BA CC industrial relations (current airline staff only)

[CC Forum Moderators]

This thread is intended for use by people presently employed as airline staff.
To discuss BA Cabin Crew industrial relations only.

If you do not fall into this category - please do not post here: Please visit the Pax/SLF Forum where there is an active thread running HERE (http://www.pprune.org/passengers-slf-self-loading-freight/409355-ba-strike-your-thoughts-rants.html) that welcomes your thoughts.

[GS-Alpha]

Funny that this thread has so far been viewed 1326 times and yet no one has written anything yet! Just how many lurkers follow this conversation?

[Flap62]

Perhaps because there's really, really nothing left to say.

[Far-Ted]

It appears Bassa still has a lot to say.


BASSA - Latest News "BILL’S WORLD" Oct 4th, 2010 by admin

“Bill’s world”... Time for a party? Excellent!

...Errmmm, well maybe not quite.
Unfortunately, unlike the 90’s cult movie ‘Wayne’s World’, Bill’s world isn’t particularly excellent and, for most people, it certainly isn’t party time. To be honest, on the whole it’s actually just a pretty depressing place to be, with a split, demotivated workforce and an out-of-touch, out-of-control management busy “ethnically cleansing” any crew who dare to disagree or question.
In fact in “Bills world” things go from the ridiculous to the downright callous as the days go by; during this week alone we all received an ESS mail from Rachael Clarke, informing us that we would be having three additional VCC crew members on flights and for us to give them a “big, warm, cabin crew welcome on board”
The irony that these are the very people that volunteered to undermine and break our industrial action, ensuring that we not only lost money and work but also lost our staff travel, seems to have completely passed her by. Obviously they are also keeping their hand in, ready to break the next one. We have no idea what jobs they actually normally do, but clearly they cannot be missed very much; perhaps they should have a look over their own shoulders, as the shadow of new fleet approaches, they may very well find themselves on it, permanently this time.

XXXX XXXX, one of our most popular, short haul representatives, is facing a difficult and personal ongoing battle against cancer, we of course wish him well and know that XXXX will also feel much better and more supported in his fight, with the news that Bill Francis’s department has decided to stop paying him after the minimum 6 month period of sickness. In the past, fleet managers used their discretion to be humane and caring to people in difficult circumstances; not any longer in Bill’s world. They seem to believe that worrying how to pay your mortgage and being penniless will surely aid any cancer sufferer in their battle to stay alive. Don’t worry though, XXXX wasn’t singled out for this special treatment for being a union rep, we just use him as an example, everybody with long-term sickness, including cancer, now get treated exactly the same. Incidentally XXXX has given 45 years of service to this company meaning that XXXX was attending to passengers while Bill was still in nappies!
(Now that’s a thought not worth lingering over).

National newspapers recently revealed that Mr Walsh, alongside other Directors, is also set to receive massive future share bonuses and benefits, ironically at the exact same time as cabin crew have to pay more for a reduced pension.
The ill-judged fight for survival now resembles more of an unseemly squabble at the trough. As merger after merger is announced or rumoured, money now appears to be no object.

Chosen your future pension option? Then take a long hard look at your final pension projection and its meagre final figure, then be aware that a large proportion of our flight deck colleagues will receive pensions of over a hundred thousand pounds per year. Legislation only provides protection for pensions up to £29,748.68p, most cabin crew are of course, below this threshold. Perhaps that is why the pilot community were motivated to organise volunteers to break a strike of people who are possibly on a tenth of their salary. It would appear their motive was to save themselves, rather than British Airways. Lenny McCluskey, our preferred candidate has publicly committed to try and have BALPA removed from the TUC family for their crass, selfish actions.

So, to cheer us all up, how about: “Unite victorious as removed crew member is back on board” as a headline instead?
Don’t laugh, it’s true, we originally took industrial action over the removal of one crew member without agreement - we have now gained three! Job done, let’s all relax. Okay, they are all working to New Fleet terms with no agreement but hey, let’s not get picky...
A prominent central London billboard aptly reads:
“People from bad areas steal your mobile phone,
People from good areas steal your pension”

.....in Willy, Billy and Silly’s case it comes with a happy grin thrown in but not for much longer, keep the faith.

X X X X ......believe it.

[ChicoG]

Go on then, let's remind ourselves about this imposition malarkey shall we?

You know, the one Nigel Stott wanted damages for, even though he never actually set foot on a plane after it happened.

Imposition case thrown out (http://www.employmentcasesupdate.co.uk/site.aspx?i=ed4655)

[Juan Tugoh]

An interesting missive from BASSA. Full of the usual stuff, but conspicuously short on anything that could actually progress the dispute. I guess BASSA have now placed all of their hopes in the hands of the courts.

[Snas]

My Bold below from BASSA latest
out-of-control management busy “ethnically cleansing” any crew who dare to disagree or question.

That reference above is a bit much to be honest, however I did like the bit about getting the crew member back at the end, delicious irony indeed.

No content regarding any forthcoming action however, save for the mention of BALPA's future membership, so CC are still in the wilderness as to their future and their ST, those still in the union that havent accepted the last offer that is.

Also, are these messages released from BASSA never from a person, at most all I ever see is Admin and on this one not even that. As I dont have access to the source (thankfully) can someone confirm this is how they are sent out, unsigned. Is that usual?

[Human Factor]

So Len wants BALPA out of the TUC? It's a shame the BALPA members don't get a vote as Len's count would probably increase by 3000.

[Sgt Wilson]

As this is near the beginning of a new, albeit continued thread, would any BASSA supporters, current or past, like to tell us where they think we currently are in this dispute and how they think it could be resolved given what has happened up to now?

I don't think anyone is naive enough to think that BA will accede to their demands, so the question is really, not what you want, but rather what would you settle for.

I realise that this may leave you open to the wrath of some of the more enthusiastic posters, but I would be very interested to hear your views.

Thanks

Sgt Wilson

[Wirbelsturm]

Perhaps that is why the pilot community were motivated to organise volunteers to break a strike of people who are possibly on a tenth of their salary. It would appear their motive was to save themselves, rather than British Airways. Lenny McCluskey, our preferred candidate has publicly committed to try and have BALPA removed from the TUC family for their crass, selfish actions.

How bizarre, I don't remember any one from any organisation apart from BA management 'organising' anything?

BALPA removed from the TUC family for their crass, selfish actions.

The Association in question merely stated that it was up to their members to make up their own minds as to what to do. A rep resigned as he felt his beliefs (or disbelief in the BASSA actions) conflicted with his role as a rep.

So, a normal BASSA missive with very little substance then.

All hail Len McKlusky, another Union stalwart with the death of an industry behind him. Can't wait.

[Pornpants1]

Looks like BASSA have "locked out" legacy crew from lots of Long range work, and thus lots of nice long range box payments. Seems that Narita(moves to the 777 in 2011), Hanida and Buenos Aires are all destined for "new fleet" also I have been told that "legacy crew" will not be flying the A380 or the 787:*

Well done BASSA for your hard line stance:D:D

[Betty girl]

Pornpants, it important that you don't pass on hearsay as fact on this thread.
The only routes that have been confirmed so far are from November- Prague, St. Petersburg and Pisa and from December- Denver and Las Vegas.

WW crew are trained on the 777 and the crew who fly on the new aircraft has not been decided yet.

[Pornpants1]

dear oh dear

Its a rumour forum!!:ok::ok:

That being said I post what I hear from some very well placed people:uhoh::uhoh:

Pornpants, it important that you don't pass on hearsay as fact on this thread.
The only routes that have been confirmed so far are from November- Prague, St. Petersburg and Pisa and from December- Denver and Las Vegas.

WW crew are trained on the 777 and the crew who fly on the new aircraft has not been decided yet.

Where have I passed anything off as "fact"?

To repeat myself , I have been told by numerous people over the last 10 days that "legacy crew' will not be operating the flights listed above:rolleyes::rolleyes: nor will they be crewing the 787 or a380.

Ask yourself if you were BA, and in order to save money what would you do? Lets face it LA LA has already admitted in writting that on the SIN terminator alone BA could save £4 million per year with new fleet.

I am talking summer 2011 for the above routes!!!! 4 x a380 arrive in 2013, and 787 hopefully start arrive late 2012. So the wishlist you quote above is long out of date by then!

I say again, I am really really glad BASSA have taken the hard line stance that they have, its worked wonders:{:{:{

[617sqn]

PornpantsWhilst I admit this is a rumour network,I would like to dull things for a while and add some facts.
I know that's really boring so I won't be long.
As you know,all crew were sent a letter by Bill Francis,with the option of the non unionised crew being able to sign in agreement.
I have that letter in front of me now.Bill Francis has said:

Access to route network

I intend to ensure a fair and transparent distribution of routes to all fleets based on commercial need.

Access to aircraft type

I intend to deploy new aircraft based on commercial need across across existing and new fleets.New aircraft will be introduced on a fair and transparent basis across all the company's fleets.Your existing terms,conditions and fleet agreements will apply when new aircraft are operated on existing fleets.as new aircraft are introduced across all of the company's fleets,you will be trained in order to receive the necessary licences as required by regulation.

From where I am sitting that seems quite fair.

Are you now saying that Bill Francis is not to be believed and Bassa were right all along?If this has now changed then crew will have no faith in anyone!!




Any way back to rumours now

[moo]

To put to bed the pay/market rate issue, Virgin are currently recruiting cabin crew.

Job Details
Cabin Crew


Ref 69932
Location
Contract Type Permanent
Salary Range £0 to £15,000
Job Type Cabin Crew

Job Details

As you would expect, we like to look after our staff and offer a competitive package starting with a full time, permanent contract.

The following is currently provided (after a qualifying period):·

- a basic salary of £11,564; trip pay, plus on board commission.

[Hotel Mode]

Are you now saying that Bill Francis is not to be believed and Bassa were right all along?If this has now changed then crew will have no faith in anyone!!

Nobody was lying. That was part of the deal that the BASSA membership rejected. That deal is not on the table anymore so any promises in it aren't either. The ones who signed have the pay protection so route transfer isn't as much of an issue.

[Hot Wings]

BASSA's communications are full of lies and half-truths. Surely there must come a point when even the most fundamental BASSA supporters will think "well if that's bo****ks then maybe the rest is as well"?

[Tiramisu]

Are you now saying that Bill Francis is not to be believed and Bassa were right all along?If this has now changed then crew will have no faith in anyone!!
Nobody was lying. That was part of the deal that the BASSA membership rejected. That deal is not on the table anymore so any promises in it aren't either. The ones who signed have the pay protection so route transfer isn't as much of an issue.

Che?
Are you saying BA have lied to those of us who signed up to the offer re-route transfer?
Is that why senior managers are holding drop in sessions on Eurofleet for Pursers and CSDs to see how they can utilise and manage both these supervisory grades more effectively? That deal is very much there. I happen to have it too and I will ask Bill Francis next time I see him to see if you guys are right. It is a contract we have with BA and it makes no sense whatsoever to have us sitting at home on full pay while Mixed Fleet do these routes. By the way, please stop calling us Legacy or Heritage crew.
We are CTCs!
For your information that is Current Talented Crew and we are the best!;)

[Betty girl]

That deal is binding in it's entirety for those crew that signed it, so although other crew have not signed up to the pay protection, the other parts apply to all crew whatever fleet.

There is absolutely no way BA will have decided which crew work on what aircraft as far away as 2013. It all depends where they send the aircraft, when it arrives, and which other aircraft are being operated on that route. If for example, at that time, Mixed fleet was still operating on the 777 and the new aircraft was going to be used on a route that also had 747s flying on, they may choose to use WW crew and vice versa it may be more flexible to use Mixed Fleet on another route etc.

Obviously some long range routes will move across because otherwise as WW gets smaller they would start to operate proportionately more long range, if some did not move across. This would impact on their 900 hours and make them even richer!!! So I think everyone knows some long range routes will move over to Mixed Fleet.

What is strange is that some of you seem to revel in the thought of your colleagues losing out. Very strange considering it is you same people, who constantly point out to everyone, that the majority of us worked and did not strike.

Here! here! Tiramasu

[MissM]

It's certainly a coincidence that NRT all of the sudden will become a 777 service next year as well HND and EZE. What destinations would be next? Perhaps SIN as they are re-negotiating the terms and conditions of our crew based there. PEK and PVG would undoubtedly come next. There's also a rumour circulating that SFO will go to Mixed Fleet.

I can't believe the naivety amongst some of you. Do you actually believe that BA will protect current crew from Mixed Fleet just because they have said they intend to insure a fair and transparent distribution of aircraft and destinations? To intend means absolutely nothing. Perhaps it's time to wake up for some of you and see what's happening.

[Pornpants1]

Italian desert/cake lady;) My only information is for WW beyond that I know very little:ooh:

MissM for the first time I agree with you, but BASSA members and by default non BASSA members are where they are because of a complete and utter failure of BASSA to negotiate sensibly :*:mad::mad:

[Tiramisu]

Miss M,
How are you?
The ones who need to wake up is those who thought BASSA would get them Staff Travel in five minutes and those who didn't believe Willie Walsh who said that you would lose Staff Travel if you strike.
Having said that I am genuinely sorry for you having lost your staff travel and for being so naive and gullible.

[617sqn]

Whilst some crew were naively worrying about working one down,others were waking up and smellling the coffee.

They were aware of the real issues at stake.New fleet.

Some crew chose to strike over the crewing levels.
Others chose a different battle and attempted to secure as good a deal as they could to protect their pay.

It seems both sides have achieved their aim.
Non unionised crew have payment protection and the union have succeeded in getting extra crew on board. VCC. But at what cost?

[Juan Tugoh]

I think HND and EZE are red herrings in this as any guarantees are only about route transfers not about new routes. The single NRT being changed to the 777 and NF would be a sensible commercial decision allowing crewing flexibility between the 2 Tokyo destinations.

A single route going over to MF is hardly indicative of a policy to strip lucrative destinations from CTC. MF will have to be employed somewhere and they will be used where it makes commercial sense.

If BASSA had allowed CTC crew to look at hourly pay a few years ago then no routes would be "premium" routes, they would just be routes.

[numberfifteenplease]

It is a contract we have with BA and it makes no sense whatsoever to have us sitting at home on full pay while Mixed Fleet do these routes.

And here lies your first mistake - it is NOT a contract. It is an AGREEMENT - just as we all work(ed) to AGREEMENTS until BA decided to change them. You and your colleagues have been used - No current BA crew will be 'safe' from whatever BA want to do.

For those of you who 'Backed BA' - you will not be 'protected' neither will 'legacy' (I love the way you Pilots are using that word) crew.

For Tiramisu, HiFlyer14, Eddy et al - you need to understand that BA is a business, a corporate machine, a money making entity for it's shareholders, simples :ok:

BA is not here to 'protect' nor 'look after' anyone - it is here to make money.

Take whatever Bill Francis offered you with a pinch of salt - they will change whatever they want to change and do whatever they want to do. The only thing that could possibly stop them doing that would be a strong Trades Union and thats almost a thing of the past.

Remember those movies that the baddies used to get the guy to dig their own grave before they shot them - welcome to the real world guys, you just helped dig your own grave. (By the way I recommend Spear & Jackson as a fine manufacturer of garden implements)

[Gingertom]

No15 You are spot on - have(had) been following your threads. Ab fab.

[Betty girl]

No15,
It is Bassa that have let you and the rest of us down by striking instead of talking.
All the union ever get us, are agreements also, so whats the difference. My agreement is as binding as any Bassa have got and BA has upheld all the agreements to date. Crewing levels were never part of any agreement.

Shame Bassa did not make an agreement over the new crewing levels, that none of us are upset about, instead of taking you all out on strike, maybe then we would all have an AGREEMENT and you might have your staff travel also.

We all have a choice believe Bill or Bassa and I have found Bill to be the most honest so far.

[Fargoo]

BA is not here to 'protect' nor 'look after' anyone - it is here to make money.

Take whatever Bill Francis offered you with a pinch of salt - they will change whatever they want to change and do whatever they want to do. The only thing that could possibly stop them doing that would be a strong Trades Union and thats almost a thing of the past.

Absolutely spot on.

[ChicoG]

Take whatever Bill Francis offered you with a pinch of salt - they will change whatever they want to change and do whatever they want to do. The only thing that could possibly stop them doing that would be a strong Trades Union and thats almost a thing of the past.

Correction: The *other* thing that *would* have stopped them would have been being in such a dire financial state that the only option would have been a fire sale to one of the Middle East carriers, and then you'd *really* know the meaning of management that do what they want.

[MissM]

Tiramisu

Personally I couldn't be less bothered with ST as I almost never use it and should I ever travel in the future I will take my business elsewhere.

And I am genuinely sorry for those of you who thought you were backing BA when crossing the picket line. Some of you might have signed a three year deal with the company which protects you for the time being but in my opinion you have really sold yourselves down the river. What happens later?

It's not too late for you, or anyone else, to change your mind. The majority of us made the right decision earlier this year and won't doubt to make that decision again. Personally I will strike go on strike for as long as it takes as some of us care about out future and will not accept this behaviour from our excuse to an LT.

[RadarIdent]

Tiramisu

Personally I couldn't be less bothered with ST as I almost never use it and should I ever travel in the future I will take my business elsewhere.

And I am genuinely sorry for those of you who thought you were backing BA when crossing the picket line. Some of you might have signed a three year deal with the company which protects you for the time being but in my opinion you have really sold yourselves down the river. What happens later?

It's not too late for you, or anyone else, to change your mind. The majority of us made the right decision earlier this year and won't doubt to make that decision again. Personally I will strike go on strike for as long as it takes as some of us care about out future and will not accept this behaviour from our excuse to an LT.You say you could'nt be bothered with ST, but are prepared to strike for it?
Are you prepared to give anything to this company MissM (other than strike threats), or is that for the rest of the staff to be burdened with?
And you wonder why there are so many VCC's willing and able!

[numberfifteenplease]

My agreement is as binding as any Bassa have got and BA has upheld all the agreements to date. Crewing levels were never part of any agreement.

I am absolutely staggered that you say the above and genuinely believe that it is true - it shows a complete lack of knowledge of your working 'Agreements'.

You will find that crewing levels are most certainly part of the 'Agreement' that BA and BASSA used to adhere too - in the WW Sceduling Agreement it is section 7 page 29.

7. CREW COMPLEMENTS
MINIMUM PLANNED CREW COMPLEMENTS
ADDITIONAL CREW MEMBER ROUTES
ICC COMPLEMENTS
WORKING POSITIONS DOWNROUTE SHORTAGE

On EF it's Section 21, page 30.

We had an 'Agreement' and BA changed it - just as they will now change anything they want too in the future - can't you see that?

[Yellow Pen]

The majority of us made the right decision earlier this year

Indeed. The majority went to work, and about 4900 of 13000 crew made the wrong decision and went on strike.

[Betty girl]

No 15,
It is not a three year agreement. The pay part is three years. Did you actually read it!!!

[numberfifteenplease]

No 15,
It is not a three year agreement. The pay part is three years. Did you actually read it!!!

You have me confused now - who has mentioned three year agreements?:confused:

[Betty girl]

Sorry No15 it was Miss M in post 30 that mentioned three years.

[Betty girl]

MissM,
I don't think your union will strike now. I think they will find some way to save face and sign you up to the agreement. Shame they let go of a better one and lost you your staff travel for you.!!!

[Alex33]

No.15 you see things so clearly, yes it is all about running a busiiness and making money. Each one of us is just a name and staff number, once you actually start believing that the company care about your rights/contract etc you have lost the plot. Welcome to the world of corporate business it is very ruthless. It is a sad fact that loyalty and even going to work during the strike and backing BA will not help you in the long run. I have been very proud to work for BA but I am no fool we are tiny cogs in a very large wheel and can and will be replaced to save money. Our board can afford the top lawyers, stragists, economists they can run circles around us at the same time putting such a spin on it making it all very believable for the guillible.

[numberfifteenplease]

Sorry No15 it was Miss M in post 30 that mentioned three years.

I thought I was going nuts then xx

[Betty girl]

Look BA can not get rid of people just because they are on an old contract. They will not be paying for us to sit at home and do no work either. Qantas have done exactly the same thing and have crew on different contracts and the old contracts are still there.

You are all being frightened by a union that has got out of control. Yes of course BA would rather have people on cheaper contracts and as we leave that is what will happen. They are making huge savings from the new crew compliments and even bigger savings from Mixed fleet (and the union has helped make these bigger than ever)

What we should all do is get on with doing our job and show BA that E/F and WW can be better than Mixed Fleet with all our experienced crew.

[The Blu Riband]

Personally I will strike go on strike for as long as it takes

MissM
Do you really believe that another strike would produce ANY positive results for any crew who participated in it?

You always state your determination to go on strike; but you don't have any clear reasons or objectives.

I honestly think that with your attitude you would be better off working elsewhere, for your own peace of mind.

[JUAN TRIPP]

Miss M wrote

Personally I will strike go on strike for as long as it takes as some of us care about out future and will not accept this behaviour from our excuse to an LT.

Well you might, but will DH be allowed to by Messrs Woodley and Simpson. I think not.

Also you mention that ST is not important to you, but for the commuters we all know it is. Its a shame none of them could write to DH and get him to explain WHY after all this time ST hasn't been reinstated despite being promised it back in 5 mins. I hear from lots of crew why cant WW just gine us our ST back and they would be quite happy to move on. As I explain to them, Bassa would then move onto the sacked/suspendees, and then the next thing etc. It wouldn't end with giving ST back. WW is not that stupid and gullable.

[Wirbelsturm]

As all of you know, and as has been made clear once again in both thread title and opening post, this thread is about cabin crew. Not pilots.

Continue to derail the debate and lose your posting privileges.

CC Forum Moderators

[Sgt Wilson]

We had an 'Agreement' and BA changed it - just as they will now change anything they want too in the future - can't you see that?

Agreements will always be subject to change. In order to protect ourselves we need a strong union to negotiate with the company about those agreements. Is BASSA that union?

They didn't negotiate and then went on strike, squandering their most effective weapon, the threat of strike.

So what happens now, folks. Does anyone know or remember what BASSA want anymore?

[Wanula72]

I understand the first MF routes have been confirmed from November as Las Vagas, Denver, Pisa, St Petersburg and Prague.

So its starting

[flapsforty]

A judge has ruled that BA´s change of crew complements does not constitute a breach of contract of employment.

Ruling here (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2010/302.html).

Re-starting that particular discussion here is pointless, so please don´t.

Thank you.

[Sporran]

Wilbelsturm,

Very good post! Lots of facts and explanations.

Your description of 'final correction' has been on the horizon for a long time. I believe that a strong union is very important, but strong does not mean intransigent or selfish. bassa have never been known for their 'negotiating skills' in my whole time in the company. They have always considered any efforts towards compromise as a sign of weakness. This lack of being willing to seek any compromise has directly led to this 'final correction'.

All other workgroups have negotiated in good faith and attempted to 'negotiate' the best deals for their members. The fact that all other groups have signed up to these negotiated settlements proves that BA are not out to deliberately destroy unions. I do not believe for a minute that WW and the LT want to destroy bassa, but I am equally certain that he does want to reduce their unhealthy power and influence over the running of the airline.

I am sure that Bill Francis wants to be as open and honest with cabin crew as possible regarding the routes that go over to New Fleet. However, he will have no influence about which routes are transferred in the future - these decisions will be made by the 'bean counters' who are not renowned for putting people before profit!

bassa's completely unrealistic attempts at negotation have allowed the opening of Pandora's box (New Fleet) and the contents of that box can never be put back inside. New Fleet had been taken off the table, but it was just the total unwillingness of bassa to negotiate that ensured it returned.

Surely it is time that bassa members demanded a change of leadership to get rid of this much of militant meglomaniacs who are only interested in their own power base. The present bunch of reps have only been looking after their own interests - NOT the rank and file members who pay their subs and expected to be represented properly.

[1000 to go]

It is also important to remember that any 'assurances' about certain routes being retained by current LH crew are dependant on a settlement being reached between BA and Bassa/Unite.

If this settlement doesnt happen, BA are free to move whatever routes they want. I have already heard some crew complaining that the new Tokyo service will probably be new fleet.

Please do not allow yourselves to think these assurances are valid now.

[MissM]

Yellow Pen

BASSA have different numbers as to how many have claimed strike pay. I'm sceptical to information presented by BA as they sometimes tend to twist things to their own advantage.

Betty Girl

It remains to be seen whether there will be another ballot. As I previously said I couldn't be less bothered with ST as I almost never use it but I happen to care about our commuting colleagues and what they are going through. You say that BA can't get rid of those of us on the old contract. Why not? Because no cabin crew have been placed in CL before? That's no guarantee whatsoever.

The Blu Riband

Negotiation. Not imposition. That's what the strike is about. Satisfied?

A threat of a possible strike in the future will always have an affect on forward bookings. It's one of our strongest weapon. BA might be able to depart 100% of all WW flights should a strike occur. Customers however will not get what they are paying for. Flights crewed by VCC? VCC are not anywhere near the standards of some of us legacy crew. I have had the pleasure of working with some of them and I should certainly hope they perform better at Waterside or wherever they are based.

[ottergirl]

Why not? Because no cabin crew have been placed in CL before? That's no guarantee whatsoever.

No but it would prevent them from recruiting any more cabin crew for a couple of years and that wouldn't help mixed-fleet get going.

[Hotel Mode]

You say that BA can't get rid of those of us on the old contract. Why not? Because no cabin crew have been placed in CL before? That's no guarantee whatsoever.


Wasnt the '97 strike based around similar scaremongering from BASSA about old contract crew being forced onto the new contract?

How many old contract crew have been forced onto the new contract in the intervening 13 years?

[ranger07]

I'm sceptical to information presented by BA as they sometimes tend to twist things to their own advantage.

Laughable! You only listen to BASSA then MissM and take what they say as gospel? Staff travel back in 5 minutes amongst many other untruths/misinformation!

Negotiation. Not imposition. That's what the strike is about. Satisfied?
And how long do you negotiate for? One year,two, three before BASSA would come to anything like a compromise?

Flights crewed by VCC? VCC are not anywhere near the standards of some of us legacy crew.

In your opinion MissM. A little display of self importance here maybe?

[midman]

BASSA have different numbers as to how many have claimed strike pay. I'm sceptical to information presented by BA as they sometimes tend to twist things to their own advantage.

Funniest post I've read in ages! I genuinely haven't read anything that Bassa have published that has anything to do with pilots, that hasn't been wrong, inaccurate or misleading. That's why so many of us find Bassa's 'word' so difficult to believe.

It remains to be seen whether there will be another ballot.....You say that BA can't get rid of those of us on the old contract. Why not? Because no cabin crew have been placed in CL before? That's no guarantee whatsoever.
So there may not be another ballot? So what has all this strife over the last 18 months+ been for? As for getting rid of old contract cabin crew, you can't just get rid of people without jumping through many employment law hoops, many of which curtail the ability of an employer to lay off who it wants to lose. It's just scaremongering to suggest otherwise, but it suits Bassa's tactics to develop in its members that sense of being under siege and constant threat.

Negotiation. Not imposition. That's what the strike is about. Satisfied?

Looking at it from a different point of view, when the Bassa reps said "No complement reductions" were they not IMPOSING their own solution on the cost reduction negotiations?

BA might be able to depart 100% of all WW flights should a strike occur. Customers however will not get what they are paying for. Flights crewed by VCC? VCC are not anywhere near the standards of some of us legacy crew. I have had the pleasure of working with some of them and I should certainly hope they perform better at Waterside or wherever they are based. I should hope legacy cabin crew are better than VCC, who are trained to a standard to allow the flights to depart safely, and with some element of the service. But at least BA earns the revenue and the passengers reach their destination. (It's the only time I've seen a whole crew applauded by passengers at the gate)

[Wirbelsturm]

Negotiation. Not imposition. That's what the strike is about. Satisfied?

Sporran, thanks.

The point above is that even the most stubborn child will eventually realise that when the talking is exhausted the imposition will come. BASSA were warned they just didn't believe that the company would do it against the all powerful BASSA.

Failure to push through change would have led to total loss in forward investment over the past two years leading to an inability to cover the atrocious losses incurred leading to a potential collapse of the business. Satisfied?

[Wirbelsturm]

I'll repost this after checking thoroughly for the 'correct' text.

Take whatever Bill Francis offered you with a pinch of salt - they will change whatever they want to change and do whatever they want to do. The only thing that could possibly stop them doing that would be a strong Trades Union and thats almost a thing of the past.


Where in the CC Contract appears the clause 'contract for life'? Is it a bit like a Hugo Chavez contract?
Managers have to re-negotiate their own contracts, often on a yearly basis, based upon previous performance but the CC should be protected and cosseted all their life? This is not a nationalised company any more it is privately owned so the quote:


BA is not here to 'protect' nor 'look after' anyone - it is here to make money.

Should not come as a surprise to anyone.

Contracts are made to be re-negotiated as market circumstances change. Most unionised groups throughout BA have been very successful at long negotiation thus enabling change over a long period. Sadly BASSA have failed their membership in this and whilst it seemed for many a year they they held the high ground with their aggressive stance all it meant was that the final correction would be all the more painful. Welcome to the final correction. Agreements are put into the contracts to enable them to be changed at short notices without the total re-negotiation (that word again) and re-writing. They may appear in a contract but, as the court case proved this year, are NOT legally binding.


The only thing that could possibly stop them doing that would be a strong Trades Union

And didn't Len McKlusky do exceedingly well protecting the 'contracts' of his previous 'bothers and sisters' in the Dock industry in Merseyside? He protected them so well that the whole docks industry collapsed due to being totally non competitive and the contracts vanished into the wind in the dole queue of the 1980's.

Lets look at Tony Woodly? Member of the TGWU which led 'negotiations' in the protection of the workers employed by the beleagured British car industry, an industry that needed radical reform to survive the onslaught of the Japanese car manufacturers. Once again a total failure to negotiate meaningfully and a demand to the strict adherence of the 'old contracts' led to the industry collapsing.

So here we have two pillars of the Union community both still employed on nice salaries (they'll be losing child benefit) after totally destroying their respective industries with their 'all for one, one for all' rhetoric.

Quote from Len McKlusky:

"Capitalism has failed," said Mr McCluskey last year. The state, he said, should "intervene where necessary through industry control and ownership".

I would love to see them try to pull BA back into the national industry which would lead to the collapse of the airline as EU rules do not allow state subsidy of airlines. But Len would know that wouldn't he?

BASSA and Unite are terrified of losing the grip on the reigns of BA that they have managed to acquire over the past 20 years. BASSA aren't interested in the individual any more they are aghast that their bullying, yes bullying, approach to negotiations, using the 'nuclear' option from the outset, has failed.

There is a core who will constantly believe that they can hold on to the past as it is their right and, personally, I feel sorry for them. The only way to protect future contracts is through progressive, structured and adult dialouge with the company. The time of BASSA is past.


Hopefully that now contains nothing to 'derail' the debate.

Thanks
:(

[Human Factor]

Personally I will strike go on strike for as long as it takes...

I suspect you won't be given the opportunity again.

[fruitbat]

HF

I agree, strong rumours that a settlement is to be announced within the next week.

[Yellow Pen]

The rumours abound that Walsh and Woodley are about to conclude a deal, but Woodley is not in a position to deliver a deal. Only the BASSA leadership can conclude the deal, a result of them seizing back power after Woodley put them back in their box at the last dispute, and the BASSA leadership will never agree a deal which fails to put them back in their jobs at BA, something Walsh won't countenance. The only way Woodley could deliver a deal would be through the implicit threat to cut BASSA loose from Unite, and I doubt there'd be many supporters of that amongst Unite whilst the leadership of the union is still up for grabs.

[numberfifteenplease]

and the BASSA leadership will never agree a deal which fails to put them back in their jobs at BA

I don't agree with you on this - DH knows he will never be returning to BA - any offers from BA will be put to a ballot of that I am certain, so it will be down to the members to decide

[Juan Tugoh]

IF Woodley and Walsh can come to an agreement, such that UNITE recommend the agreement to BASSA members and it is subsequently rejected, BASSA will become far more isolated than they are now. UNITE would then be less inclined to go to bat for BASSA - remember that while it is only BASSA that can end a dispute, it is only UNITE that can authorise a ballot.

This represents a real problem for BASSA as without another successful ballot there will be no more protected IA - assuming that any further ballot cannot be challenged in court. How many BASSA members are so committed to the cause that they REALLY put their job on the line?

[MissM]

Hotel Mode

None but the strike in '97 was different. At least the new contract was integrated onto existing fleets. We are now facing a separate fleet which means the end to EF and WW fleets.

Ranger07

ST had no relevance in my decision to strike. Personally they can stuff it but as I have said many of our commuters are suffering from participating in a lawful industrial action. What BA did when they removed this concession was to punish every striker for being naughty.

Self importance? Of course. We are the reason as to why BA was once the world's favourite airline. Sure, some managers and desk clerks at Waterside might have put a few things together but the cabin crew are the face of the airline.

midman

What do you think will happen when we are too many crew on EF and WW fleets? They will either offer us Mixed Fleet (despite them being afraid of us contaminating the fleet) or show us the door.

BASSA offered different solutions which excluded crewing level reductions. BA weren't interested. At one point they were only £10 million pounds apart so I doubt that they have ever been interested in reaching an agreement.

Strikebreaking crew and VCC not minding their own business being applauded by passengers at the gate? Sure, that's certainly something to applaud at.

[MissM]

I honestly think that with your attitude you would be better off working elsewhere, for your own peace of mind.

As much as some of you obviously would prefer me to do, I won't be going anywhere for a while. Maybe if BA offered me a good VR package I would consider it!

[fly12345]

Iberia merger wont happen??
Bookings will suffer??
Singapore going to MF in November??
Staff travel returned in 5 minutes??
etc etc etc

VR??
Keep dreaming Miss M!!

[Wirbelsturm]

Self importance? Of course. We are the reason as to why BA was once the world's favourite airline. Sure, some managers and desk clerks at Waterside might have put a few things together but the cabin crew are the face of the airline.


Wonderful arrogance. It would seem within the world rankings the 'face of the airline' is in need of a lift.

Forget what everyone else does within BA, the Cabin Crew, according to BASSA, are all that counts. The CEO that lead to such crass opinions is long gone as should such arrogance.

[Tiramisu]

And here lies your first mistake - it is NOT a contract. It is an AGREEMENT - just as we all work(ed) to AGREEMENTS until BA decided to change them. You and your colleagues have been used - No current BA crew will be 'safe' from whatever BA want to do.
Yes I admit, an error on my part calling it a contract instead of an agreement. Nevertheless, it's still an agreement from BA in writing that confirms my future earnings which is much more than you or other crew members have. And for that I am grateful to BA.
For those of you who 'Backed BA' - you will not be 'protected' neither will 'legacy' (I love the way you Pilots are using that word) crew.

In Backing BA, we backed ourselves protecting our jobs and those of other employees in BA too.
For Tiramisu, HiFlyer14, Eddy et al - you need to understand that BA is a business, a corporate machine, a money making entity for it's shareholders, simples http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/thumbs.gif

BA is not here to 'protect' nor 'look after' anyone - it is here to make money.
You are stating the obvious and that is not in question here and neither are we oblivious to that.
As far as BA not protecting us, how would you explain Bill Francis offer that we've signed up to if that's not protecting our future earnings?
I have flown with several BASSA members who wished they too could have accepted the same offer.
Take whatever Bill Francis offered you with a pinch of salt - they will change whatever they want to change and do whatever they want to do. The only thing that could possibly stop them doing that would be a strong Trades Union and thats almost a thing of the past.

I'm very happy with the offer from Bill Francis and prepared to move with the times and work with BA. As far as I am concerned, I'm playing my part like the rest of the BA workforce in contributing to cost savings while protecting my job. How are you playing your part exactly?

By the way, is BASSA the so called strong Trade Union that you are referring to that failed to bring BA to it's knees?
Bravo!:ugh:

[Tiramisu]

Miss M said,
It's not too late for you, or anyone else, to change your mind. The majority of us made the right decision earlier this year and won't doubt to make that decision again. Personally I will strike go on strike for as long as it takes as some of us care about out future and will not accept this behaviour from our excuse to an LT.

It's not too late for what exactly, Miss M? The freak show is over and we've all moved on and are working with BA in a positive way to bring back business. Judging from my flights the past couple off weeks with extremly high business loads, you've failed miserably.

[MissM]

Wonderful arrogance. It would seem within the world rankings the 'face of the airline' is in need of a lift.

Forget what everyone else does within BA, the Cabin Crew, according to BASSA, are all that counts. The CEO that lead to such crass opinions is long gone as should such arrogance.

Surely what everyone else is doing can't be too important or time-consuming as they have enough spare time to complete both cabin crew training and crew flights.

Like it or not, we are the face of the airline. We spend the longest time with our customers. Whenever a manager, or some desk clerk, at Waterside decides to change something onboard, we have to face the consequences and deal accordingly, not them.

[MissM]

Tiramisu

It's not too late to change side. Should there be another strike, you are more than welcome to come to BFC. Some of you, those 1000 who signed the individual BA offer and really sold yourselves down the river, might have move on. What happens later? No union representation. You will be on your own. Are you relying that PCCC will come and rescue you?

If you, and every other union member who crossed the picket line for whatever reasons, had supported your union, which is responsible for the terms and conditions which you are enjoying, we never would have been here today. The dispute would have been long gone. Unfortunately there will always be individuals who are enjoying certain benefits, which others are fighting for because they don't want to do it themselves.

[numberfifteenplease]

Yes I admit, an error on my part calling it a contract instead of an agreement. Nevertheless, it's still an agreement from BA in writng that confirms my future earnings which is much more than you or other crew members have. And for that I am grateful to BA.

As previously mentioned - BA had an 'agreement' with it's crew in the past which it changed - how on earth can you seriously believe that your future earnings are 'guaranteed'. The only way it would be 'guaranteed' was if it was a contractual term - your signed 'agreement' is not contractual.

In Backing BA, we backed ourselves protecting our jobs and those of other employees in BA too.

Thats your opinion of course, in my opinion you have helped accelerate the demise of our job

As far as BA not protecting us, how would you explain Bill Francis offer that we've signed up to if that's not protecting our future earnings?

For a start it came from Mr Francis, and more importantly it is not a 'contractual' agreement

I have flown with several BASSA members who wished they too could have accepted the same offer.

I have flown with several non-strikers who wished they had striked - both of our comments are unsubstantiated hearsay

I'm very happy with the offer from Bill Francis and prepared to move with the times and work with BA.

Good luck

As far as I am concerned, I'm playing my part like the rest of the BA workforce in contributing to cost savings while protecting my job. How are you playing your part?

By working with one less crew member every trip

By the way, is BASSA the so called strong Trade Union that you are referring to that failed to bring BA to it's knees?

I suggest you re-read what I wrote -

Take whatever Bill Francis offered you with a pinch of salt - they will change whatever they want to change and do whatever they want to do. The only thing that could possibly stop them doing that would be a strong Trades Union and thats almost a thing of the past.

I emphasised the fact that BASSA is almost a spent force so I do not understand your point. BASSA is still the strongest trades union amongst Cabin Crew. There simply is no other viable alternative.

[Tiramisu]

Miss M,
No offence, but I'm not the type to frequent BFC even if it was the last place on earth!
As far as BASSA is concerned, it is a reckless union which has lost credibility in every sense. It's tarnished the name of cabin crew and I wouldn't want to be associated with it in any way. I'm also content with the benefits that BA have granted me.
I'm very happy with the PCCC which has a respectable and very adult forum where momentum is growing rapidly. If I need support, I will consult the PCCC.

[ArthurScargill]

Miss m :
if BA offered me a good VR package I would consider it!]

So why didn't you take it when it was offered about a year ago ?

[DeThirdDefect]

Flights crewed by VCC? VCC are not anywhere near the standards of some of us legacy crew.
Are you saying that some "legacy crew" are no better than VCC?
Are we to assume that you place yourself amongst the "legacy crew" who're so much better than VCC?

[The Blu Riband]

Only the BASSA leadership can conclude the deal

In which case there will never be an agreement.

Do BA even care any more?
They could just let Bassa and their lemmings wallow in self pity.

[Tiramisu]

As far as I am concerned, I'm playing my part like the rest of the BA workforce in contributing to cost savings while protecting my job. How are you playing your part?
By working with one less crew member every trip

numberfifteenplease,
But yet you went on strike for working one crew member less!:rolleyes:

PS:I have re-read your post re-BASSA being a spent force, so my reference to BASSA being the so called stong Trade Union was indeed irrelevant.

[Lib Dem]

So, has a deal been struck with Unite and BA ?

Sorry, but I've been off the radar for a bit and have missed all the latest gossip.......................

By the way, when did the thread title get changed ? Don't I get consulted on anything anymore!

[Colonel White]

Self importance? Of course. We are the reason as to why BA was once the world's favourite airline. Sure, some managers and desk clerks at Waterside might have put a few things together but the cabin crew are the face of the airline.


As someone who is not cabin crew I can only say that your comments show a remarkable lack of knowledge of the airline business.

[Takes deep breath]

Without wishng to be disparaging to cabin crew, you might care to contemplate what happened during the strike and extrapolate.

BA as a business continued to operate. We sold lots of seats. we sold lots of cargo space, we made certain that passengers, their baggage and all that cargo got from A to B. We bought in aircraft and crews.

Basic bit of airline fact - you don't need planes or cabin crew or (and here I am on thin ice given this forum) flight crew. You do need accountants, marketeers, sales folk, revenue management and maybe the odd IT bod. You don't need vast numbers but you do need some.You can go into the market place and buy the rest. That's what wet leasing is all about. You can buy in your ground handling, that's what Servisair Gatwick Handling and others provide. You won't make as much profit or have as big an asset base, but then you won't have huge debts to service either.

Cabin crew may be one of the faces of the airline, but are no use unless there is sizeable operation out there to ensure that there are passengers to carry in the first place.Cabin crew are not the most important part of the airline, never have been and never will be. Your comments only serve to make you look foolish.

The strength of an organisation is the sum of its component parts.

[Litebulbs]

What I find very interesting in the debate today, is whether BASSA/Unite or the PCCC would represent the interests of crew better? I would be a little naive if I thought that the bulk of contributors to this and previous threads, thought that BASSA/Unite was a good thing, but why set up another association to consult with BA? If BA are a reasonable employer, then a works council set up under the ICE regs would suffice. OK, you would not have negotiating rights, but negotiating rights mean nothing, if you cannot enforce a position and that does mean industrial action.

I understand that a banner is needed to draw people away from BASSA/Unite (I really want to say the T&G and god help us if Len gets in and my subsequent expulsion from Unite), but who is to say that the PCCC will not be made up of BASSA reps, if a deal is made by Unite with BA? There probably would be a fair few union cards ripped up if that happened, but could the PCCC be selective in its membership?

[MissM]

DeThirdDefect

I can't speak for everybody but there are always exceptions. Surely there are probably some VCC who perform better than certain regular CC but they are definitely in the minority. I know that I'm very good at my job. I have a very good service record and would undoubtedly beat every VCC in every aspect onboard.

Tiramisu

We were striking over the principle of imposition and not actually the fact that crewing levels were decreased.

Colonel White

Are cabin crew not needed? Try departing a full 747 without any cabin crew onboard and you will see what happens. I gather you would get a personal visit from CAA.

BA is a premium airline. Customers pay a lot of money to fly with us and they do so for many reasons. We offer a good service (not as good as it used to be) onboard. Who deliver it? That would be us in the cabin. Customers tend to have high expectations, both on the service itself but also on us.

[64K]

BA has some truly excellent cabin crew. Then there are a majority who do their job as required. Then there is unfortunately a terrible minority as well who believe that the company owes them a living.

BA has created a monster - continually, crew have been told they are 'the best'. You just need to look at in-flight assessments - apparently crew member XYZ is exceptional because he smiled and used a customer name. Surely that should be the norm? There are countless other examples.

BA crew are not the world's best, I'm not sure if such a thing exists. The rifts between crew, and between crew and management, need to be fixed urgently. Ultimately, BA will move on with or without its crew. Ask yourself: 'how easily can BA replace me?' versus 'how easily can I replace BA?'

(My personal opinions, not those of my employer)

[Colonel White]

Miss M said A threat of a possible strike in the future will always have an affect on forward bookings. It's one of our strongest weapon. BA might be able to depart 100% of all WW flights should a strike occur. Customers however will not get what they are paying for. Flights crewed by VCC? VCC are not anywhere near the standards of some of us legacy crew. I have had the pleasure of working with some of them and I should certainly hope they perform better at Waterside or wherever they are based.Clearly she hasn't seen the latest stats for September. BA carried more passengers this year than last and more in premium cabins. So much for strike threats affecting forward bookings. :D BASSA going to go on strike ? Only if Unite let them have a ballot. And Unite won't do that because they know that the reason on the ballot paper links it to the previous walkout. BA could then not only sack strikers, they could also come after Unite for compensation. Now given Unite's dodgy finances having spent a small fortune first backing Labour in the election and then backing young Ed for the Labour leadership, plus all the cash they've splurged on this dispute in strike pay and legal fees, coupled with the money they need if they want a round of public services strikes, they may not have much in the kitty to pay BA as well.

If BASSA are determined to take action, Unite may just cut them loose. After all, BASSA aren't looking for a settlement, have cost the union a small bundle to date, damaged Unite's credibility at large by failing to mobilise mass support and could do further damage to the union by any continued action. Moreover, BA seem well placed to nullify the impact of any strike. Unite have bigger fish to fry.

[Colonel White]

Are cabin crew not needed? Try departing a full 747 without any cabin crew onboard and you will see what happens. I gather you would get a personal visit from CAA.
If it were not for the sales folk, rev man, finance, schedules, ops cntrol etc.. all those people you seem to despise, you wouldn't have a destination, a slot, a 747 or any passengers in the first place ! You could, however have all the former and then wet lease a plane (as BA did during the strikes) - so having your own cabin crew , plane and (whispered softly) flight crew are not essential.

[Yellow Pen]

I seem to remember full 747s departing LHR during the strike without many cabin crew on board at all! One SCCM (not necessarily an existing cabin crew member), a handful of experienced crew and the rest VCC. Now that the VCC are experienced, we could feasibly depart LHR with no BA employed cabin crew on board.

As to the 'virtual airline', it's a great plan on paper but has anybody ever actually made it work in the real world?

[GearUp CheerUp]

Surely what everyone else is doing can't be too important or time-consuming as they have enough spare time to complete both cabin crew training and crew flights.

Has it not occured to you (and DH, come to think of it) that maybe, just maybe, people's abscence while they do VCC training, flights or recency is covered by overtime, other colleagues filling in or them catching up on their work later?

[Colonel White]

As to the 'virtual airline', it's a great plan on paper but has anybody ever actually made it work in the real world?

Suspect a lot of startups begin in this fashion - get some revenue coming in and then progress to dry lease and own crew.

[Yellow Pen]

Precisely. 'Virtual airline' works for a small operator, but not for a major carrier where attempting to wet lease a 50 x B777 operation just ain't gonna happen.

[Bengerman]

Whilst entertaining, Miss M's arguments are simply a rehash of previously rehashed BASSA mantras. The way FORWARD has to rest with the cabin crew themselves and the best way they can help themselves is to oust the militant idiots who put their membership in this unenviable position, elect some reasonable, pragmatic reps who can use common sense and get the dispute sorted at the earliest opportunity.

[Stiffco]

Thanks to Colonel White for the last few posts; tells it as it is.
Which, I am sure caused a hissy fit :{ when a certain over inflated balloon was burst.

[JUAN TRIPP]

Tiramisu wrote

Miss M,
No offence, but I'm not the type to frequent BFC even if it was the last place on earth!


Ha ha.You and me both. Quite simply I couldn't think of a worse place. Spoke to one crew who admitted that the place was pretty full of 'trashed' crew on the day she visited. Sad.

Miss M wrote

Negotiation. Not imposition. That's what the strike is about. Satisfied?

Oh come on Miss M. You obviously dont know the history of DH 'negotiation' skills. He would have gone on for 9 years never mind 9 months. Remember Bassa have shot to pieces at the time the long range agreement in 88, part time in 93, the crew card system in 94 etc. If it would have been upto Bassa none of the above would have happened. It always particularly amuses me when the Bassa stalwarts go on about what Bassa has done for crew, when if it would have been upto them, part time would NEVER have happened. Try taking that away from 60% of crew nowadays. Also if only Bassa would have tried to be proactive you never know that longhaul might just have had some kind of preferential bid system by now. Oh but no, they have trashed that idea in the past too.

[Missyminx]

What I would like to know is, what are peoples' views on how this is all going to end? As a previous post mentioned, BA doesn't really need to do anything. They have achieved more than they could have hoped for thanks to the self-destruct approach of a dysfunctional union. They (the union) have become, as they stand, an irrelevancy, both in the eyes of BA - and to those of us who just want to come to work and enjoy our job, look after the safety and welfare of our customers and have a bit of fun with our colleagues down route. In my experience, this has been pretty much the norm on all of my trips since the 'strike', often with almost full crew turnouts (cabin and flight) enjoying sociable time out. This job, like life is all about what you make it, (just don't make it out to be something it is not!). The minority of militants are legends only in their own minds. Miss M declares she will strike for as long as it takes. To achieve what precisely? Where is there cohesion in the Unions' plans? Come to that, what ARE their plans? They really need to be communicating in a less emotive manner and concentrating on working towards an acceptable (ST notwithstanding) closure to all this; as closure there does need to be.

[ChicoG]

What I would like to know is, what are peoples' views on how this is all going to end?

Dylan Thomas wrote: "Do not go gentle into that good night". But that's exactly what BASSA will do. The "legacy" crew (MissM's words, not mine) have no power now - striking was their last and only weapon, and it no longer works - and therefore all they have is occasional posturing and a bit of finger pointing, interspersed with the occasional BASSA missive that criticises without offering any alternative.

I think you'll see the old and expensive legacy crew reaching their sell by date, taking their (BA supported to the tune of 500 million quid a year) pension and slinking off to grow tomatoes.

This dispute finished when WW put his foot down and said "No More", and only a few deluded individuals that think BASSA speak the truth, and nothing else, believe otherwise. All that's left are are a few fatuous legal arguments.

To be honest, I don't know why people like MissM don't know when they're beaten. She implies that she almost can't wait to strike and go to Bedfont; heaven knows what she's going to do when it finally sinks in that the whole exercise was pointless and embarrassing, and probably won't ever happen again.

Pimms anyone?

[stormin norman]

What's the betting on Staff Travel being given back before the next ballot ?

[dilldog01]

Miss M seems to be of the opinion that apart from Waterside and the flight/cabin crew on the aircraft BA don't employ anyone else ?

[Snas]

Miss M seems to be of the opinion that apart from Waterside and the flight/cabin crew on the aircraft BA don't employ anyone else ?


At the risk of sounding hard done by Mangers (a breed that I belong to) are often regarded by the troops as being a pure overhead of little worth.

The reality is that there are aspects of my job for example that the likes of Miss M perhaps don’t even know exist let alone how to perform.

She regards Managers as not being responsible for BA being the world’s favourite airline, that’s Cabin Crew who achieved that, cabin crew that were recruited by managers, trained by managers, dressed by managers, scheduled etc etc (I could go on clearly)

It’s a team for goodness sake and please start behaving like one of it’s members.

Her (Miss M's) statement of "Sure, some managers and desk clerks at Waterside might have put a few things together..." displays a level of arrogance and ignorance in equal measure.

[Flap33]

I can't see ST being returned, it would be a major concession by the company and I think given the opinions on this thread we are in agreement that BA don't need do anything at the moment; BASSA appear to have been excluded from the party.

Given the Government Spending Review coming on 20th October and the expectation of 10,000s of public sector job losses I would predict that any call for strike ballot would be given short shrift by Unite - they really are going to have bigger fish to fry..... If BASSA are kicked out of Unite and decide to go it alone would BA still be able to go after Unite for damages?

In some respects, Unite might actually have to finish BASSA off themselves in order to protect the greater Union... If WW and Tony Woodley can reach an agreement I would suggest BASSA be de-recognised by BA and crew given the option of going straight into Unite Mainstream and accepting that the batle is lost, sign the new agreement (whatever that maybe) and get on with returning this airline to the top.

[spin_doctor]

I can't see ST being returned, it would be a major concession by the company

I disagree, I think if the LT believe that returning ST (as part of an agreed settlement) will end this dispute then it will be returned.

I'm aware that in doing so lots of 'backing BA' types will wail and gnash teeth, however you can't have it both ways. Numerous statements to the effect that it is BA's trainset and they must be allowed to manage it as they see fit apply just as much in this example. If it's in the best interest of the company and the shareholders to return ST, they will do so.

[Wirbelsturm]

I have to agree with Spin Doctor on this one as well.

I think ST has been used as a big stick to prevent a mass 'sheeple' walkout by BASSA members 'coz BASSA said so' and made them look more carefully as to the irrational reasoning behind the action.

Now it could be used as a carrot to entice an agreement which could, potentially, be far less accomodating than those offered in the past but the 'return of ST' can be used by BASSA as a token of 'victory' however false and hollow that token may be.

Personally I don't mind in the slightest if ST is returned, I would just like to see an end to this ridiculous dispute and get on with doing what we all do best until the next round of concessions looms.

[Juan Tugoh]

If it's in the best interest of the company and the shareholders to return ST, they will do so.

I agree. However, at the moment it seems that to be in dispute with BASSA is no real problem, there is no real threat of any IA - the current ballot while it remains active is a paper tiger. If they strike on this ballot they can be sacked as the IA is no longer protected. Another ballot is problematical as it has to be on a separate and unrelated issue, BASSA and UNITE officials have publically included ST and Disciplinary issues as part of the current dispute. They need another issue - one that motivates sufficient BASSA members to strike that the strike has teeth. So far BASSA's strikes have not had enough teeth; BA have not been forced to change their policy one iota, so far the strikes have failed. Why would a new one change that?

For BA, it is a different equation. While the dispute is on they can introduce New Fleet and other working arrangements and BASSA are powerless top stop it, they are not being consulted. BA have not even started to talk about a pay deal, except for the 1000 or so crew who have signed a deal with BA and who are not BASSA members. All the time a pay deal is not negotiated, the pay budget for CC is going down in real terms due to the effect of inflation. It may not be high at the moment but 2-3% of a multi-million budget i not to be sneezed at.

So with no real threat and the pay budget easing and other minor benefits there is little to change BA's position, Return ST? Why? - there is little benefit to BA, even if it will allow a settlement all it will do is allow the malcontents to continue to foment discord, while BASSA will claim a victory that will embolden them and reinvigorate a toothless and increasing marginalised BASSA. Where is the real upside for BA?

[Wirbelsturm]

Juan Tugoh,

What you say make good sense when viewed from an employees perspective or from a laymans perspective. From the viewpoint of the investor however any discord within a company, no matter how small, can be seen as a negative incentment. The problem with having an open festering dispute with one part of your employee base is that no-one can predict when it might explode. By reaching agreement the company has the possibility to build in clauses preventing such idiotic, ill thought out and damaging action in the future. Such a soloution is far better when enticing prospective investors to back the company as it shows that the management team are proactive with dealing with disputes rather then allowing them to fester.

That is why, with the new aircraft orders looming, the access to South America opening up, the increase in African flights happening and the increased LH leisure market from LGW, I think the company will want this dispute settled on their terms and not BASSA's. If that means the return of ST as a 'gesture' then so be it.

[ChicoG]

One could equally well argue that with the status quo, with most of the BASSA reps removed or emasculated, and legacy crew steadily rolling out of the company at the normal rate of attrition, that the company need do nothing; the festering sore will heal itself, and the dead skin covering it will simply blow away in the wind.

[The Blu Riband]

Maybe BA should put the return of staff travel to a vote!

Let the staff decide. :)

Personally I thought the last offer of a return with zero seniority was satisfactory.

Anybody can see that after a year or so it could be negotiated back to their original dates.

But the snag there is that word again; negotiation.

Not Bassa's strong point.

[Juan Tugoh]

Wirbelsturm,

what you say makes sense, and I agreed with the initial quote that if it is in the best interests of the company and shareholders St will be returned. I just think it it a complex issue.

The most important part, as I see it, is that this dispute has now gone on so long that it is a MUST for the company not to be in such a situation again. I feel that BA believe they must not give BASSA a victory that would allow them to lick their wounds and rebuild the union as it was prior to this dispute. For BA, it is imperative that the basic relationship that they have with BASSA is redefined - BA to manage their business, BASSA to act as a negotiating body for the CC community.

It would be a false economy to settle this dispute now without dealing with the underlying flaw in the relationship. If they were to do this, then doubtless there will be another toxic dispute in a couple of years and another one a few years after that - sadly a show down with BASSA as a loser is necessary for the long term and for the future commercial sucess of BA. No Blue Chip company can afford a dinosaur union exercising such influence over its commercial operation. BA need to divest themselves of the reputation of having a strike every summer.

The position BA and BASSA are in now is less than ideal but the longer it continues the less it hurts BA - Premium loads are up, the share price is up and the threat of further IA does not seem to be worrying the frequent flyers overly. This dispute needs to be settled but not at any cost. As you say I am not particularly bothered about ST itself, it is more about what it represents in this dispute and the way it has been used as a political football that defines it's relative import.

[The Blu Riband]

Her (Miss M's) statement of "Sure, some managers and desk clerks at Waterside might have put a few things together..." displays a level of arrogance and ignorance in equal measure.

Not only ignorance but a total inability to hear another point of view or to accept facts that don't concur with previous ideas.

She hasn't ever heard any point of view or fact that she doesn't agree with.

Which is why, if I was Willie, I wouldn't give an inch , ever, until Bassa totally cave, or until the crew themselves change Bassa's strategy.

[Wirbelsturm]

I'm afraid that BASSA will never simply 'go away'. The thugs at Unite will never allow it, they have a hook into a major FTSE 100 company and they are not going to allow that to be lost any time soon.

If BA attempted to destroy BASSA then Unite would be all over the company like a rash. The delights of the Socialist Worker party camping on the doors of Waterside and T5 is not one that the company wishes.

Although the PCCC could be a credible alternative they have yet to amass the required numbers for official recognition and they have also not been exposed to the negotiation experience with the company.

Even with 4000 militant members BASSA would still be a force to reckon with sadly and therefore they need to be legally hamstrung and tied up to prevent this sort of scenario in the future. BA could hold the sword of Damocles over them with respect to the costs involved over the past two years and a threat to reclaim if they caused more trouble. It MUST be in writing though!

To re-iterate, BA CANNOT destroy BASSA nor, IMHO, would they or have they ever wanted to. That was pure BASSA fantasy. BA will want to remove the old school, historic, miltant tendancies of the Union and ensure that clauses are placed into agreements/contracts to prevent future damage due to ingrowing toenails, days off for Henley, Wimbledon etc. etc. etc.

Give the power to decide what is acceptable hours for all crew based on a singular industrial hours framework to the Captain and lets all get back to work.

[MissM]

GearUp CheerUp

Interesting. Who's paying overtime pay?

Juan Tripp

Not a surprise as you, and Tiramisu, would be too busy backing BA for nothing in return. Every single person who crossed the picket has done nothing but to prolong our dispute and step up the creation of Mixed Fleet. Don't think for a second that you have done yourself a favour.

Let's believe BA's figures for a second. They claim that some 4.900 crew members have lost ST. Around 6.000 would have crossed the picket line and 1.000 of them signed (and sold themselves down the river) the individual offer. What exactly have the remaining 5.000 crew members gained from crossing the picket line? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

ChicoG

I will never feel embarrased over my actions or claim that they were pointless. I still believe going on strike was the right decision and I won't hestitate a second to go on another strike should we vote for it.

We still have power. Even if we vote for another strike it will affect the business regardless of BA promising to operate a full 100% longhaul schedule. What will our customers be getting? They will be getting to their destinations but receiving a substandard and poor service from VCC which is not what many are expecting.

Snas

A team? Hardly. I'm finding it very difficult to be saying that BA employees who either crossed the picket line or trained to break our strike are my colleagues. I find their behaviour to be despicable.

Well done Willie Walsh. You have really succeeded in dividing this company.

[Snas]

A team? Hardly. I'm finding it very difficult to be saying that BA employees who either crossed the picket line or trained to break our strike are my colleagues. I find their behaviour to be despicable.



Yes well, you rather make my point. Your arrogant and elitist view of CC’s self importance and sense of entitlement doesn’t appear to me to have been created solely from this particular dispute but has always been there.

Fortunately however I happen to know that your view isn’t shared by all your cabin crew colleagues, so unlike you, it would seem, I have some hope for the future of the team.

[Juan Tugoh]

Every single person who crossed the picket has done nothing but to prolong our dispute and step up the creation of Mixed Fleet.

You may well be correct in stating that the dispute has been prolonged by the crew that crossed the picket lines - but not in the sense that BA would have caved in to BASSA's demands. As BASSA's own QC stated in court (and therefore made an uncontestable option for BA) BA can always vary your contracts by issuing a 90 notice of severance.

At the time the ballot was run and indeed for the whole summer BA were in dire economic straits and required structural changes. BASSA were quite determined to have no changes (something they have completely failed to achieve) hence the ballot. A successful strike is highly likely to have triggered a more robust response from BA. Rather than berating people for crossing the picket line line, you should be thanking them for you having a job on your current salary.

Either way, if and maybe are irrelevant, people did cross the picket lines and the strike failed. BASSA need to move on and deal with the reality of a failed strike and stop wishing things were different.

[ranger07]

Wow. If MissM is typical of the BASSA die hards, how on earth can any deal be struck?
Such elitist attitudes, every one else is wrong, no other staff member in BA is as pertinent to the operation etc etc.
I'm stunned at these outlandish attitudes.
Are you ever going to offer this airline anything MissM?

[Tiramisu]

Posted by Miss M
What exactly have the remaining 5.000 crew members gained from crossing the picket line? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.
Quite a lot actually.
1. Staff Travel
2. They haven't lost money and got themselves in financial difficulties.
3. Job satisfaction... they are happy at work.
Lastly,they are not the ones that look miserable in CRC moping around. A Captain asked me recently about how I could differentiate the strikers from those who came to work. My reply was they are ones who don't smile and look miserable all the time feeling sorry for themselves.

I forgot to add,

4. Kept the people who pay our wages (the pax) happy to continue to fly BA
5. Helped our employers overcome a ridiculous, disproportionate strike which threatened our employers future, thus safeguarding our jobs and pensions

[ottergirl]

Tiramisu, you beat me to it I was just composing a similar message.

Miss M - your views are quite staggering. Could you not conceive for a moment that your beloved union and reps have let you down badly? That they have allowed their ego's to prevent them from getting a future for their members? They may have lost their jobs but they could much better afford to than most of their members thanks to Unite subs paying off their mortgages. Some of them only became reps because they didn't like flying much and wanted more time on the ground to hang out at St Mary's stadium. Turn some of your anger to the people who have let you down badly, we owe you nothing, they do!

A Captain asked me recently about how I could differentiate the strikers from those who came to work.

Had a great trip today with just such one of these people (notorious according to the rest of the crew). From the arrival in the briefing room dripping in yellow pens, xxxx tags, bassa lanyard, etc. right up to the end of the day he was a total misery. Of course, we did have a little fun at his expense, engaging him in reluctant conversations and teasing him about his pens. Result four happy CC and one v. unhappy! Who lost?
Edited to add, seems some of you who are new to the forum think I am implying that we bullied this crew member. Not at all, we were lovelyto him! It is part of all our jobs to engage with the team we are working with and, if as a crew member it makes you unhappy to talk to your crew, then clearly it is not the right job for you. His unhappiness came from within him not from his crew.

[Hotel Mode]

Hiroo Onoda (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hiroo_Onoda)

I'm once again reminded of this. The rest of the world knows it's over. The die yards look like they will continue taking pot shots at the locals and stealing the occasional chicken though. The question is will the commanding officer leave his seasonal veg to come and tell them it's over?

[who came first]

I'm afraid that BASSA will never simply 'go away'. The thugs at Unite will never allow it, they have a hook into a major FTSE 100 company and they are not going to allow that to be lost any time soon.

If BA attempted to destroy BASSA then Unite would be all over the company like a rash. The delights of the Socialist Worker party camping on the doors of Waterside and T5 is not one that the company wishes.



Too late. BASSA is finished. They have no more ammunition. Their leadership have lied to their troops, they risked all with the last set of strikes and lost. So now they pay the price. I think it would be fair to give staff travel back to the strikers because they are for the most part unwitting victims of the BASSA leadership but it's not going to happen. There's nothing in it for BA. I think they would see it as showing weakness which would only encourage BASSA.
BA has been very careful not to do anything to upset other Unite groups as that could be dangerous so they will continue to ignore BASSA which is fine by most other Unite members.

[Tiramisu]

Hi Ottergirl,
There's only one way to manage all the yellow that does not comply with uniform standards. I request politely, to have it removed. Easy.;)
There's going to be a huge focus on Uniform Standards soon with the start up of Mixed Fleet in November. BA want to make sure that we all look smart so therefore no 'Vote Yes Strike' Tags and anything that sends the wrong message to our customers. About time too.

[GayGourmet]

What will our customers be getting? They will be getting to their destinations but receiving a substandard and poor service from VCC which is not what many are expecting.

I'd like to point out that many VCC normally work in the terminals, the lounges and call centres along with other customer touch points, and are therefore perfectly qualified to look after our customers on board the aircraft, just as they do every other day of the week in their normal jobs.

Other VCC are managers from all levels of the business who are benefitting from the experience by being able to go "back to the floor" and learn a great deal about the role.

Then of course you have a large number of cabin crew who have changed careers but who were able to go back to Cranebank on reduced length courses due to their recent flying experience - for these people it's like riding a bicycle.

What the VCC and Backing BA campaigns have done is to unite more and more people at BA who believe we have a bright future. People from all walks of life and jobs at BA have been thrown together in all sorts of activities, and many agree that it feels more and more like one big team now, like never before. VCC has also earned the cabin crew themselves a huge amount of respect and admiration, as more and more people understand fully the lifestyle, the job, and all of the pressure it entails.

So no, I don't think our customers' on board experience will suffer in any way other than, perhaps, the pace of the service if the crew are working to minimum complements.

GG

[License to Fly]

Hotel Mode We are the reason as to why BA was once the world's favourite airline. .

And probably the reason why BA are not now, the middle eastern airlines have a fantastic crew attitude that BA could learn from. I think Mixed fleet may have a few teething problems, but give it a few months, it could give BA back its consistent brand and customer service that is sometimes lacking - we all want BA to do well don't we ?

[Tiramisu]

Although the PCCC could be a credible alternative they have yet to amass the required numbers for official recognition and they have also not been exposed to the negotiation experience with the company.
Wiberlsturm,
Whilst the PCCC may not have the required numbers for official recognition as yet, they are not far behind and as previously mentioned, they are gaining momentum.
Who's to say that the PCCC don't have the required skills to negotiate with the company anyway? From what I have seen, the PCCC members are more responsible, intelligent and forward thinking exploring ideas for a way forward out of this mess on our behalves.
What have BASSA's negotiating experience achieved with the company to date?

Loss of Pay and Staff Travel for strikers.
Loss of New Share Scheme and Extra Free Ticket.
Loss of Monthly Travel Payment.
Tarnished the reputation of an iconic brand and it's cabin crew.
They have expedited Mixed Fleet and the list goes on...

[MissM]

Juan Tough

Should I be thanking BA for having a job on my current salary? Do you think my salary has been given to me from BA as a gesture of generosity or because of strong union representation?

Ranger07

I would be willing to offer a lot to BA but only if they were interested and serious to negotiate seriously. They could remove another crew member if they wanted to but it would have to be negotiated. Not imposed.

Tiramisu

What about Mixed Fleet? Will they be protected from it? No, they won't. It was a bad decision to cross the picket line. BASSA have not expedited Mixed Fleet. Who did? Every single one who crossed the picket line including yourself. Be proud of yourselves. In my opinion, everyone who crossed the picket line should be offered a new contract on Mixed Fleet.

Regarding the PCCC I don't believe you have the appropiate negotiating skills. It would probably be suitable for anyone who crossed the picket line but not everyone else who went on strike because we want to protect our future careers and reach a watertight agreement. Undoubtedly PCCC would have soled all of us down the river.

GayGourmet

It's different to work onboard. From what I have experienced from having worked with VCC they do give a substandard service and have absolutely no idea what they are doing. I gather they must be rather excited over getting the opportunity to work as cabin crew and wearing wings on their jackets as they probably never would have passed the ordinary selection process under normal circumstances.

[beesflyer]

Miss M. You say VCC aren't up to the standard of Legacy crew. This may be true of some. But can you explain, why on the SLF site and Flyertalk our passengers are only too pleased and want to fly with BA during the strike periods, finding the experience much better than the norm. Not in sinc with your view of VCC capability at all.

[MissM]

There's going to be a huge focus on Uniform Standards soon with the start up of Mixed Fleet in November. BA want to make sure that we all look smart so therefore no 'Vote Yes Strike' Tags and anything that sends the wrong message to our customers. About time too.

Funny that it really has not been an issue in the past but now we are going to be assessed on uniform standards during SEP. Do you honestly think they are wanting to make sure that we all look smart? Surely it couldn't have anything to do with that BA wanting to find every possible reason to suspend legacy crew over silly uniform issues?

[Hot Wings]

MissM,

Congratulations on your continued defence of BASSA. It makes entertaining reading and helps the rest of us see how difficult it must be for IFCE to try and manage some of you. However, you do yourself no favours by being blind to published facts. Please read and comprehend the ruling against BASSA regarding the imposition - BASSA did not negotiate, so BA had no reasonable option but to impose the changes. Why are you unable to recognise this?

[Juan Tugoh]

Juan Tough

Should I be thanking BA for having a job on my current salary? Do you think my salary has been given to me from BA as a gesture of generosity or because of strong union representation?

Well that's certainly interesting from someone that seems to have inordinate pride in their skills such that they are the only staff in BA that matter. The name there is Juan Tugoh not Juan Tough, it is a simple thing, a matter of courtesy to get someone's name right - but as the best crew in the world you should already know that.

You are being, I suspect, deliberately obtuse. I did not say that you should be grateful to BA for your salary but I did point out to you that "BASSA need to move on and deal with the reality of a failed strike and stop wishing things were different." It does not matter what might have happened it matters what did happen and how BASSA intends to move forward, an analogy is that if I got the numbers for the lottery last week I would be a millionaire - but I am not and wishes will not pay the mortgage.

[Rover90]

Funny that it really has not been an issue in the past but now we are going to be assessed on uniform standards during SEP. Do you honestly think they are wanting to make sure that we all look smart? Surely it couldn't have anything to do with that BA wanting to find every possible reason to suspend legacy crew over silly uniform issues?So just turn up to SEP conforming to Uniform Standards

If you had ever worked with a certain UK operator, less than perfect uniform standard or any failing in your SEP knowledge meant you went home on unpaid leave pending a chat about your future flying career.

A bit harsh maybe but you would have to agree, BA is currently very reasonable when it comes to daily SEP knowledge and Uniform Standard conformity.


and MissM
because we want to protect our future careers and reach a watertight agreementThe aviation industry does not do watertight agreements, it is a very fluid business.....and please could you concede something that the majority of posters on this forum know and that is we are only ever 90 days away from a "Notice" that changes our contracts......and that would be take it or leave it.

[Syndicate9]

Tiramisu, do you REALLY believe your job is more secure now than it was 12 months ago. I'm not cabin crew and I can't see that at all. With the commencement of the Mixed Fleet your future is at real risk and there are many of my colleagues who are rubbing their hands in undisguised glee at the prospect.
However they seem to fail to realize that all employees and all grades need to be concerned. The destruction of Unite no matter what the reason will eventually affect the work of everyone in BA. Those parts of the company who do not belong to a Union already face having to re-apply for their jobs annually or whenever it suits BA. I can't imagine many of my colleagues wanting to go through that no matter how much they hate BASSA right now.
Again some of my colleagues believe they are above all of that but they too need to realize that they are not irreplaceable. If BA were to defeat the unions what could BALPA do to stop their own careers being destroyed by cheaper pilots on inferior contracts and agreements?
I think we all need to calm down and look at what is happening with a little less passion and a bit more of a cool head.

[swalesboy]

Why do people keep going on about BA trying to ruin Unite? Unite have proven in every other department that they are a sensible people who can spot the issues at hand and deal with them in a responsible manner.

Do you think the various managers want to discuss things on a one to one basis with every individual they employ?

BA need the unions as much as the oiks (including me) that work for them, simple as that.

Does BA want to destroy BASSA? Different story. Who could blame them.

Woodley/Simpson, in private may sing a different tune about BASSA, who knows.

[Tiramisu]

Syndicate9 said,
Tiramisu, do you REALLY believe your job is more secure now than it was 12 months ago. I'm not cabin crew and I can't see that at all. With the commencement of the Mixed Fleet your future is at real risk and there are many of my colleagues who are rubbing their hands in undisguised glee at the prospect.


Syndicate9,
I've never said my job is more secure now than it was 12 months ago. All I have is an agreement that gives me protection of my present terms and condition and future earnings and a pay rise for the short term.
There are no guarantees for anyone in the airline industry and I am fully aware as an old contract CSD, that mine is the contract that BA would like to be rid of. I'm not looking at things with passion but it's more of a case of being realistic and level headed.

BA are currently engaging with us, trying to make CSD's on Eurofleet more productive. They've been holding feedback sessions for Pursers and CSDs last month and again this week to gather ideas from us as to how to achieve this.
There are also other things in the pipeline which I'm not at liberty to post here.
If BA were really trying to get rid of us, they wouldn't be spending the time and money investing in existing fleets and current crew which I belive they are.

All I have done is played my part in a dispute which I believe was totally the wrong fight. BA is a business and who's to say that if it was my business, I wouldn't be doing the same. We need to be competitive to stay ahead of the game
The unions need to get back with BA to salvage what they can while they can.
And another thing, one only has to reflect at the effect the Ash Cloud had in April which could happen again in the future with disastrous effects on all our jobs, never mind Mixed Fleet.

[MissM]

Rover90

It's only an interesting turn for BA because uniform standards have never really been an issue in the past. They are, in my opinion, looking for every possible reason to suspend you should you work on the legacy fleet.

It may not be necessary for you to have a watertight agreement but for some of us on EF and WW fleets we need such an agreement to protect us from Mixed Fleet. Perhaps you don't understand it but Mixed Fleet does mean an end to existing fleets and sooner or later we will be out of employment. I am sincerely sorry if you have a problem with that some of us are sincerely concerned about our livehoods.

Tiramisu

There's a strong rumour that they will be transferring all 767 from EF to WW for a couple of years. Where would that leave you? It certainly doesn't indicate that they are wanting to make you more productive. Don't be mislead by this company.

[Tiramisu]

Miss M said,
There's a strong rumour that they will be transferring all 767 from EF to WW for a couple of years. Where would that leave you? It certainly doesn't indicate that they are wanting to make you more productive. Don't be mislead by this company.

Miss M,
Bill Francis and Glenn Reynolds have both categorically stated that as long as the 767s are here, and that is till at least 2016, the CSD role will exist on Eurofleet. If not, I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

[Rover90]

It would appear we work on the same aircraft for the same employer

It may not be necessary for you to have a watertight agreement but for some of us on EF and WW fleets we need such an agreement to protect us from Mixed Fleet. Perhaps you don't understand it but Mixed Fleet does mean an end to existing fleets and sooner or later we will be out of employment. I am sincerely sorry if you have a problem with that some of us are sincerely concerned about our livehoods. I am WW CSD, and you are a Purser on WW. Perhaps you could let me know where I am getting this wrong.

[SlideBustle]

Haven't posted for a while!!

Don't know what has happened with BASSA/Crewforums being replaced with an 'X'???

Anyway, the whole dispute has gone worse at the moment! The bad feeling at work is terrible - there is a MASSIVE divide between strikers and non. That's without the tension between Crew and other departments-volunteers. Also, people (including myself) are always paranoid about everything. Saying the right (or wrong) things, doing the wrong things, speaking too loud. I always do things properly pretty much anyway but still...

Whilst at the beginning of this dispute I did believe the 10% of crew being on MF in 10 years, I really am starting to doubt this now.... Why??? 1250 crew being recruited in 1 year - there are about 3000 crew on Eurofleet. Now I am not an expert in Maths and I know they obviously factor in turnover but... honestly??? And I do have quite abit of time left.

I also do think that the salary for Mixed Fleet is SHOCKING, and whilst CSM is reasonable for that much responsibility is quite a bit less than CSD and even Purser! Sorry, I know Market Forces and all that - but come on! We are living in the 21st century so around £1200 is not alot (this will be max take home - including allowances downroute - where just a pizza can cost £15 in some destinations!!!) Living in London too - looking around if you wanted to live by yourself your outgoings would be around £1000-£1200 minimum and that would be a bedsit in Hounslow... OK people can join elsewhere but first of all people deserve a good wage and also it is concerning if they do starve us of work. There are never any guarantees with anything, HOWEVER they are not getting rid of crew - if they starve US of work, or force us out/onto Mixed Fleet this is replacement of crew which no matter how you look at it IS unfair!!!

I assert that us (particularly post-1997 crew) are NOT overpaid anyway, particularly our starting salary. Will Mixed Fleet work??? Hmm... who knows it sounds very idealistic from a management point of view, and there is nothing wrong with them wanting to increase standards but whilst we do have some VERY SOUR apples, we do still have some of the best crew (IMO!) Not saying other airlines don't have crew as they do - but we do deserve our pay really. Not saying change in BA is not necassary AT ALL but is the way this whole Mixed Fleet being set up the way to do it???

[Rover90]

MissM
It's only an interesting turn for BA because uniform standards have never really been an issue in the past.So what you are saying is that we have been less that optimum at adhering to uniform standard in the past and we are now going to be really off side because BA are going to start taking a closer look at us and flagging failures.

Good heavens, how could we be falling short in any way when we are so wonderful. I am appalled!

[Betty girl]

Sidebustle,
I know change has been hard but I really don't think it is going to be as bad as BASSA are scaring people it will be.

Yes Mixed Fleet is here and BA will make huge savings from it. They are also making huge savings from us working with less crew.

I recently had a meeting with one of the E/F Fleet Managers and she told me that she had been offered a move to Mixed Fleet but she chose to stay on E/F. She told me that there are NO plans to get rid of WW or E/F and that we would just gradually get smaller as Mixed Fleet gradually gets larger. She said that all new entrants would go on to Mixed Fleet but that would only happen as routes expanded and as WW and E/F crew retire or leave etc. NO ONE WOULD BE FORCED TO GO. She even predicted that there would be some promotion on both fleets as a lot of senior crew are due to retire in the next few years. She said she intended to help make E/F as good if not better than Mixed Fleet and could not understand why the union had taken such a hostile stance to negotiations that in fact were designed to protect current crew.

I choose to believe Bill Francis and this Fleet Manager. The choice is believe them or BASSA and I personally lost faith in BASSA years ago.

[SlideBustle]

Yes Betty Girl what you say makes sense. But then again, thinking about it, so does the theory that they want to, in effect replace current fleets... I mean noone knows - even BA probably don't know how Mixed Fleet will work themselves! And yes, the union could have been less hostile.

I just really hope we can continue on our current salaries for many years to come, that is the main thing really... I do also believe that there should be agreements with Scheduling etc... I don't mind working harder and would rather work harder than work for less, however would rather not work to Scheme!! I do think a collective force (ie. Union) of crew should be able to negotiate agreements...

Actually that is a point - is Mixed Fleet really scheme or have they an agreement?

I do think BF et al has tried to be fair aswell, it's just the bigger picture and future... it is hard (well impossible!) to predict, but I think if their plan, or what they will in the future plan is to transfer our good work to them, is unfair.

[Betty girl]

Well he has promised to be fair! but as you say no-one really knows.

I was feeling down until I spoke to this Fleet Manager and she was so positive about E/F and how we could do better than Mixed Fleet, it really made me feel a lot more positive. If you want PM me and I will let you know her name and you could talk to her yourself.

P.S. We all need to actually look at the facts as stated by the company, which you can believe or not. A lot of what is said on this forums is polarized views from one camp or another, all with different reasons and agendas, some just wild speculation and some just to scare us and this is coming from both sides.
My advise to you is to reread the agreement sent to us by Bill Francis whether you signed it or not (without any of the union scare mongering attached) and realise that this will probably be what is accepted eventually by the union, as Simpson and Woodley thought it ok. The only stumbling block was staff travel and disciplinaries.

[stormin norman]

One of the major problems now facing 'old contract' crew is whether they will collect their pensions based on their current pay scale, or (as many see it) being forced onto a new (mixed fleet scale in the future) as the legacy numbers wind down (which they will in time given the turnover rate of crew).

Its a prospect that not many others in BA will have to contemplate but a great worry to those who embarked on a career as cabin crew as a long term job.

[mohitomaster]

Why have the posts regarding the shutdown of 2 cabin crew forums been removed?????

[flapsforty]

Mohitomaster, this thread is about BA CC industrial relations.

Not about shenanigans on other forums.

[52049er]

Slidebustle - I agree that MF pay isn't stratospheric, but why then has BA had no problems with filling the vacancies with high quality (I had the pleasure of meeting some of them a couple of weeks ago) applicants?

Its not a nice world out there, and yes market forces are now taken into account by BA and its competition. The MF offer is entirely in line with what you could expect elsewhere given the skillset required. What it does do is emphasise what a good employer BA has been over the years, and how crazy BASSA were to reject any efforts at negotiation.

For what it's worth, looking at the equivalent scene for flight crew these days, and what the job entails, I'm not sure I'd rush into £100 000 of debt to sit where I do now either, but people still do so why should the companies change their stance there either? :(

[Hubert Davenport]

Fair in a business world, I don’t think so.

What one manager promises to do today is not necessarily what the next appointed manager will stick to.

Historically within BA managers are moved around departments and the replacement is given a lower budget than his predecessor.

I also believe Bill will transferee futures routes in a fair way, I do however doubt he will be around for very long.

As for the new head of IFCE he has to make cuts and route transferee will make him the biggest savings.

Anyone with an ounce of business sense can see the savings that can be made by moving the routes that generate ETP, box payments, etc; can’t be ignored.

So please don’t think fairness comes in to the business plan, when we have no union representation as much work as is physically possible will be moved to the cheaper operator.

It’s nothing personal it’s just business accountancy.

[BlueUpGood]

Let's believe BA's figures for a second. They claim that some 4.900 crew members have lost ST. Around 6.000 would have crossed the picket line and 1.000 of them signed (and sold themselves down the river) the individual offer. What exactly have the remaining 5.000 crew members gained from crossing the picket line? Nothing. Absolutely nothing.

They have exercised their democratic right to go to work. Just as you exercised yours to take industrial action.

It begs the question of course, as to why so many voted in favour of IA, but then declined to take part. I would suggest BASSA were unwise to vigorously encourage a yes vote without highlighting the consequences for it's members if IA should be required. Anyone who believes taking action that would cost a company tens of £m's, wouldn't be met with an aggressive response needs to be briefed on the realities of industrial relations, which is the unions responsibility. 'Sending a message' to WW is one thing, but what if he (of course) calls your bluff? You have to be prepared for, and accept the consequences, and failing to fully and accurately brief BASSA members accordingly has left you where you are now. Had your strike action been fully supported by the members, no amount of volunteers would have kept BA flying.

IMHO BASSA have completely failed those it is there to represent. Had they briefed properly, they would have got a very different ballot result. They may have found themselves in a weaker position in terms of ballot results, but the ballot is the massed opinion of the people it represents, and BASSA should be listening. With the greatest of respect to BASSA members, they have been duped by the ultra hardline leadership, who have used at times ludicrous propaganda to get the result they wanted, not the result the membership would have wanted if they had been responsibly briefed by BASSA.

Let me give a simple analogy. Your doctor is there to look after your health, and ensure the best long term outcome for you, and in a similar way your union should look after your long term welbeing in the workplace. When faced with problems, you go to your doctor, expecting an accurate diagnosis, to be told all the facts and consequences, and given realistic options, for the best possible outcome, giving you the final say. That is what he/she is there for. You would not expect your doctor to recommend a course of treatment without telling you of the side effects, or giving you options, or hiding facts from you would you?

Let's imagine for one minute BASSA had acted responsibly, and the ballot had returned a no vote for IA. Likely as not, you would all be very much happier now, with no pay cut, share incentives, enjoying the fruits of your labours with your concessionary travel, no new fleet, oh - and working to the same crewing levels as you have been for the past year or so.

[Juan Tugoh]

Hubert,

What you say seems to be reasonable.

Given your analysis, the current inactivity of BASSA seems incomprehensible. All the decisions regarding MF are being made without any input from the negotiating body for the crew - whether people like it or not BASSA still are the recognised union. They are playing a waiting game according to DH, but what are they waiting for? The court cases to be decided? That could take a while, appeals tend to follow court cases. Whatever they are waiting for MF continues and actions become Custom and Practice which gain weight in law.

BASSA need to end their current dispute and start to represent their members in the developments that are happening now. The current stance of no negotiation just seems to allow BA to do what they want, move routes as they see fit etc. The only crew with any form of protection at the moment seem to be the ones that were shrewd enough to accept the deal recently that was excluded from BASSA members.

You can argue all day about the rights and wrongs of the dispute, the reality is that BASSA have been marginalised and are excluded from any influence while they continue to sulk and pout AND DO NOTHING. BA are doing exactly what they need to do at the moment without any CC representation.

[Betty girl]

Hubert Daventport,
I agree with what you say but this is why Bassa should have engaged in negotiating the monthly travel payment instead of striking over the imposed crewing levels, which a judge has ruled as reasonable in the light of the unions not attending any meetings.
We as crew have been very let down by the union and those that chose to strike have been let down the most.

If the monthly payment is accepted by all crew eventually, it will mean that it wont matter which routes transfer. The problem lies in the fact that, had negotiation taken place it could have been a more realistic figure and at the moment the figure is more like a safety net just in case you don't archive all your box payments or ETP. Also at the moment the union has not accepted it and only 1000 crew, myself among them, has this safety net.

Lets hope for all our sakes that some of the more decent and intelligent union reps can move forward and sign an agreement, probably similar to the one on the table but hopefully better and we can all get on with our lives.

[BlueUpGood]

I would be willing to offer a lot to BA but only if they were interested and serious to negotiate seriously. They could remove another crew member if they wanted to but it would have to be negotiated. Not imposed.

Sorry to have another pop at your posts, but really...

BASSA have shown they are incapable of real negotiation. They are however very good at propaganda. The question is why so many choose to ignore fact over fantasy?

[Hubert Davenport]

This is a paragraph from the draft copy of Operation Columbus.

The strategy for growing the new fleet relies upon growth of the network, attrition in the old fleets and the appetite for existing crew to reduce their hours through voluntary part time, sabbaticals etc. Recruitment into and promotion within the old LHR fleets will be stopped, and routes transferred to the new fleet as crew numbers reduce in the old fleets. The scope includes designing packages to enable transferee or secondment into the new fleet. Given the difference in remuneration between the old fleets and the new fleet, an important part of the Columbus programme is to make the new fleet as attractive as possible in non-financial ways i.e. lifestyle flexibility, to encourage as many transfers as possible.

It is one of the most worrying parts of the proposal, to make the new fleet attractive I would imagine that the old fleet would have to haven degenerated into something rather awful.

Having looked at the document again I was shocked to see how much of it has become reality.

I do have serious concerns that the final part of the plan is the one that will damage our futures the most.

I have no doubt that our life at BA will be made very unpleasant in an attempt to drive us to New Fleet.:{

[Hubert Davenport]

BG

The safety net you describe is in the £6,500 region if I remember correctly.

I doubt that we would have triggered the payment over a three-year period.

Having not triggered the payment I believe BA would remove it.

My worry was that if we had needed that safety net many of our routes would have already been transferred to MF.


Without the safety payment the routes that generate good allowances for us would now be fast tracked over to the MF.

We would now be left with all the trips that have no premium pay attached to them, with no safety net.

I also agree with the MTP but do feel it was offered with a lot of unacceptable conditions tied in.

It could have been a starting point for negotiation, but many people had the staff travel issue on top of this to think about.


I know it is a bit cynical and I hate to be so negative, however past experience with our management leaves me in a sceptical position.

[Watersidewonker]

Proud to be in BASSA. Other airlines know how this company have behaved. You can go on and on about MF etc etc but those crew who have held firm will remain so.

[Betty girl]

Hubert,
The agreement is NOT for three years only!
It is the pay deal element that is only for three years.

This is what upsets me so much, is that so many people have been misled by union officials, who seem to be on a totally different agenda, than the one of negotiating a good settlement for us.

Some crew have been attracted across to mixed fleet already to be CS M's and Future Talent but no one is being forced. Probably more VR may be offered in the future but even with all this BA have told the city, who they are not allowed to mislead, that they estimate it will take 10 years for Mixed Fleet to be 40%.

Please take out the letter, with the agreement in it, that we ALL got from BA and reread it slowly. Not the version with the union add ons in, which is totally misleading. You will see that this agreement is valid until it is renegotiated and it is the pay deal that is for three years.

If you have not got the agreement I could try and reprint it here for you. Let me know if you need me to.

P.S. I am glad that we can have a good debate without the usual poster that just seem to want to insult and denigrate crew. I have started to just ignore these poster and just respond to balanced and productive posts. I suggest everyone does this too whatever side of the debate you are on.

Many thanks BG.

[Hubert Davenport]

I was not referring to a three-year deal. I was just going on my past experience with this company. I doubt very much that you will need the top up payment as the figure is very low. If your allowances were under this figure a lot of our routes would have quickly moved to MF.

What I am suggesting is that the initial growth of MF will be relatively slow so you will never need the top up, what BA tend to do in this situation is remove the payment stating that it was never needed.

That is when the majority of the routes will be transferred to MF.

We will eventually be left with routes with very poor allowances and have no protection.

This will be the final phase of Operation Columbus, making the old fleet people transfer over to NF because the old fleet is no longer financially beneficial.
This would most likely be done by offering a payment to buy our contracts and put us on the MF contract.

[dolly bird]

As a CSD on WW I'm pleased with the focus on uniform standards. Spend half an hour in crc and you will see some sights. Over the years I have approached crew on my flights who are not adhering to the laid down uniform standards and have been met with various responses ranging from tears to been accused of bullying and harrassment.

Dirty tabbards, scuffed shoes, poorly ironed shirts the list is endless and I see this on almost every flight.Arriving at a destination I'm often embarrassed especially (as in LA) when we queue up next to other airlines who look immaculate!

For lots of crew who like to bleet about 'being the face of the airline' maybe now they'll be forced to look at their poor standards of uniform dress!

[Colonel White]

BG
Lets hope for all our sakes that some of the more decent and intelligent union reps can move forward and sign an agreement, probably similar to the one on the table but hopefully better and we can all get on with our lives.

I'd second that desire, however I can't see BA management improving the deal on the table. If you look at the history of this dispute, the offers have got successively poorer. The last (and deemed by BA to be final) offer was more than reasonable. It gave cabin crew a heck of a lot more than other bargaining groups have had (look at the deal struck with ground crew which involves headcount reductions). From the sidelines it would seem that the reason that the Unite leadership would not actively recommend it was because whilst staff travel would be returned, seniority would not. Again, from the sideline I think that it was a real pity that so few cabin crew actually voted.

I also believe that the dispute is being perpetuated by a few people on the union side who have a personal axe to grind and who could not be reasonably described as impartial. Union reps need to be able to advise members of their rights. The role is all about being the voice of the members in dealings with management. It is not about foisting personal agendas on management and members. I'm sure that there are some good reps within BASSA, it's just a pity that the only ones we on the outside se, are the more strident variety.

[Betty girl]

Hubert,
You can't just let your imagination run wild and imagine all these dreadful scenarios and act as if they are definitely going to happen. You have to base things on fact. Fact is that Bill Francis has given his word that we can keep our terms and conditions and continue to negotiate all our agreements.

You say they removed the last 'pay back' deal after three years and yes they did but that was because it was only agreed for three years and in actual fact, hardly any crew ever got paid out from it because we nearly all earned more than we previously had, with the exceptions of a few E/F crew who had previously done a lot of split duties.

I agree this figure is low but it is now just a safety net, the previous offer was higher but that was a replacement which, although it was higher, would have not rewarded those that did the harder, longer,trips. I actually prefer the new offer but just wish we had, had an active union negotiating for us and maybe it would have been a bit better. What we got was an embittered DH dragging crew into a dispute and loosing a lot of crew their staff travel for nothing. It could have been so much better!

Colonel White,
Yes it is more of a desire than anything else. Had we had a useful union it may have been better but as you say not much hope now. Incidentally had we have had a productive union the Mixed Fleet crew could also be working to better agreements. They are going to be getting a worse deal than Gatwick now and that is thanks to Bassa.

[123breath]

Betty Girl is right......an offer is on the table, one which is extremely generous in my opinion given the circumstances, and Bassa should do the right thing and sign-up.

If their membership had read the latest offer properly, without Bassa looking over their shoulder whispering doom and gloom, and if they felt able to accept it in good faith, they could be looking forward to security in employment for the next few years. As things stand they do not have that security, thanks to Bassa. If, in three years, BA start to fiddle with the agreement, and in doing so betray that good faith, then that is the time to talk about industrial action, not before. Any more industrial action now will clearly be counter-productive and bring forward the demise of current agreements. Strike action has become futile in this current dispute. Anyone who thinks otherwise is delusional.

Staff travel will obviously still be an issue, but once the dust settles in a year or so, and industrial relations within BA are much improved with a much more rosy outlook financially as we emerge from the recession, there might be scope for negotiations between a 'New Bassa', (patent pending...... remember 'New Labour'......didn't they do well for a few years/3 elections? All Bassa need to do is replace DH & co with a Blair/Brown/Mandelson type team :uhoh:) and BA to improve the situation as far as staff travel for strikers is concerned. Those who have lost staff travel will have to be patient on this one.....they will be in a much better position to get it back next year than now....it just isn't going to happen in the current dispute. BA have won this one.

This would provide the 'legacy' crew with an opportunity to prove to the rest of us just how good certain amongst them keep telling us they are, as they would in effect be in competition with the new Mixed Fleet.

The alternative is indeed 'doom and gloom' for anyone supporting Bassa

[who came first]

It's dragged on so long now that maybe my memory fails me, but are you sure there's an offer on the table? To accept the offer re guaranteed top-ups you had to be non-union on 1st July, and I thought the last overall offer made my BA was withdrawn when the last set of strikes took place?

[Betty girl]

That offer is the last offer and it was turned down by Bassa but I am sure as some crew have accepted it (about 1000) it's not unreasonable to think that it would still be there if Bassa made a bit of an effort.

[123breath]

You might be right....I've lost track/interest myself. I'm sure if Bassa knocked on Willie's door with their collective tails between their legs he would invite them all in to talk though, as I remain convinced that he doesn't really want to sack them all.........it just wouldn't look good for the corporate image. That's why he's been so patient up until now.

[Colonel White]

My understanding is that the offer that BA made back in July hasn't been rescinded. BASSA members may have voted to reject it, but I would think that just as previously,the offer would remain on the table until such time as BASSA can persuade Unite to ballot for further IA. At that point BA would retract theoffer. Not sure what happens as a result of Unite kicking off court action. I'd have thought that if the union accepts the offer, the court action would get dropped.

[Hubert Davenport]

BG
It’s not my imagination, it is 25yrs experience working for BA.
We are working for a business and that is what drives their decisions.
It is not about how we feel it’s about getting the job done for as little as possible.
When we have no union and we are represented by a management run staff association, I think you may be in for a bit of a surprise.
It won’t be about who went on strike or not, we will all be worse off.

[123breath]

Bassa would almost definitely want some kind of a face-saving gesture from Willie, and that depends on how generous he is feeling, but even without anything tangible I'm sure Bassa's proven record of twisting the truth would make any agreement/climbdown look like an outright victory for Union militancy. It really is up to them to go knocking on his door.

The way I see it this is their only realistic option if they want to survive this war (sorry for yet another reference to war) in any shape or form.

Come on 'New Bassa', arise from the ashes.

[MissM]

Betty Girl

I recently had a meeting with one of the E/F Fleet Managers and she told me that she had been offered a move to Mixed Fleet but she chose to stay on E/F. She told me that there are NO plans to get rid of WW or E/F and that we would just gradually get smaller as Mixed Fleet gradually gets larger. She said that all new entrants would go on to Mixed Fleet but that would only happen as routes expanded and as WW and E/F crew retire or leave etc. NO ONE WOULD BE FORCED TO GO.

Did you get this in writing? Of course you didn't which means what she said doesn't mean anything. Surely you can't that naive enough that you are actually believing what one of our managers said to you?

Tiramisu

Bill Francis and Glenn Reynolds have both categorically stated that as long as the 767s are here, and that is till at least 2016, the CSD role will exist on Eurofleet. If not, I'll cross that bridge when I come to it.

According to a different source within the company all 767 will be converted to WW configuration (sooner than you think) and be transferred over to WW for a few years before returning back to EF again.

[JUAN TRIPP]

Miss M wrote

According to a different source within the company all 767 will be converted to WW configuration (sooner than you think) and be transferred over to WW for a few years before returning back to EF again.

Sorry Miss M thats wrong. Flew with one of the flight crew managers on 757/767 fleet recently and they catorgorically denied that. There was a rumour that Boeing were going to pay for the EF 767's to be converted to WW as the 787's were delayed, but that is now NOT going to happen

[Snas]

MissM


Surely you can't that naive enough that you are actually believing what one of our managers said to you?



Do you honestly believe that every word said to you from BA management is a complete lie?

[ottergirl]

Hi dolly bird, welcome to pPrune.
As a CSD on WW I'm pleased with the focus on uniform standards. Spend half an hour in crc and you will see some sights. Over the years I have approached crew on my flights who are not adhering to the laid down uniform standards and have been met with various responses ranging from tears to been accused of bullying and harrassment.

You and me both! I have spent a few hours on standby today and was having a good look at the uniform standards. Truly appalling. So much so that I just suggested to my manager that if Eurofleet want to roster me to a stint in CRC as uniform police then I would be happy to oblige. Many other Eurofleet CSD's would be up for it as well. I have also popped to cc direct and got a supply of lanyards to hand out in briefing for anyone not in posession of one that conforms to the standards!:)
As for the new uniform control in Cranebank, the CSST trainers have always been happy to point out shortcomings but it has taken a while to convince SEP that they should join our campaign. Time for a new culture, lets give Virgin a run for their money!

[Betty girl]

Miss M and Hubert.

I have worked for BA for 22 years and in that 22 years they have been nothing other than a good employer. You paint a picture of a management that I don't recognise at all.

In 97 they protected current crew when they altered the salary structure and again now they have agreed to protect current crew. All along they have said that current crew can keep their terms and conditions and they have bent over backwards to try accommodate this.

It is Bassa that always messes things up and has made all this change a complete nightmare.

I know all of you will say Bassa have always negotiated all your terms and conditions, they are wonderful etc etc. but that is not true. Since the late 80's Cabin crew 89(Amicus) have always done the negotiating while Bassa always refuse to talk and then afterwards Bassa always lie to their membership and take the credit for what CC89 negotiate!!!That's the truth.

It is their union in-fighting that has contributed to this mess also. Many of us can clearly see what is happening and that is why we did not strike.

I will however agree that Willie Walsh is probably not an easy person to deal with and that removing Staff Travel has made it all more complicated but in my eyes the true cause of this mess is the inflated egos of some of the union reps ie. DH. who seems to have developed a God like persona.

[Rob Bedcrew]

You say they removed the last 'pay back' deal after three years and yes they did but that was because it was only agreed for three years and in actual fact, hardly any crew ever got paid out from it because we nearly all earned more than we previously had, with the exceptions of a few E/F crew who had previously done a lot of split duties.


BG in fact the deal was a guarantee that was to be reviewed after three years. There was no mention in the first instance of its removal. Furthermore, BA were less than veracious with their proposal. The calculation that was used at the time was inconsistent in its usage in that certain aspects of pay were omitted from the comparable calculation from previous payments; Motor Transport Allowanced for one.
I and others queeried this at the time, via Contact, however the spin that was put on it, and the fact that my letter was edited in such a way that it enabled them to sidestep the issue, was an eerie foreboding of the lies and spin being perpetrated now.
Leopards never change their spots!:=

[Betty girl]

Rob,
Quite frankly I am amazed that you feel badly done by the 97 agreement. I have never heard anyone in the last 13 years say they felt worse off except for post 97 crew, who like Mixed Fleet crew, new what the salary was when they joined.

That does not however mean that I feel that Mixed Fleet pay is OK. I do not and have been vocal on that point all along. However I would have liked our unions to have been there negotiating on behalf of both us and new crew, instead of calling people out on a damaging strike that has made everything all much worse.

[ChicoG]

Furthermore, BA were less than veracious with their proposal. The calculation that was used at the time was inconsistent in its usage in that certain aspects of pay were omitted from the comparable calculation from previous payments; Motor Transport Allowance for one.
I and others queried this at the time, via Contact, however the spin that was put on it, and the fact that my letter was edited in such a way that it enabled them to sidestep the issue, was an eerie foreboding of the lies and spin being perpetrated now.
Leopards never change their spots!

Isn't that exactly *when* you want a union doing sensible and detailed negotiation on your behalf? Why didn't it happen?

[vctenderness]

Not true Rob Bedcrew! Money back guarantee had an end date which was open to review. What happened was that the cost of administration at the end overtook the number of claims. BA then said it had served its purpose and would not continue. Motor transport had nothing to do with it having been incorporated in a different deal. Your letter in Contact was probably answered accurately be you saw it as 'Spin'!

[Rob Bedcrew]

Motor transport had nothing to do with it having been incorporated in a different deal. Your letter in Contact was probably answered accurately be you saw it as 'Spin'!

If one is quoted a money back guarantee surely all the factors in the equation should be used to balance. Basic algebra must surely tell you that.
Omitting the MTA allowance would not allow for a direct comparison.

[Syndicate9]

Betty Girl
The agreement is NOT for three years only!
It is the pay deal element that is only for three years.
What will non unionised crew do when BA break this agreement as isn't that what started this whole farce in the first place?

[tash55]

Ottergirl, as a SCCM, I am quite frankly shocked and disgusted at the way that you have treated this member of your crew (irrespective of their views). Large organisations have policies in place to protect employees from ring-leaders like you! :=

[Meal Chucker]

When they first appeared I hoped they were kisses goodbye, but I now guess they are a count down to Bassa's appeal on the 11th.

There are two more x's to come -

xxxx.bassa.co.uk/xxx.gif (http://xxxx.bassa.co.uk/xxx.gif)

and

xxxx.bassa.co.uk/xxxx.gif (http://xxxx.bassa.co.uk/xxxx.gif)

COURT 74
Before LORD JUSTICE WARD
LADY JUSTICE SMITH and
LORD JUSTICE JACKSON
Monday, 11th October, 2010
At half-past 10
APPLICATION
A2/2010/0578(Y) Malone & ors -v- British Airways Plc. Application of Claimants for renewal of lower court part refusal of permission to appeal.
APPEAL
From The Queen's Bench Division
FINAL DECISIONS
A2/2010/0578 Malone & ors -v- British Airways Plc. Appeal of Claimants from the order of Sir Christopher Holland, dated 19th February 2010, filed 10th March 2010.

[the flying nunn]

Betty Girl such true words. I can't believe I paid money to those muppets for so many years and got nothing in return. All BASSA seem to be able to do is make things worse.

[Wirbelsturm]

Miss M

As much as some of you obviously would prefer me to do, I won't be going anywhere for a while. Maybe if BA offered me a good VR package I would consider it!

It is this sort of dual standards that really astounds me. Here is Miss M, a true stalwart advocate of the BASSA action, laudable irrespective of your view point, considering VR if the package is good enough.

Let's turn the clock back to the start of this sorry dispute and look at the requirement for all departments to shed jobs. All departments were told that VR could be offered IF, and only if, productivity were increased to allow the same workload to be shared amongst the remaining employees.

I seem to remember that some 2400 VR applications were received by IFcE from members of the CC. These VR applications were put on ice due to the inability of BASSA to negotiate changes thus ensuring the required productivity. Only after BA exhausted the negotiation path and put up with the purile infighting of BASSA for an extra 6 months were the changes imposed and the VR applications rubber stamped thus ensuring no compulsory redundancies.

Now we have members of BASSA who demand retraction of the productivity changes but want a golden egg VR package as well? It would seem that anything goes in BASSA as long as the individual is 'alright jack'. I wonder why all of the LH CSD's who make up the board want to protect their 'legacy' past?

Sometimes it is the little things that reveal the true murky nature of self centerism that lies beneath.

[ottergirl]

http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/infopop/icons/icon13.gif
Ottergirl, as a SCCM, I am quite frankly shocked and disgusted at the way that you have treated this member of your crew (irrespective of their views). Large organisations have policies in place to protect employees from ring-leaders like you! :=
tash 55, I am sorry you feel that and maybe I could have phrased it better in my post. I in no way meant to imply that my crew were anything other than very nice and chatty with this crew member. His unhappiness on the flight came from his discomfort in talking to us, for some reason he did not want to engage which is an important part of CRM. It is interesting though that my making an extra effort to get him to put his prejudices aside could be seen by you as disgusting behaviour so I will ask him when I next see him if he felt that way. I will also edit my post so that it is clearer.
What do the other forumites think? Is it unacceptable to try and get withdrawn crew to engage with the team or should they be allowed to be as quiet as they like? What do the other SCCM's do to improve crew morale?

[Rocket Scientist]

flapsforty
Moderator


Mohitomaster, this thread is about BA CC industrial relations.

Not about shenanigans on other forums.

That's good to know. Does this mean, however, that those who have prolifically copy and pasted from BASSA and Crewforum will now have their posts deleted?

Many thanks.

[flapsforty]

Rocket Scientist, all information pertaining to the dispute is welcome here.

Discussion about what goes on other forums is not.

Substance rather than gossip, facts & reasoned opinion rather than mindless hysteria.

As long as you are currently employed by an airline and our way of doing things appeals to you, please feel free to participate.

If you don´t like our rules, which is entirely your choice, do not participate.


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

flapsforty
PPRuNe Moderator Team

[MissM]

Betty Girl

We are dealing with a different management this time. 13 years was a long time ago. They are saying that they want to protect current crew. That's why we need a watertight agreement because face it or not Mixed Fleet will make existing fleets come to an end. Quicker than you think. They say it will take at least 10 years which is rubbish. They have looked at the history and simply multiplied it with 10. They are already recruiting 1250 crew a year which is around 10% of the current crew numbers.

It should be interesting to see in three years what stance management will take towards you when they want to re-negotiate, or should I say discuss, your pay. Be rest assured that they are wanting to decrease it because many lucrative routes have gone over to Mixed Fleet and thus your average yearly earning should be less.

You say that you did not strike because you can see what is happening. Here's a question to you. Could it be that you did not strike because you relied on others to do it for you?

[Tiramisu]

We are dealing with a different management this time. 13 years was a long time ago. They are saying that they want to protect current crew. That's why we need a watertight agreement because face it or not Mixed Fleet will make existing fleets come to an end. Quicker than you think. They say it will take at least 10 years which is rubbish. They have looked at the history and simply multiplied it with 10. They are already recruiting 1250 crew a year which is around 10% of the current crew numbers.There's no denying that we are dealing with a different mangement this time Miss M, it's a far more intelligent mangement. So is is striking going to sort out the growth of Mixed Fleet? BASSA have blown it big time and they know it, that's the problem with the BASSA mentality, blame everyone else except for themselves.

It should be interesting to see in three years what stance management will take towards you when they want to re-negotiate, or should I say discuss, your pay. Be rest assured that they are wanting to decrease it because many lucrative routes have gone over to Mixed Fleet and thus your average yearly earning should be lessGet back to your reps and get some new intelligent ones elected who may at least try and salvage things. As someone suggested in a an earlier post, get a 'New BASSA' in and you might possibly see crew sticking together in a united front. Stop blaming BA and take some accountability for a change.

You say that you did not strike because you can see what is happening. Here's a question to you. Could it be that you did not strike because you relied on others to do it for you?
A cheap shot, Miss M.:=

[MissM]

There's no denying that we are dealing with a different mangement this time Miss M, it's a far more intelligent mangement. So is is striking going to sort out the growth of Mixed Fleet? BASSA have blown it big time and they know it, that's the problem with the BASSA mentality, blame everyone else except for themselves.

Everyone who crossed the picket line is responsible for Mixed Fleet. Don't ever believe that you did yourself, or this company, a favour for not going on strike. It was a short-sighted, and may I dare say selfish, decision of you.

We want some sort of control of Mixed Fleet which BA is not willing to provide us. They are willing to 'discuss' route transfers and such with us but nothing else. Discuss means nothing.

As someone suggested in a an earlier post, get a 'New BASSA' in and you might possibly see crew sticking together in a united front. Stop blaming BA and take some accountability for a change.

Would this 'New BASSA' be the PCCC? They still remain anonymous and keep insisting on doing it. How are they going to offer us some sort of representation?

A cheap shot, Miss M.

But possibly an accurate one. Some insist on having your cake and eating it too.

[Betty girl]

Miss M,
You know well, that all this strike has done is cause you damage and lost you some pay and your staff travel. It has caused BA damage, damage to it's name and reputation. It has caused all of us crew damage, now being viewed so badly by so many, you just have to look at all the posts from our passengers on pprune. But the most damage it has done is to the union itself by making such a stupid decision to strike in the first place. It has lost all moral high ground because it was an ill thought out strike over a ridiculous issue that most crew were not even bothered about. It has actually lost Bassa any power it ever had. More fool DH, he was actually told by one of his own reps back in November that he needed to wait for the November pay roll before balloting but he just went ahead with an illegal ballot in full knowledge of what he was doing. It is DH that has let you down and he has let Bassa down also. No one else.


It is easy to blame those of us that could see this from the start but even if all crew had striked it would have made absolutely NO difference because only weeks later the volcanic dust shut BA down completely. It was clear to see that Willie Walsh would have just ridden out a strike in just the same way.

Bassa have never negotiated in good faith, often not even bothering to sit down at the negotiating table, and that is why this is such a mess and it is people like YOU, that need to do something about it and get a new Bassa Chairman elected instead of holding on to the complete fool, that is not even eligible anymore to be your leader.

P.S. Mixed fleet was off the table until Bassa started the strike. Wake up and stop blaming every one except yourselves for this mess.

[Tiramisu]

Everyone who crossed the picket line is responsible for Mixed Fleet. Don't ever believe that you did yourself, or this company, a favour for not going on strike. It was a short-sighted, and may I dare say selfish, decision of you.
We want some sort of control of Mixed Fleet which BA is not willing to provide us. They are willing to 'discuss' route transfers and such with us but nothing else. Discuss means nothing.
There you go again Miss M, blaming everyone else. Current crew, Pilots, VCCs and the rest of the world. I'm not a member of BASSA Miss M, and I haven't been for years!
You say 'discuss means nothing' and that's precisely why we are here right now because of BASSA's refusal to discuss. Your statement 'we want control of Mixed Fleet' is staggering! It says it all.:ugh:

[ranger07]

Without exception, all your posts are very pro BASSA, your views extremely anti-management, very distrusting of them, only you and BASSA are 'correct', and no other department, in your opinion, are as pertinent to the operation as 'you'.
May I ask, are BASSA, to your mind, totally flawless, and are you content with all those that currently represent you?
Thank you MissM

[52049er]

MissM - I'm keen to avoid the all-too-frequent ganging up on supporters of one side of this dispute - but...

We want some sort of control of Mixed Fleet which BA is not willing to provide us. They are willing to 'discuss' route transfers and such with us but nothing else. Discuss means nothing

Why should you have control of MF? You, me and all the rest of our colleagues are merely salaried employees of BA, a commercial company run on behalf of the shareholders by the Board.

Historically, BA have gone beyond their statutory (and moral) duties in including our representatives in discussions and decisions taken to improve the business, and we have all reaped the benefits over the years.

However, we have no 'right' to control anything. If it is beneficial to BA to discuss things with us (and it usually is - happy, involved staff are more productive than miserable, excluded staff) then they will. If it is not beneficial from a purely commercial viewpoint, then they do not need to discuss. They are never going to 'guarantee' anything anymore - least of all control of commercial decisions to a staff group.

[the flying nunn]

You say that you did not strike because you can see what is happening. Here's a question to you. Could it be that you did not strike because you relied on others to do it for you?

Please don't do anything like that for me Miss M. If you should ever have a valid and legitimate reason for going on strike then I will join you.



Everyone who crossed the picket line is responsible for Mixed Fleet. Don't ever believe that you did yourself, or this company, a favour for not going on strike. It was a short-sighted, and may I dare say selfish, decision of you.



Why not see if you can stretch your memory a little further? The responsibility for mixed fleet lays squarely at the feet of the BASSA committee. They were the ones that whipped the small percentage of union members into a "NO NEGOTIATION" frenzy at the racecourse. By far the most selfish and short sighted decision of this whole saga was the one of DH to push for a strike at all costs. What makes you think he sees his members as anything more than cash cows and cannon fodder?

[MissM]

Betty Girl

Management should be held responsible over what you are mentioning what this strike has caused. A full strike with very few crew crossing the picket line would have caused a huge chaos and I don't think WW would have ridden it out.

BA would have gone ahead with Mixed Fleet either way. Temporarily it might have been integrated with existing fleets but be rest assured that sooner or later they would have introduced a separate fleet. Remember this document regarding OC? They have been planning a new fleet for many years and why should they throw it out the window? Why cause a massive concern amongst IFCE for nothing? The document included that promotion and recruitment on existing fleets would seize. It also stated that they wanted the new fleet to look as attractive as possible to encourage secondment and transfers. As it is today, they don't want any of us on their new fleet because they don't want it to be contaminated. This is the sort of management we are dealing with and their actual view of us. Charming, hey? I have around 30 years left until retirement should I retire at the age of 65. Mixed Fleet will grow accordingly to natural wastage from existing fleets according to BA. That should be interesting to see.

Tiramisu

Should you ever again quote what I have said in the future, please do it correctly. I said that we want some sort of control of Mixed Fleet. Surely it should be a concern of yours that you want to make sure that aircraft and destinations are transferred fairly, especially as your pay deal is only for three years. If most lucrative destinations have been transferred by then you can be rest assured that your future pay deal will be a lot lower.

Ranger07

BASSA are not flawless. They have made mistakes. However, as I have to choose between our management and our union, the decision is easy.

52049er

Because if we don't have any control of Mixed Fleet we are going to lose a huge amount of pay as the most lucrative destinations would go over. Unfortunately staff on the ground don't understand this. Neither do our pilots. Maybe they will understand what we are fighting for should BA ever begin registering its aircraft in Spain.

[the flying nunn]

Miss M

what was the reason you went on strike for again? Every time I ask one of the "yellows" they struggle to tell me.

[fly73]

Let us not be in any doubt that the strike had nothing to do with stopping the New Fleet at LHR. If you refer back to the Unite The Way Forward Summary of Formal Offer Dated 10th March 2010, it states;

5. MFH- There will be a new separate mixed flying fleet for new crew, with separate terms and conditions and sole bargining rights for Unite. Alongside the introdution of this fleet British Airways has confirmed the following ongoing commitments to their current crew.

It then goes on to talk about Monthly travel payment, route access, new aircraft etc.

So for all those people who said they went on strike to stop New Fleet, you didn't. It formed part of your own Unions proposal to the company. Infact under Unites offer it would have grown more quickly as they wanted at that point to put a crew member back on theWW and EF aircraft.

I have been constantly shocked at the number of people who were prepared to go on strike without knowing what was contained in the Offer made to BA by Unite.

I left Unite in June, I will rejoin when they get their house in order, as I believe that union representation is important. Unfortunately BASSA are not representing their members interests. If I had gone on strike I would be very angry that 4 months since the end of the last strike an agreement seems no closer!

[Runway vacated]

we are going to lose a huge amount of pay as the most lucrative destinations would go over. Unfortunately staff on the ground don't understand this. Neither do our pilots.

Erm, yes we do, Miss M, and that is why many of us were perplexed when BASSA arbitrarily rejected the idea of hourly pay many years ago. It would have "evened out the bumps" caused by high earning trips and probably improved the sickness record for certain destinations to boot. Of course it would also have meant that the cosy arrangements between certain "senior" union reps and the scheduling team would have been terminated, and so was rejected out of hand.

So you now find your finances heavily dependent on going to destinations you have no contractual right to serve, and have accelerated the employment of CC who are way cheaper than you.

I think I understand.

[midman]

Miss M
Pilots won't be worried if BA aircraft are registered in Spain, France, Italy or wherever. As I'm sure you know, under JAR, (and EASA from 2012). a pilot licenced to fly an aircraft in the UK can fly one registered in any other european country.

Despite the desperate hopes from some on CF (XX still?) there will be no cruise pilots, no Mixed fleet for pilots etc, those being recruited for next year will enjoy exactly the same Ts and Cs and Bidline benefits that current pilots enjoy.

That's what happens when a union engages with the company.

[MissM]

The Flying Nunn

Do you really have to ask this question again? I was asked it only a couple of days ago. Why did I go on strike? Because of imposition! Not due to the practical fact that crewing levels were changed but because they were changed without any negotiation.

Fly73

BA will go ahead with Mixed Fleet whether we like it or not. BASSA have included it in their proposals because they understand there's no stopping. What BASSA can and have been trying to do is to negotiate so that WE receive protection from Mixed Fleet.

[Betty girl]

BA have never said they don't want Mixed Fleet contaminated, that comes from the mouths of others. I know of quite a few that have chosen to go to Mixed Fleet and some have taken pay cuts to go over. I personally would not want to go over but no one is making me.

BA has said anyone can move but they have to go over on the terms and conditions of Mixed Fleet and they want those people to want to be there. They have said, time and time again, that no one will be forced to go over. You have just swallowed all the scare mongering of Bassa.

No one is happy with the development of mixed fleet and and I do feel the starting salary is too low. However it is Bassa's refusal to negotiate that has made it all worse. It has got nothing to do with the huge number of us that could see you were waisting your time striking with someone like Willie Walsh in charge. It is a complete fallacy that we went to work to keep our staff travel, or were happy for others to strike for us or we did not want to lose pay. The reason that the vast majority of us worked was because we did not agree that striking was the way to get a settlement and we have been proved right.

[report call sign]

Miss M

Are you completely delusional, totally brain washed by your dysfunctional union, that now decides to even forsake its members playing the "X" game on their website?

When are misguided crew like yourself going to wake up and see that you are being led blindly under false promises like "oh don’t worry we will get you your staff travel back (yeah right dream on!) Rhetoric, and understand that the company you work for presently has/is moving on and YOU are being left behind!
Time to grow up and face up!

oh and while you are at it, just think to yourself "WHY, did I go on strike!"
worth pausing for a moment wouldnt you say!:ugh:

[MissM]

Midman

It doesn't mean BA pilots would crew those aircraft registered in Spain.

Betty Girl

In such case, why are they bringing in instructors from the outside? Getting Mixed Fleet if you have previously worked for EF and WW fleets is very difficult. Ask our ex-temporary crew who backed BA through the strikes. Many of them have been declined employment on the new fleet. That's what you get for supporting BA.

Of course nobody will be forced over to Mixed Fleet because they don't want any legacy crew on it. They don't want crew to be talking about 'the good old days' on EF and WW fleets. Mixed Fleet is a new era and something out of the ordinary. They even get to wear the uniform hat. They are that special you see!

Report Call Sign

We will get ST back sooner or later. BASSA will not accept an agreement which does not include full (without any sanctions) return of it. BA might be moving on without us, including everyone who crossed the picket line or didn't sign the individual offer offered this summer. That would be around 10.000 crew members in total. It's certainly a high number to be moving on without... But, they are too busy focusing on Mixed Fleet and uniform standard issues as will be screened during SEP. One could wonder why they have all of the sudden come up with that idea.

I don't regret for going on strike. I will do it again should we vote for it. And, I know exactly WHY I went on strike.

[RadarIdent]

I don't regret for going on strike. I will do it again should we vote for it. And, I know exactly WHY I went on strike.

Well good for you, but do you think your 'strike' will be of any significance with additional VCC's and new recruits?

Staff travel returned? Why would you be under that illusion? Willie wont back down, neither would many of us wish for him to do so.

[HiFlyer14]

We want some sort of control of Mixed Fleet which BA is not willing to provide us. They are willing to 'discuss' route transfers and such with us but nothing else. Discuss means nothing.

This complete lack of understanding of UK Employment Law by BASSA and its reps explains why we are in this mess.

Under UK employment Law, consultation is all BA have to do with regard to MF, crew complements and anything else other than pay, pensions and leave. BASSA SHOULD know this, and SHOULD have consulted as best they can. They SHOULD have agreed the crew complements last year and in return agreed an integrated MF that would have secured all our jobs. That is what the PCCC would have done.

The Professional Cabin Crew Council is now working hard to establish itself as a viable alternative to Unite. We are now able to put members in touch with accident and injury legal protection. We are willing where possible to attend meetings with members with BA. We have a forum which demonstrates a wealth of different views from across all fleets, including Mixed Fleet. We are gathering views of our members on the forum (PCCC – Professional Cabin Crew Council (http://www.mypccc.co.uk)) and we hope to soon be in a position to consult sensibly and practically with BA about the issues that affect all of us.

For years we have all paid HUGE amounts of money to Unite. Now, they are not even consulting with BA at all, which is what we pay them to do. They are so busy spending OUR money on yellow pens, spending OUR money on court cases to get back staff travel (which was offered anyway so the court will simply ask why they didn't take it), and spending OUR money on other needless things. Quite frankly they don't know which way is up at the moment. Will they ever recover from this? Unlikely.

It is time for change It is time for someone to start consulting with BA and the people best placed to do that on our behalf are the PCCC.

[upperdeckpsr]

and the people best placed to do that on our behalf are the PCCC.

What makes the PCCC people the best placed?

[Betty girl]

Miss M,
You can't have it both ways.
First you say we will all be forced on to Mixed Fleet, now you say they don't want us there.

You can't have it both ways.

Basically, I don't know why a few Temps did not get the jobs, probably their sickness record, but that is just a guess, as in previous years, temps or crew on 6 months probation who have had a bad sickness record have not been taken on full time either.
I have flown with four temps who are taking the job. Having said that they were all treated badly by BA during all this disruption and all said they were just giving it a try, to see what it was going to be like.

When it comes to the hat, BA actually want all of us to wear the hat. Brands have been requesting this for a long time but were told that, in this economic climate, it was too large a cost.
It has been agreed for Mixed Fleet because they are getting less uniform than us. Only two skirts, no trousers and no knitwear.
I have however been told that to prevent people like you from making out it is because Mixed Fleet is special, to stop Mixed Fleet crew, too, from feeling singled out, also because it is something a lot of crew have said they would like and because brands wants us all to have it, BA are considering giving it to all of us, not just Mixed Fleet. So you may be wearing one soon Miss M.

[Litebulbs]

Under UK employment Law, consultation is all BA have to do with regard to MF, crew complements and anything else other than pay, pensions and leave.

With respect, that is the minimum statutory provision gained, if you have a collective recognition agreement.

"Collective bargaining" means "negotiations relating to or connected with one or more of those matters" (TULRCA 1992 s.178(1)). A different definition is used for some of the purposes of the new rules introduced on 6th June 2000 by Employment Relations Act 1999 sched.1.1. As a general rule.for purposes of these new rules "collective bargaining" refers to negotiations relating to pay, hours and holidays only unless any other matters are voluntarily agreed.

emplaw.co.uk - British Employment Law (http://www.emplaw.com)

[RadarIdent]

What makes the PCCC people the best placed?

Well, BASSA have shown a total inability to consult/negotiate, I can not imagine for one moment that the PCCC would continually hum with fingers in their ears, can you?

[upperdeckpsr]

Well, BASSA have shown a total inability to consult/negotiate, I can not imagine for one moment that the PCCC would continually hum with fingers in their ears, can you?

Maybe you didn't understand my question - what makes the PCCC people, whoever they are, the best placed to negotiate with BA?

I'm not after a smart a*sed answer, I want to know what makes them the best placed.

Have they prior negotiating skills? Have they been on a course? Have they experience in negotiating at the highest level with a PLC? Fairly relevant questions which would enhance their credibility dont you think?

[MissM]

HiFlyer14

Don't take this the wrong way but a 'council' which remains anonymous doesn't sound too serious nor professional. As it has been set up by a couple of cabin crew members it should be interesting to know what sort of experience and relevant education or training they have. For the time being I am not going anywhere near it.

RadarIdent

Because BASSA will never put forward a proposal that does not include full return of ST. BA can't be in a dispute with us forever.

Betty Girl

It is obvious that they don't want us on Mixed Fleet. To be honest I doubt that very few legacy crew would accept it should we ever be given the offer. BA knows that very few legacy crew would accept it because it includes a new contract including lousy terms and conditions.

Don't deny that they are trying very hard to make Mixed Fleet appear special. Be Outstanding and Future Talent to name a few of their beloved and well thought through expressions and titles.

[RadarIdent]

Maybe you didn't understand my question - what makes the PCCC people, whoever they are, the best placed to negotiate with BA?

My reply was an insinuation, that the PCCC could be no worse than BASSA who have totally failed in negotiations in mammoth proportions.

Yes, we are at an early stage here, so fingers crossed that the PCCC will be a viable alternative serving both the interests of Cabin Crew and the airline, something BASSA should have done but have failed to do as of late!

[Wobbler]

As it is today, they don't want any of us on their new fleet because they don't want it to be contaminated. This is the sort of management we are dealing with and their actual view of us. Charming, hey?

Miss M - Have a read below and see if you can guess why BA may not want some 'legacy' crew 'contaminating' (in your words) Mixed Fleet

Personally I will strike go on strike for as long as it takes as some of us care about out future and will not accept this behaviour from our excuse to an LT.

I'm sceptical to information presented by BA as they sometimes tend to twist things to their own advantage.

A threat of a possible strike in the future will always have an affect on forward bookings. It's one of our strongest weapon. BA might be able to depart 100% of all WW flights should a strike occur. Customers however will not get what they are paying for

Self importance? Of course. We are the reason as to why BA was once the world's favourite airline.

I still believe going on strike was the right decision and I won't hestitate a second to go on another strike should we vote for it.


We still have power. Even if we vote for another strike it will affect the business regardless of BA promising to operate a full 100% longhaul schedule

Don't be mislead by this company

Don't ever believe that you did yourself, or this company, a favour for not going on strike.

We want some sort of control of Mixed Fleet

I'm finding it very difficult to be saying that BA employees who either crossed the picket line or trained to break our strike are my colleagues. I find their behaviour to be despicable

[RadarIdent]

Have they prior negotiating skills? Have they been on a course? Have they experience in negotiating at the highest level with a PLC? Fairly relevant questions which would enhance their credibility dont you think?

Yes, I do and wish the PCCC will be more up front in that regard.

[vctenderness]

Yes, I do and wish the PCCC will be more up front in that regard.

I know very little about the PCCC but a lot about BASSA! Even without any negotiation skills I guess the PCCC would actually turn up and sit at the table - that would be a 100% improvement.

Who is to say that ex reps from Amicus Cabin Crew or even BASSA would not join and become reps?

BASSA is finished but cabin crew need a union to represent them and I believe BA don't have a problem with that either.

[HiFlyer14]

Upperdeckpsr

If you register with the PCCC at PCCC – Professional Cabin Crew Council (http://www.mypccc.co.uk) you can chat to us directly (and other members) and we will happily answer your questions there.

[Betty girl]

Chico
Do you actually work for an airline?

I don't agree with a lot of what Miss M says about this dispute but she is probably a good crew member, all the same.

Every now and again this thread gets very personal and it is a shame because I like to hear the views of those that striked, so that we can have a reasoned debate about what they think and what people who did not strike also think. We are not able to discuss it at work, you see.

[Wirbelsturm]

Willie wont back down, neither would many of us wish for him to do so.

He won't have to. Apparently the BASSA core are holding out for the CEO to change and reckon that Keith Williams will be all sweetness and light and give them all their pot at the end of the rainbow back along with ST, 100% Bookable first class seat and an extra 100 years on seniority for being good BASSA eggs.

I really have no idea what colour the sky is in LaLa land.

[dave3]

oh dear holding out for 100 years seniority... how sad.... strikers are a real threat to you!!!! when we get our ST back... you dont want us to get it returned simply because most of the posters on this forum will be down the back again.. this is not about ST! that we will get back in court.... this is about imposition

[Yellow Pen]

Thats funny, because I could swear there were numerous TV and press reports of both Tony Woodley and Duncan Holley saying the dispute is now about staff travel.:confused:

[dave3]

never mind Woodley and Holley where have you signed ???
You have had the opportunity!
Stop going on about BASSA! you dont believe in them !
Mr Francis said if your not in a union you can sign the new contract so...
you have made your mind up I presume we can assume you have signed the new contract then !!!

[Wirbelsturm]

(1)that we will get back in court.... (2)this is about imposition

(1) Thats what BASSA said months ago and it still hasn't even been near a court so I wouldn't hold your breath.

(2) That has gone to court and BASSA were told it was nothing to do with them how many crew BA staffed an aircraft with.

So, not going too well on the court front is it. But then again it never has for BASSA has it apart from one lifting of an injunction that led to a totally failed attempted to 'ground the airline' with numbers at Bedfont heartily bolstered by the Socialist Worker Party an a bunch of Teachers who had nothing better to do that day.

Where next for BASSA one wonders?

Personally I don't care about ST for strikers one way or the other, BASSA have made the issue by promising yet more things they can't deliver. Also, no, I won't be down the back if it makes you happy. :p

[Colonel White]

Maybe I'm missing the point here, but what do BASSA and Unite aim to do in the short to medium term about this dispute ? All very well appealing over court judgements, but even if they win the appeal, it won't alter the status quo. Absolute worst case for BA is that a percentage of staff will get nominal damages, It won't alter the fact that there is still a dispute and a number of staff have lost out financially as well as in benefit terms. If Unite win the appeal and assuming that BA are not given leave to appeal to the supreme court, does that mean the union will settle ?

It is highly unlikely that an appeal court will order BA to alter the manning levels back to the pre November 2009 state. Even if they did, this would not aid Unite as the company would then merely increase the number of Mixed fleet staff and transfer a few more routes across to them. So Unite lose out on both counts.

BA are under no pressure to offer improved pay etc. to Unite members. They can let the status quo perpetuate. As long as Unite claim to be in dispute, the company can cheerfully withold staff travel, just as they have in previous disputes. At some point in time, the members who have lost ST will either give up and leave BA, or accept that unless they settle they won't get a chance at regaining it. They could wait for any court action to go through, but even then the courts may only offer damages, not restitution. Now given the nature of staff travel, it is unlikely that any damages would be significant as the monetary value is low.

Court cases will not resolve this dispute and thus I come back to my original point. What exactly are Unite and the BASSA branch intending to do about resolving it ?
Moreover, what will those people who went on strike gain as a consequence ?

If the strike was purely about a point of principle, then I suggest that those who walked out have nothing to gain. They made their point. It fell on deaf ears . End of story. From where I stand, saying that is was as a result of management imposition is striking on a point of principle. Time to move on.

[dave3]

colonel.. takeyour points however lets think of it this way...what have the strikers now got to loose by going on strke again?.. they have already lost st and pay/ MORE PAY THAN THEY WENT ON LEGAL IA FOR .. so the bitterness is intranced.. nothing to loose, so may as well continue however I have to say they continue because they believe there is a better solution.. I still await a reply from the posters on this forum who have signed the new agreement.. and lets say bassa win at the appeal will these same BASSA haters give any money back that they may gain from the case?? I very much doubt it!
I have had a post removed.. it stated that I have the upmost respect for flight deck they get me home safely to my family and I thank them for that .. it all so said you make yourselves feel bullied. you wear your backing ba lanyards, this has become childish..stand up for your cause what ever you believe debate and listen

[TightSlot]

Oh Dear! Back from the pub are we dave3?

Calm down please everybody - go to bed!

[dave3]

wow! tightslot, will take whatever the mod throws at me but open debate both sides happening ,no not home from the pub may be xfactor has sent me a bit doolallyyy but.. why did you delete my post ?
sorry mod now realise why you think im just home from the pub.. sorry every one but I have dyslexia not a pun or a joke sorry.

[Colonel White]

Dave3

That wasn't quite the point I made. I asked what Unite intend to do to bring this dispute to a close. Further strikes that rest on the same reason would not be 'protected'. Thus anyone who walked out could be dismissed for breach of contract. Now I'm sure that being sacked is not exactly what those who have walked out so far have in mind. Moreover, what useful purpose would striking serve if BA are able to maintain a viable operation ? Surely the whole point of the strike weapon is that it brings the company to a halt and thereby forces management to accede to the union demands. Any ballot now would presumably be lined up to deliver strikes over the Christmas period. Those crew with modest memories will recall the public backlash last year. Given that this time around BA will not only have all the volunteers but also the new Mixed Fleet staff plus at least 1000 existing LHR staff, oh and all of LGW and LCY I suspect that those turning in for work will be treated as absolute heroes, whilst the stayaways will be regarded as lower than the Grinch. If the stayaways then on their return to work and make their status very public by wearing BASSA lanyards, sporting xxxx tags on luggage and clutching yellow pens they might just get a lambasting from the passengers. Question . Is that what strikers really want ?

[dave3]

cant speak for the majority but I want my Terms and conditions, so did the F/D when open skies was released.. WE realise that changes need to be made but when top management are still getting massive bonuses when we are an airline in crysis does that not grate you.??. Im a base closure I have to travel hours to work.. I love my job, I just want to fight to retain what ever I can democraticly and mylegal right.. not at any cost..the feeling in CRC states the cost (not from me I will add not fallen out with anyone ) however we all have different views thats what makes us human.. I am not articulate but I love my job and my passengers love me.. I just want to fight for what I and thousands of other crew believe in. If your from another department you would never understand that. being crew or flight deck is very different to any other job.. again I still await a reply from the anti bassa crew who have signed the new contract and are happy.

[Colonel White]

Dave3

I fail to see how the terms and conditions of crew contracts have been changed. Crew complements are not contractual. If they were, then all BA needs to do is issue a proposed change and give crew 90 days to sign it. Is that what those who walked out want the company to do ? It would be a very easy move and given that crew have been working to the new numbers for nearly a year I suspect a lot of people would sign up.

Fighting for what you believe to be right is admirable, but it is important to know which fights to pick and which to avoid. BASSA very foolishly didn't avoid this one and now a heap of crew members find themselves caught out. Continuing the fight runs the risk of losing one's job - assuming that the individual takes further strike action.

The problem for those who walked out is that they can't use the same premise again for further action. So the fight grinds to a halt. What is left is a group of dissatisfied cabin crew who feel oppressed, unsupported by a number of their colleagues (by my reckoning around half of cabin crew disn't walk out) yet unable to alter the situation. Choices. Accept the status quo, recognise you lost this one learn from it and maybe next time seek to build what you lost this time into any settlement to future disputes. Alternatively leave the company and work for another carrier. Third option is stay but try to plug away at this forlorn hope. The risk is that you might then find that BA tighten up on all sorts of little things, like uniform standards, punctuality, service levels etc. Infringements get treated by the standard processes, which may mean anything from being pulled from a flight to disciplinaries.

FWIW at least cabin crew haven't been put through the delights of having to reapply for their jobs as some A scale staff have. Having 20 people play musical chairs for 15 jobs is not fun.

[Caribbean Boy]

Colonel White (http://www.pprune.org/members/232551-colonel-white) wrote: FWIW at least cabin crew haven't been put through the delights of having to reapply for their jobs as some A scale staff have. Having 20 people play musical chairs for 15 jobs is not fun.They were the lucky ones. I know of one department which told dozens of people that they were no longer wanted. I also know of a large section of another department which found themselves without work when it was downsized.

A lot of cabin crew really do not know how lucky that they have not had cutbacks imposed on them They would then have had little prospect of getting another job in BA even with Careerlink help.

[From Tunbridge Wells]

'Moreover, what will those people who went on strike gain as a consequence ?'

Nothing, and it makes me very sad that so many peoples' lives were toyed with in order to try and prove that some refugees from 70's style unions can exercise some power. Must be proud of themselves now.

[Miss BA]

Dave 3,

I am one of the 1000-ish non union crew who signed the new agreement. Why wouldnt I be happy?

[Bunk Monitor]

According to the Guardian talks have been taking place this week and "substantial progress" has been made. Also according to a Tweeted message from Amicus, all Mixed Fleet courses for November/December have been cancelled.....:hmm:

[The Moo]

Miss BA your new MTP etc is non contractual. Have BA not demonstrated in the last 12 months that anything they feel to be non contractual they can eventually take away with no agruments ?

[Miss BA]

MTP? Not sure what they could take away Moo?

[MissM]

Anyone who signed the individual offer sold themselves down the river.

The pay deal is only for three years. Wait until they want to re-negotiate the top-up payment and be rest assured it will be lowered because lucrative routes have gone over to Mixed Fleet and thus the yearly average earning is lower. Since you won't have any union representation either it will be a take it or leave it situation.

Good news if courses have been cancelled because they haven't found enough suitable candidates. If true I guess that's because many can see a bit further beyond and understand what a lousy package BA are offering.

[Miss BA]

Miss M,

Why have we sold ourselves down the river? We are still getting the same pay as you are ( and being increased in January), same allowances and same terms and conditions.

If we all lived our lives saying " but what if" no one would get any where.

Funny how some members of your organisation emailed Bill Francis to ask if they could sign up for it after the closing date.

[Wirbelsturm]

The pay deal is only for three years. Wait until they want to re-negotiate the top-up payment and be rest assured it will be lowered because lucrative routes have gone over to Mixed Fleet and thus the yearly average earning is lower. Since you won't have any union representation either it will be a take it or leave it situation.


You have sown the seeds of your own demise through inability to negotiate like adults. If BASSA had even contemplated a combined rate for flying hours consisting of the meal payments, destination payments, box payments etc. being rolled into one then the spectre of 'losing' high allowance routes to New Fleet would never have existed. As BASSA is chaired by LH crew who would sell their own Grandmother to protect their cash cows at the expense of all others change was never really on the cards was it.

The example of what could have been done is already operating in the airline where 'high paying trips' doesn't exist anymore and the route structure is open to all. Whilst costing some money and making others money the transition was ok resulting in a more equitable rostering system.

All of this was made available to CC but BASSA stonewalled it. Why?

BA offered to discuss New Fleet with BASSA. BASSA refused. BA offered a second time, re-iterating that if BASSA wanted some sort of influence over the formation, or indeed if NF was to be formed, then they HAD to sit down and discuss it. Again BASSA point blank refused.

BASSA have fired their one and only IA weapon and shot themselves in the foot. Why should BA continue to deal with a bunch of malcontents who are paling into insignificance both for the Airline and for their Union paymasters Unite who have bigger problems on the horizon.

You may spout union rhetoric at all those who have signed the new contract Miss M but, ultimately, it is YOUR UNION through purile arguments and innevective leadership which has placed and pushed many into the position of having to accept it to pay their bills.

[Pornpants1]

Bunk Monitor According to the Guardian talks have been taking place this week and "substantial progress" has been made. Also according to a Tweeted message from Amicus, all Mixed Fleet courses for November/December have been cancelled.....http://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/yeees.gif

Seems very few people have bothered to pick up on this. I heard the same late this week, or is that late last week?? Anyway the only elaboration I got was that UNITE, read BASSA, read Cabin Crew, would pay a very high price to get New Fleet off the table and Staff Travel back;)

[Miss BA]

Pay a high price? In what way?

[TorC]

........
The pay deal is only for three years. Wait until they want to re-negotiate the top-up payment and be rest assured it will be lowered because lucrative routes have gone over to Mixed Fleet and thus the yearly average earning is lower. Since you won't have any union representation either it will be a take it or leave it situation........

What might BASSA be able to get for you? Surely they are not holding-out for a watertight, gold-plated, for-a-lifetime, never-ending deal? That'd be totally unrealistic, so come to think of it, it probably IS what they're holding-out for :rolleyes:

Since BASSA have chosen (along with CrewForum, which I thought was an "independant" site?) to restrict the ability of their members to discuss matters privately amongst themselves, the Professional Cabin Crew Council forum at www.mypccc.co.uk (http://www.mypccc.co.uk) is now the only place where BA CC can do so.

And as PCCC membership grows daily, I wouldn't have too many fears about not having representation in the future.

[Dixie Dean]

Bassa say today they were due to announce a new ballot.

However Unite are in talks with BA and have told BASSA not to proceed with the ballot.

DD

[Miss BA]

:ok:Thanks Dixie, I am always the last to know things..

[diut]

The only reason as to why they might have decided to stop NF, if it is true, would not really be down to us, but it is possibly because of what is going on at the moment.

I have flown with temps,which are not new fleet but who works under the same pay scale at the moment, and they are all struggling. I have seen people crying in briefing room and people saying they are sleeping in CRC because coming in for a t&b is not worth the money for the petrol.

I hope the management has seen this and realized that some changes were needed.

So for all of you who keep on talking about the new fleet as the future, come and fly with us for a day and if you already do that, speak to these guys and you might find out why so many of us are against it.

[MrBunker]

Aside from the, as ever, slightly overblown rhetoric - this could be interesting.

Bassa (http://xxxx.bassa.co.uk/)

[Wirbelsturm]

this could be interesting.


Until Lizanne and Duncan don't like the font the proposal is printed in!

[Pornpants1]

You now know what I know:-

elaborate.... "add more detail concerning what has already been said : he would not elaborate on his news."

I would however speculate, that in order to get New Fleet off the table, and staff travel back, the proposal may contain something along the lines of another Purser off long haul aircraft to be replaced by main crew, some of those cost saving could be used to offer VR for those disenchanted with BA.

Reduced MBTs on some trips, new entrant pay scales and or a slower progression along the existing pay scales, or a pay cap for all new joiners.

You name it, hourly rate could also be back!

As I said its speculation! But no more New Fleet and staff travel returned is not going to come cheap.

All these have been discussed at great length before, and off course BASSA have made clear that neither BASSA or CC89 have been at the table, so standby for another chapter of "the good, the bad, and the ugly" later next week or whenever Tony and Derek make the "new deal" public:ok:

Its clear UNITE don't want or need another failed strike on their hands. So the timing of this "new deal" appears just like all the other stalling tactics used by UNITE to ensure that there will be no strikes at Christmas.

Maybe this time its different:uhoh:

[Pornpants1]

UNITE can't impose a solution on BASSA, after the strike that wasn't in February 2007 BASSA changed the rules, only BASSA can put a stop to the runaway train:zzz:

[Yellow Pen]

But a 'Take it or leave it, we'll support you no further' ultimatum is an imposition in all but name, and we know how much BASSA dislike imposition!

[diut]

I will never understand why people like yourself MISS BA, who has worked all strike days, has not moved on to the NEWFLEET..apparently they are short of candidates so why not helping the management once again and move over?

Why is it okay for someone else to be paid 11k and 2.40 an hour and not for you?

Me,on my part,have been trying everything I could to fight the introduction of such pay.

Even though the strike was about imposition we all knew talks were about other subjects as well- one was the introduction of mixed fleet- like it was 4 years ago. It is never just about one line ,there is always more to it.

So,explain me why, if you wish, you are not moving onto the new fleet.

[Wirbelsturm]

UNITE can't impose a solution on BASSA, after the strike that wasn't in February 2007 BASSA changed the rules, only BASSA can put a stop to the runaway trainhttp://images.ibsrv.net/ibsrv/res/src:www.pprune.org/get/images/smilies/sleep.gif

I agree with Yellow Pen, I think Tony Woodleys patience can only be stretched so far. Unite have a nasty year ahead of them with the public sector. The last thing they need is the negative publicity of further strikes from members whose jobs haven't even been threatened even if their representatives doomsday projections lead them to think that way!

Perhaps BASSA are under threat of removal from Unite if they don't play ball, who knows whats going on behind the scenes with God Duncan!

[pushycat]

T or C,

you are incorrect,there are two other forums where BA crew can communicate and they are in addition to the PCCC.

I'm not sure on a forum such as this which displays such animosity towards cabin crew that I want to give the links though.

[Wirbelsturm]

I'm not sure on a forum such as this which displays such animosity towards cabin crew that I want to give the links though.

Percieved animosity, Pushycat, percieved animosity.

I think you will find, as has been written many, many times before, very few on here have any animosity toward Cabin Crew at all. The majority of incredularity is directed squarely at the Union BASSA and their rather outdated and interesting (fisty cuffs in the car park during preliminary negotiations anyone?) negotiating techniques!

You read into posts what YOU want to read, not necessarily the intented meaning of the poster.

[Miss BA]

Being a "legacy" crew member as apparently we are now called.. I dont find any animoisty towards crew members on this forum. Thats why I come on here. Its more of a balanced view on here. Same over on the PCCC forum.

I agree we dont all agree on things but it would be very boring if we did!:ok:

[Flap33]

I too think that Unite are going to impose a settlement on BASSA (kind of ironic really).

BASSA face being excluded from Unite whilst still be in dispute with BA; should this happen I can forsee a lot of crew loosing thier jobs - BASSA just doesn't have the resources or expertise to take on BA's legal team.

The end is near, maybe Unite are finally seeing BASSA for what they really are, a disfunctional group of die-hards who have blown this whole dispute out of all proportion.

[vctenderness]

UNITE can't impose a solution on BASSA, after the strike that wasn't in February 2007 BASSA changed the rules, only BASSA can put a stop to the runaway train:zzz:

The only person able to sanction Industrial Action is the General Secretary of Unite in this case either Woodley or Simpson. The nonsense that BASSA put out to members in 2007 was just that - Nonsense!:=

[diut]

BASSA face being excluded from Unite whilst still be in dispute with BA; should this happen I can forsee a lot of crew loosing thier jobs - BASSA just doesn't have the resources or expertise to take on BA's legal team.

The end is near, maybe Unite are finally seeing BASSA for what they really are, a disfunctional group of die-hards who have blown this whole dispute out of all proportion.

flap 33, I think it's completely the opposite of what you are saying.
Bassa and Unite are collaborating for a better future for actual crew and future crew.

What you fail to see is that BASSA is not a separate entity from us crew. What makes BASSA is the 8000+ members. So if you are assuming that 70% of crew -whether they striked or not- are a disfunctional group of die-hards , you might want to re-think.

[Caribbean Boy]

Diut,

Last January, Unite had 11,691 cabin crew members. If it's now 8,000, then that's a big drop in numbers. You may well ask yourself why so many consider their union to be inappropriate.

And 8,000 means 60%, not 70%, of total membership.

[TorC]

Bassa and Unite are collaborating for a better future for actual crew and future crew.

Better than what/when? Prior to the strikes, or now?

It seems that many BASSA members have forgotten what this was all about in the first place, and are indeed ignorant of many of the offers that were made along the way, but rebutted without a 2nd thought by their esteemed leaders. More seems to have been lost than can ever be gained now. And whatever maybe "gained" will no doubt come at quite an astronomical price. But that'll all probably be spun into a huge victory by BASSA in their efforts to remain in situ, and fed to the members who seem unwilling to question the hand that starves them.

As to collaboration, with BASSA & CC89 admitting that they are not privy to anything that has been going-on between TW & BA recently, that's very hard to see.

Therein lies the problem of belonging to an organisation that is tied into something bigger, with possibly differing objectives to those that it purports to represent.

[diut]

ast January, Unite had 11,691 cabin crew members. If it's now 8,000, then that's a big drop in numbers. You may well ask yourself why so many consider their union to be inappropriate.

And 8,000 means 60%, not 70%, of total membership.

Some people might not believe in what bassa and unite are doing,hence pulling out of the union. it is in your right to do that and am glad that people have if they don't support the union.

Numbers might have dropped due to severance and people leaving as well,as you know the only recruitment we have had has been with temps which are not unionised..so please consider everything as I would do. I don't particularly like numbers as we never know the exact figures,but I can only go with what I see onboard.

It has always been about providing or maintaining a future for current crew or future crew, whether it was the imposition-removing a purser wasn't only down to the service aspect of it, it would alsocut down chances of promotion,whether it was negotiating terms and conditions for the NF and so on.
Don' t you worry about people being up to scratch with the many offers that were on the table. I am one of those who was up to date,yes, even with the one who was contemplating the new fleet incorporating in the actual fleet.
I guess the management is free to do what they want,or so they have demonstrating in the past few months, so why not going ahead with it,even without BASSA consensus if they really wanted to? because that's not what they wanted.. that would have not interfered with our terms and conditions so why not going ahead irrespective of the union?

[Colonel White]

Diut

you asked
I guess the management is free to do what they want,or so they have demonstrating in the past few months, so why not going ahead with it,even without BASSA consensus if they really wanted to? because that's not what they wanted.. that would have not interfered with our terms and conditions so why not going ahead irrespective of the union?

The answer is simple. BA management do not want to give BASSA any oxygen. By doing things in a measured, reasonable manner,they prevent BASSA and Unite from screaming 'Unfair!' I suspect that BA management know that they can ride this out. BASSA on the other hand desperately need to demonstrate that they are doing something for their members who have lost out by striking. The longer it goes on with no progress, the more dispirited they become. BASSA's credibility is shot. They have signally failed to achieve anything for their members apart from loss of income etc. By not being antagonistic BA management have robbed BASSA and Unite of any cause for a further ballot. They have ensured that the union have no justification that would garner widespread support from either cabin crew or the wider union membership within BA. Back in 2007 Willie Walsh warned Tony Woodley that he needed to get BASSA sorted out. Woodley didn't and this is the result.

We will wait and see what the court of appeal come up with.

[Caribbean Boy]

diut (http://www.pprune.org/members/340337-diut) wrote: Numbers might have dropped due to severance and people leaving as well,as you know the only recruitment we have had has been with temps which are not unionised..so please consider everything as I would do. I don't particularly like numbers as we never know the exact figures,but I can only go with what I see onboard.I like numbers because they can tell uncomfortable truths. The number of cabin crew who took voluntary redundancy was 1,003 - they left on on 31 October 2009, 30 November 2009 and 15 December 2009. So, when Unite balloted 11,691 in January 2010 for strike action, those were the people who did not take VR.

As for cabin crew who left BA: based on an average of 25 leaving each month, then about 225 would have left between January and now, bringing the Unite membership down to around 11,500. But it's not 11,500, is it? Only Duncan Holley has the exact figures for union membership, but it does look as if at least 2,500 have given up their Unite membership. That's a lot of people who no longer have belief in Unite.