door I'm sure your quite intelligent enough to realise that Posts like Eddies are doing nothing to help matters. It is not an observation it is a nasty comment and one that is not needed,

[Dawdler]

Dave, if you had bothered to acquaint yourself with Eddy's recent experiences you might have a more charitable view of his comments.

[dave3]

there is nothing charitable about this comment... Eddie is trying to cause trouble

[Dawdler]

Dave please re-read the post.

[dave3]

please someone tell me what I am missing.. I for one can not see anything positive in the post especialy going to shanghai after christmas:ugh:

[malcolmf]

If I remember rightly DH wasn't actually sacked, he retired in the nick of time to guarantee/protect his pension. So he is now completely independent of BA and can do what he wants without any retribution (except possibly withdrawal of retired staff travel).

[Lib Dem]

I received a newsletter in the post, from the Bassa Committee, with pictures on the front of those who had been sacked.
One was actually a duplicate photo of somebody who was reported on the next page as only under suspension, however, it was written by Bassa and the Secretary oversaw its content before it was "signed off".
Mr H was definitely on the front cover as one of those sacked by BA.

[who came first]

He was suspended without pay when he didn't turn up for work at Christmas. I remember he said at the time that whilst suspended he started to draw down his pension.

He was sacked a couple of months later, appealed to an industrial Tribunal this summer but lost.

[Eddy]

Dave mate, it doesn't take a little comment from me to cause trouble on this thread at all.

Regardless, the purpose of my post wasn's as you'd interpreted.

My post was more along the lines of what was suggested by the more observant "dawdler" and "locked door".

MANY of the strikers have been quick to suggest that the loss of staff travel doesn't matter to them one iota. However, some of the same people have been the most vocal when it's come to trying to secure free tickets for friends and family over the festive period.

Additionally, this year we've seen a lot of people saying that they'd be going sick over Christmas should the company not issue them with these tickets as they didn't want to go away alone over the festive period.

When did taking friends and family away at Christmas become a right?

Didn't we all sign up to do this job knowing that we'd sometimes have to spend such occasions away from those we love?

I still have the utmost respect for the majority of those who are striking; standing up for what they believe - but as locked door points out, we're seeing blatant displays of double standard at the moment.

Further, I don't like being in limbo and, until either an agreement is reached or the strikes resume, that's what I feel this company is in. The sooner one or the other occurs the better as only then can the company - and the union - begin making plans for the future.

[ottergirl]

Crewmour in the CRC is that WW fleet received a lot less Xmas trip requests this year and the management are concerned that the sickness rate will spike sharply over the festive period. Those managers who have trained as VCC have (allegedly) been told to keep their uniform and passports nearby in case they are required to fill in! May not be the season of goodwill to all!

[Dingbaticus]

The Blu Riband, in post 1447 you refer to a campaign to undermine Captains authority leading to off loads and suspensions and my well documented problem with it during my flights.

I have never been offloaded as, like many of my colleagues, I laminated and highlighted the fraud policy our managers wished us to enforce and the majority of Captains were understanding. It is true I chuckled at a couple of reactions that I will not describe on a public forum, which I believe is more appropriate than running to the bullying and harassment police at every perceived slight.

You decry BASSA for making things too personal but I believe this is a two way street, not at board or management level but lower down the food chain. I hold my hands up to being a part of the downward spiral of relations, we are employed because we posses character traits such as passion so don’t be surprised when something makes us mad we defend ourselves with mad passion.

Recent posts on PPRuNe portray those who took strike action as herds of thugs roaming the savannah of the CRC brandishing yellow pens as weapons to bully and intimidate those who went to work. I have searched the CRC for evidence of these frightening gangs but could not find them – perhaps being winter they have gone into hibernation?


Not only do I believe this is illegal, rather than helping the Company it risks creating a destructive civil war. Every time I think I have made headway and CRM is improving there are more suspensions, the latest one being Andrea Molton for collecting donations for Santascrew. Andrea’s heart is as big as her mouth and she kindly took to raising funds to give the children of the sacked and suspended a good Christmas. (Incidentally, this suspension and Santascrew website is now featured on Hardeep Kohli Singh’s FacePPRuNe page and I believe the donations have now topped 10K.)


If we are not to implode the mad merry go round has to stop, the perception that the vocal are being targeted is incensing the Cabin Crew community and risks any chance of a peace settlement. Dexters Laboratory is bang on about the lack of dialogue and input from members such as myself has contributed to the length and bitterness of this dispute. I am hopeful that with Len and Keith Williams taking their respective driving seats we have the chance of a fresh start. However if the draconian suspensions of the vocal continues then I fear things will simmer over before they even have the chance to sit down together.

Yes, bullying is unacceptable and the victims need to report it but I believe reporting every slight or difference of opinion ties up management resources, detracts from the suffering of real victims and risks plunging us into a serious civil war. This not only threatens CRM but our Company and its future.

I believe that when issues require suspensions then BOTH parties must be suspended. This will ensure the petty squabbles stop and our managers can deal with the issue quickly and fairly.


The postings made by Dingbaticus on this site are my own thoughts, feelings and beliefs and don’t necessarily represent my employers positions, strategies or opinions

Edited: To change font and size for readability.

[TightSlot]

Please try and find a more easily readable font

[The Blu Riband]

I believe that when issues require suspensions then BOTH parties must be suspended

Why?

eg If you accused someone of raping you you wouldn't expect to be arrested too, would you?

BASSA for making things too personal but I believe this is a two way street

If you mean that B & H accusations could be levelled at non-strikers too then I agree, and they have been I believe. But can you offer examples of Willie getting too personal against Bassa or its reps, or against crew in general. Or do you have any other examples of personal or institutional bullying or name calling.

I laminated and highlighted the fraud policy our managers wished us to enforce

You and other crew pressured IFCE managers to make statements beyond their remit. JPM's reflect the ANO and are sometimes poorly written or deliberately ambiguous.
By trying to make life intolerable for crew still in possession of ST and by crusading to try and erode capt's authority you ended up losing authority yourselves.

I believe one thing our strike did achieve is ensuring the rest of our T&Cs remain untouched.

I am surprised you still think of your strike as being successful in any way at all.
Certainly taken as a whole it has surely been a disaster for current crew.

Edit 2: The standard font for PPRuNe boards is Verdana 2. It has been used for over 14 years. Please avoid using other styles, and therefore changing, the norm. As my colleague says - it is difficult to read.

[Desk Jocky]

British Airways rejects Unite's 'culture of fear' claim
British Airways defended its determination to tackle bullying and harassment in the workplace today (November 25) after the Unite trade union accused the airline of operating a 'culture of fear'.

The airline rejected claims of a campaign to bully union representatives and cabin crew who went on strike.

In a statement, BA said: "As a responsible company we do not tolerate the bullying or harassment of any of our colleagues. We have an established bullying and harassment policy that is consistent across the airline. Our established disciplinary process has been in place for many years and has been agreed with all our recognised trade unions, including Unite.

"We have conducted a number of disciplinary investigations into allegations of bullying and harassment relating to the ongoing industrial dispute. These involve a tiny minority of our employees.

"The vast majority of these investigations were into complaints that employees tried to intimidate or threaten colleagues who wanted to work during cabin crew strikes, or who wished to volunteer to work as cabin crew during strike periods, into not doing so."

The airline said these had resulted in a range of outcomes from no case to answer, to dismissal for gross misconduct.

"All these investigations have been conducted in response to incidents of alleged bullying, harassment or other intimidating behaviour," it said.

Commenting on remarks by the newly appointed Unite general secretary on the possibility of further strike action by cabin crew, the airline reassured customers that it would keep the flag flying. In the event of further strikes, the airline aims to operate 100 per cent of our Heathrow longhaul operation and the majority of our shorthaul flights at Heathrow.

A spokesperson for the airline said: "Unite said last month that the proposals we put forward after prolonged discussions, assisted by the TUC and ACAS, would be recommended as the best available through negotiation.

"We continue to believe that these proposals address all cabin crew's concerns and represent a fair resolution of this dispute."



Taken from BA intranet, the most interesting comments being the final one, where I think it shows a clear indication that any further talks are not going to yield any concessions that have not already been offered.

[pcf]

Its good to have you here Ding, please keep posting... KTF
:ugh:the other forums can be sooo one sided, debate is brilliant and
you are so good at just that x

[dave3]

Eddie thank you for your reply. I for one have worked for the company for some 25years for all of those years you were able to take your family with you on staff travel if you worked over christmas..This year is different.. if you have lost your staff travel because you took part in industrial action.. This is not alowed you are not alowed to discriminate against anyone that took part in IA.
This job takes you away from your family we know that happens but a system has been in place for years that helped crew.. contractul or not perhaps the courts could decide because this has been the case for years.

[keel beam]

Dave3

You know the situation with staff travel and strikers, they were "notified" well in advance that if they went on strike, staff travel would be withdrawn permanently. However the latest deal that was on the table, and I think it still is, staff travel is offered back,

WRT christmas staff travel and free tickets for crew travelling over christmas, the chickens are coming home to roost. The bravado statements that loss of staff travel was no big deal, now changes to it being unfair that their family/partners cannot travel as they had been on strike. Again a classic example of short sightedness which has been apparent all through this dispute. It seems the striking crew had forgotten about christmas as it was 9 months or so away from when the strikes started.

[Yellow Pen]

Crew can still take family away with them at Christmas as the tickets are not personal travel but duty travel. However they will find that their date of joining for onload purposes is the 'new' staff travel joining date, which ensures that those who have backed BA have their loyalty to the company recognised. Whether strikers choose to avail themselves of these tickets is another matter.

[StudentInDebt]

This year is different.. if you have lost your staff travel because you took part in industrial action.. This year is no different, Christmas Duty Travel is available for any of your nominees that are eligible for basic standby tickets. Since the basic standby tickets were re-instated for all employees that took part in industrial action you can take your nominees away with you at Christmas. Sadly, it would seem that the cabin crew's union is once again whipping up hysteria by telling its' members not to use their basic standby tickets as, in their opinion, to do so will involve accepting that staff travel is non-contractual, something that has been accepted by anyone using a staff travel ticket in the last 2 years.

This is not alowed you are not alowed to discriminate against anyone that took part in IA.I'd be grateful if you could point us in the direction of any UK law that states this, the only protection I'm aware of for those taking part in industrial action is against unfair dismissal or disciplinary action for taking part.

[fly12345]

What difference one year makes, last year the big debate was how to disrupt thousand of flights, holidays, family reunions and inflict as much financial damage to ones employer and this year the same individuals are scrambling to get seats for their loved ones on a free jolly with the compliments of the same employer that they so much hate and still want to damage and punish.:ugh:

[strikemaster82]

KTF??

Kermit the Frog? :}

[Betty girl]

I don't think they are scrambling to get seats for loved ones. All crew can still get standby tickets for their loved ones because basic standby tickets were returned to all staff that striked.

A lot I think have decided not to volunteer for Christmas trips however and this will cause a big problem for BA. I don't believe it is being done on purpose by crew, it is just a consequence of everything that has gone on but as a result of people not requesting to be away many will get rostered trips that they don't want and that will include crew that never usually choose to be away.This will end up with a huge amount of crew going sick at Christmas, which already happens anyway, but this year it will be a very large number!

I have a feeling that BA will ask the VCCs to volunteer to be away at Christmas because I really do believe this will be a huge problem this year. BA are already aware of it because the Christmas trip requests are way down on previous years.

Whether you agree with the strike or don't, and I have always not agreed with it, there are a lot of crew out there that feel unwanted and not valued by their employer and this actually includes many that did not strike. So it will be hardly surprising if some choose Christmas to go sick!!

[windytoo]

Please could someone explain the difference between DH refusing to work and crew electing to be "sick" for Christmas, because they don't fancy working? I suspect they may lay themselves open to the same fate.

[Betty girl]

DH did not go sick. He 'no showed' on trips because he thought he should have been de-rostered for union duties.

I am not suggesting that people go sick at Christmas but every year a few crew do and of course every year there are genuine people who are sick. Flu and bad colds are always very prevalent in the middle of winter and crew are very susceptible to catching these because of the nature of our job mixing with hundreds of people every day.

It is and always has been impossible for BA to tell the difference between those genuinely sick and those pulling a fast one.

[Snas]

One is easily provable; DH himself providing the evidence, the other is not. People do get sick at any time remember. Let’s wait and see if the sickness level is actually higher than usual before we start hanging CC as a group I think.

I know my own partner felt very rough during the last strike period but felt compelled to report where she normally perhaps would not have done so, and worked the duty with a stinking cold as a result. Indeed if she had two broken legs in plaster I’d have driven her to work myself and let her be sent away before she called in as unwell for fear of getting caught up in the silliness. Once again the actions of the few making things worse for the many perhaps?

[Betty girl]

Totally agree with you Snas.

I would have dragged myself in because I would not have wanted to be marked down as a striker.

I also agree that the vast majority of cabin crew will come in and do their rostered duty.

I have also been told that more crew are being rostered on standby this year which is a direct result of BA being nervous about sickness.

I just know from my experience out on line that many crew, strikers and non-strikers alike, feel unwanted by BA and it is sad. Just hope it all gets sorted out soon. Having said that though I see nothing but professionalism from all my crew and it would be impossible for a passenger to tell if someone was a striker or a non striker, all are performing brilliantly on my flights. It is just a feeling inside of us of not being wanted anymore and it is hard for me to explain it. I expect as your wife flies you understand what I mean.

[PC767]

Betty Girl.

I admire your perseverence on this site. I gave up, everything you write will be nit-picked and challenged by one or another of a select group of individuals, BA pilots and managers, who never seem to be either flying or managing. Indeed, despite what may be written in some profiles, I question just how many are actually BA pilots. They are on here ready with an instant challenge most hours of the day, yet seldom frequent pilot orientated threads on this professional pilot site.

I am in total agreement though, that whether a crew member was a striker or not does not matter a jot when they get onboard and interact with our passengers. And there have been changes to this years staff travel procedures for Xmas duty, which may have an impact upon an individuals decisions.

[Betty girl]

Thanks for that pc767,

My manager is also a VCC and she too is worried that BA may ask her to work at Christmas. She works Mon to Fri 9-5 and really does not want to be away. I hope she gets to be a home because she is a great manager and I like her very much.

I hope that all crew get to be where they would like to be whether that be away, on a trip or at home with their family.