BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions V [Archive]

Fender Strat

21st Mar 2011, 17:07

Um... regarding the ongoing debate on BASSA's accounts, this isn't the first time that the certification officer has been called in. The last occasion was in 1996,when it ran a 12 month investigation on claims of financial irregularity. The conclusion drawn then was that there was no evidence of a significant issue of financial corruption, but that there was extremely bad administration, weak financial controls and nonimplementation of the union's rules regarding control of branch finances. The incumbent branch secretary was reported to collect over £100k pa of which half came from commission on membership dues.

Now given that was over 10 years ago, you'd think the members might have been a bit more savvy. You might also expect the union to have done more to ensure that BASSA were toeing the line. History does seem to be repeating itself.

mrpony

21st Mar 2011, 17:48

Strange to relate so soon after Fender Strat's post above:

Via a circuitous and slightly surreal exchange of messages and emails involving amongst other things an internet cafe in Whistler, B.C., a spy ( signature MILITTLI!) has sent me what purports to be a report about a letter from the Certification Officer(CO):

The CO decided not to take any action with regards to access to accounting records without further evidence.

The CO would be prepared to consider any further information in the future.

With regards to holding of elections under branch rules the CO's powers are limited to breaches of rules, not the fairness of rules adopted by a union.

MILITTLI describes him/herself as a 'a party with an interest vested in a pension scheme and hence the rest of my life' who took information freely available in the public domain and made it available to the CO.

Make of it what you will. It comes with a big disclaimer - no dates, no names, nothing specific. Still, this is a rumor network.

If it is to be believed and is recent then the CO needs valid, evidenced complaints, preferably from members or ex-members, to be made in order to trigger the process of probing a Union's accounts. Elections seem to be a matter determined by the organisation regardless of what the law says, incredibly. If a Union's own election rules are being broken then the CO has a say.

The Certification Officer's website is easily found by search engine. Those new to this thread should refer to T&Q IV for background and extensive links.
Certification Officer - Home (http://www.certoffice.org/)

LD12986

21st Mar 2011, 21:28

There was an article in The Independent in 1997 about BASSA's record-keeping:

Sacked BA union man to appeal - News - The Independent (http://www.independent.co.uk/news/sacked-ba-union-man-to-appeal-1266001.html)

BASSA and CC89 certainly have some history!

Snas

21st Mar 2011, 21:58

In my humble… paying those sort of sums to a lay rep is inevitably going to lead to tears, I struggle to see any justification for it.

Fender Strat

21st Mar 2011, 22:41

What may have escaped people's notice is that the 1997 incident involved the predecessor to the current branch secretary. Now you would have thought that given the Certification Officer's comments that a new branch secretary would have gone overboard to ensure that the branch financial matters were sorted out. I have no way of knowing if any attempt was made in that respect, but it does seem somewhat ironic that we are seeing the same complaint raised again. One can only surmise that BASSA members don't care what happens to the cash that their branch extracts from them. Which I find odd given the volume of wailing about how cabin crew get such a rough deal from BA with regards to pay etc.

What is more extraordinary is that the TGWU did not see fit to try and sort this out. Bear in mind that the current General Secretary of Unite is a TGWU man. One wonders if the apparent lack of enforcement of union procedures is yet another example of double standards within Unite.

PAXboy

21st Mar 2011, 22:42

Vested interests will always dig in. It's human nature to not give up what they have. It does not matter how they acquired it, or how much times have changed. So there is nothing unusual or exceptional in ANY of this. It's not nice but it IS normal. :ugh:

call100

21st Mar 2011, 22:58

In my humble… paying those sort of sums to a lay rep is inevitably going to lead to tears, I struggle to see any justification for it.

Although perfectly legal if the rules allow it, I agree with you in the same vein as I think that too much money is paid to Bankers, CEO's and other directors of large companies.
In the case of BASSA I would think that any FTO would find it difficult having dealings with a Branch Secretary on those sort of wages.
It will be interesting to see if anyone will step forward in any future elections who wishes to change things. Years of experience tells me they won't. Many members tend to take the easy option and resign rather than stand and fight for change from within. This is not surprising as most can't be bothered to attend any kind of meeting, regardless of how important or significant.
I don't have any axe to grind with those who leave, it's just the way things are. The problem is that BASSA will survive and eventually regroup and there won't be anyone there to make the changes needed.
This whole dispute became too personal IMO. Maybe the new CEO can change the situation. There have been talks going on behind the scenes with Unite, so, who knows?
One thing is certain, whatever the outcome of the ballot, a lot of people are going to be left feeling bitter, which is not going to help BA in the future.

Fender Strat

21st Mar 2011, 23:27

Call100

The Independent report in 1997 stated that the then BASSA branch secretary was the highest paid union official in Britain. His earnings were almost double that of the then general secretary of the parent union the TGWU. Now given that this is a lay position it makes banker's bonuses seem tame by comparison. At least the latter can hold some claim to have generated wealth for their clients, albeit the clientele may be a fraction of the population.

I think you are right though. I cannot see any future branch secretary volunteering to change the situation. It will require Unite to do something pretty drastic to alter the status quo and I'm not clear whether constitutionally they can. Maybe someone closer to the intricacies of BASSA's constitution could enlighten us.

Chuchinchow

22nd Mar 2011, 00:32

If you can get him/her off the topic and into more general conversation about using BA mileage schemes and other such things, you will find it adds a lot of value to this forum.

Yes, that's as maybe - but the title of this thread (emblazoned at the top of each page) is BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions V

Only three messages into a new thread and already off-subject. Is that a record?

Joao da Silva

22nd Mar 2011, 05:46

Only three messages into a new thread and already off-subject. Is that a record?

As far as I can see no-one has yet posted on subject.

This thread is indeed entitled BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions V.

The content seems to be mainly about the minutiae of union branch governance.

Litebulbs

22nd Mar 2011, 07:59

My thoughts are this. The last strike cost 200K in lost passengers. How much did that cost? If each pax was a £300 spend, then £50m in revenue, before any cost of contingency, to deliver the service that BA did. That is a big number (c).

Now most unions would think that this would be a position of power, but BA in its very actions through this dispute, have shown the long term savings (s) are worth the end result and IIRC the £150m per year saving has already been made through the reduced crew numbers alone. MF is a bonus (n), which because it is not an integrated fleet to legacy, it can grow unchecked. Now if c/s<=1, then the business will see it as worthwhile. If you now have c/(s+n), then even more so.

The only way this can be changed is will be a 9000 yes vote with a massive walkout. Does anybody think that this will happen?

Litebulbs

22nd Mar 2011, 08:14

Norman Tebbit the striker and Balpa too posh to picket!

BBC iPlayer - My Strike (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00j4cwd/My_Strike/)

Hipennine

22nd Mar 2011, 08:27

LB, that summation has got to be the most succinct and accurate assessment of the reality of the situation.

Isn't the important question therefore, how to persuade the probably much smaller number of yes voters, that this is the real situation ?

Joao da Silva

22nd Mar 2011, 09:23

The dispute seems to be quagmired, presently.

Even the BASSA branch secretary apparently acknowledges that a futher strike is unlikely.

It seems to me that there is a delicate balance at present, between the desire to exploit the freedom to recruit MF and the savings imposed, versus the desire to have a happy workforce.

I cannot believe that BA is content to run a business where thousands keep voting for industrial action; it simple is not healthy, but then again a return to the old ways is not, either.

So, with a change of CEO and union GS, can they finesse a way to keep the savings and MF, as well as making the disaffected employees (some of whom are not unionised, such as Betty Girl) happier and feeling fairly treated.

If not, then a long path of attrition until retirements and resignations play their part lies ahead.

If BA does wish to improve the experience (and the company recently appointed a new chief to overseet his), then one cannot help but feel that having a contented workforce (especially in customer facing roles) would be a good start.

mrpony

22nd Mar 2011, 09:42

That's my question.

It's all over bar the shouting, kicking and screaming. I can only imagine a complete end if BASSA's leadership goes and it then becomes a question of when.

Can anyone see a future for BASSA in its current guise, if so how long will it last?

LB - tks for link.

StoneyBridge Radar

22nd Mar 2011, 10:42

This thread used to be valuable, if only for the entertainment value of Duncan's drunken missives and anecdotes.

Where has he gone since his failed ET ?

He no longer appears to be on here or Cabin Crew Forum.

Has he done an Adolf and retreated to his bunker (afterall, he does like his historical references)? Has Unite gagged him (highly improbable)? Is he busy negotiating a killer deal with the Samosa maker.....?

....or has he finally realised this is now the end game? Foolishly gloating that a Yes ballot will not result in IA, but that the mere threat of it will be enough to harm BA's bottom line, shows how little powder BASSA have left in their chest, how desperate they have become and how disparate they are from reality. I'm sure Unite see they are dealing with an egomaniac of loose tongue and misplaced motive.

The company have got what they wanted and much more, thanks to the ineptitude and arrogance of BASSA.

What else is there to talk about until the ballot is in and we banally climb back onto the merry-go-round of whether this time it was legal and correct?

I believe BA now couldn't care less. BASSA is no more than a mild irritant of no consequence, no power and no influence.

It's over.

notlangley

22nd Mar 2011, 12:05

Thank you so much Litebulbs for that BBCi player link._ I think that it is generally very much on topic._ It is specifically on topic with the domino comments about the open-air show of hands._ Very few will be able to spare a whole hour to watch this._ But those who do will find it most rewarding and a valuable insight into what underlies and under-pins this industrial action.

Ancient Observer

22nd Mar 2011, 12:33

LB
thanks for that link. It brought back some memories. Tebbit's memory of the way in which his changes to the laws were processed are somewhat selective, (I was involved in a tiny way in an employer), but that is beyond this thread.

In that programme, the overall reporting of the various strikes was massively simplified......The T & G and the G & M physically fought against the NUM, and fully supported the Notts fields, the NUM corruption isn't mentioned, the EETPU fully supported Murdoch, and so on.

Maybe, though, that programme does tell us how the BA strike will end. A bit like the Miners strike - the energy for the strike drained off in to the sand.
At least Untie hold ballots - which scargill refused to do.

JUAN TRIPP

22nd Mar 2011, 13:10

The only way this can be changed is will be a 9000 yes vote with a massive walkout. Does anybody think that this will happen?

NOOOOOOOOO Way. There will be a massive yes vote - 5500 ish but a massive walkout. No. If DH goes nuclear and goes for a 2 month all out, I believe no more than 2000ish will support him. I also think DH will go for a strike depite telling everyone last month he wouldn't. Easter and Will and Kate's big day out are too much temptation for him to resist.
What is interesting is that Unite seem at last to have got their figures right as 4 crew who I know who got a ballot form in Jan despite leaving months before, have this time not got one. ( However Unite do still send me annoying text messages - I've just got another right now!!) :ugh:

Sadly I believe and hope there is another strike and a long one at that. Reason being is that IMO its the ONLY way this dispute is going to end, one way or the other.

Juan Tugoh

22nd Mar 2011, 13:30

There is a certainly a boil that needs to be lanced here. Whatever the rights and wrongs of the various issues at play, this corrosive dispute needs to be brought to an end. Someone needs to win this dispute so it can be put to bed and allow everyone to move on.

To that end perhaps the best thing would be a good old fashioned strike - not a 12 day or several 5 day "optional" strikes. Those who genuinely believe should have the courage of their convictions and get on with it. The support they need to win the strike will either materialise or not, but at least we would all know where we stood. This wishy-washy phoney-war period helps no-one, the strikers are no farther forward and BA is still suffering from the damage caused by the threat of IA. It is easy for the militants to prolong the dispute if all they are risking is a few days pay. Time for action!

GrahamO

22nd Mar 2011, 14:02

The only way this can be changed is will be a 9000 yes vote with a massive walkout. Does anybody think that this will happen?

Second answer first. No.

First part - if it happens there will be 9,000 redundancies and re-offered jobs under different T&C's, not a surrender by BA, as may be implied.

Even 9,000 strikers voting would not result in a change in BA as to do so, would be industrial suicide. Sacking 9,000 would be horrendous, but not as horrendous as the subsequent collapse of the airline when investors and managers realise it is being run for the benefit of the cabin crew and not those who actually own and fund the company.

That would make an interesting case study - given the relative ease by which a company can fold, and recreate itself under new management etc, could BA return to its one vaunted 'worlds favourite airline' status, by restructuring during a recession when its much easier to be brutal?

call100

22nd Mar 2011, 14:04

As far as I can see no-one has yet posted on subject.

This thread is indeed entitled BA Strike - Your Thoughts & Questions V.

The content seems to be mainly about the minutiae of union branch governance.

Read more carefully...;)

Diplome

22nd Mar 2011, 14:05

Has there been any recent news from the PCCC?

Snas

22nd Mar 2011, 14:26

Diplome

22nd Mar 2011, 14:32

Snas:

In our little forum that qualifies as news :)

I'm patiently waiting to see when and if PCCC is going to present a more public face. It is interesting to watch the process that may result in another negotiating force.

Ancient Observer

22nd Mar 2011, 17:20

I agree about wanting to hear more from PC3.

HiFlyer14 - et al - how is it going?

call100

22nd Mar 2011, 18:17

Whilst not news I am happy to report that my partner joined the PCCC and very much enjoys the breath of fresh air that is their forum if nothing else. It isn’t back patting and agreement all round by any means, but the debate is respectful, constructive and informative.

She’s very happy that she switched.

"BASSA make a lot more noise and a lot less sense."

Do the members keep it all secret like the leaders? Does anyone know where their funding is coming from exactly?
That is in no way an attack on PCCC I wish them luck if it's what the people want. Even if I disagree with a leadership that remains in hiding and have doubts over it's funding.

MPN11

22nd Mar 2011, 19:43

Phewww ...

First, thanks to TightSlot for letting things run on. I do appreciate that. :ok:

Next, this is supposed to be an SLF Thread about the strike ... "Your Thoughts and Questions". Whilst I fully understand that the 'inner workings' of BASSA are germane, it would be nice to see some broader discussion on how the dispute [or whatever you call it] affects the SLF. Isn't that what this Thread's supposed to be about?

Such as, for starters, I'm forward booked all the way to October, and I don't give a sh 1t? Who else is ignoring, or otherwise, the MONSTER THREAT that is BASSA? Are they having any impact on BA? Do the SLF care one iota?

Do we have to spend our entire time micro-managing the inner workings of BASSA? That's where I, and I suspect TightSlot , have got bored with this. Until BASSA, or BA, or the High Court, have something to say of substance ... or individual PPRuNe members have something really relevant to say ...
can't we all just chill a bit?

call100

22nd Mar 2011, 19:57

MPN11

22nd Mar 2011, 20:06

Snas

22nd Mar 2011, 20:25

Do the members keep it all secret like the leaders? Does anyone know where their funding is coming from exactly?

Well, I'm far from an expert on the inner working of the PCCC, but I do know there are no subs or union fees, therefore no funding.

The costs for the organisation to date must be tiny, a web site, a bit of printing perhaps and perhaps a professional fee here and there, nothing that would stretch the founders own pockets so far I would guess.

west lakes

22nd Mar 2011, 20:35

Dawdler

22nd Mar 2011, 21:45

I think Norman Tebbitt had a very good point when as a pilot he was taking part in a BOAC strike. The newsman commented about there being no pickets on the gate. "Well," said Norman "If you have to picket your own gate, you haven't got your message across."

call100

22nd Mar 2011, 22:24

Call100, that's a perfectly fair comment.

Perhaps we 'need' another thread [sorry, Mods] on the non-CC aspects of Union inner workings?

For myself, apart from a certain voyeuristic aspect on what/how Unions operate, I've largely lost interest. BASSA's activities won't affect my travel plans, in exactly the same way that they didn't around this time last year [exempt volcano]. Isn't that where we started, so long ago?

Personally I don't give a sh 1t ... BA will fly me from A to B as usual. :cool:

I can understand your point, but, it was 'SLF' who began to question the inner workings of the TU involved in the dispute that the thread was referring to. Title contains 'Your thoughts and questions'. With questions come answers that in themselves create more questions. So any thread is going to produce a modicum of thread drift, especially in the periods between ballots, results, and action (if any).
If, as you say, you don't give 'sh 1t', why not wait until the result is in and then rejoin the debate at a point that might interest you?
I don't think there will be any action in the future that will disrupt BA to any extent and they will deliver their services. So you are right not much has moved on for the regular and occasional (Me) BA pax. However different aspects of the dispute still create 'thoughts and questions' of interest to some.

call100

22nd Mar 2011, 22:35

Certainly in the early stages it was funded by the founder members, the first web site being produced by one of them.

Since then, reading bits here and there some individuals have donated to the running costs.

What is absolutely certain, despite the BASSA spin, BA are not involved with the operation in any way!

I didn't wish to infer BA funding......The questions still stand though.
They seem to be struggling to get to the 40% required position. I would have thought they would have been there by now.

Litebulbs

22nd Mar 2011, 22:42

Mr Tebbitt's comments at the end really made me think and one conclusion it that he would be seen as a moderate today. The battles and challenges are no more than history now, but some of the legislation of that time were probably a good thing, but because of the polarised view and agendas of either side, no happy median could be found.

I am not and will probably never be a gold card holding First flying exec, so I will see things differently to most on this thread, but why would anyone want to work in a pit either?

This dispute is not about pit working, it is about redistribution of wealth. Do you need to pay a crew member any more than what the new hat wearing crew are on? Do you need a Mercedes or a Mondeo in the cabin? Only time will tell if BA will loose or gain customers because of its cabin crew.

No doubt there are a few on here who spend more in travel each year, than I get paid in a wage and I am in the top 10% so generally I will be in the minority, but it is still an interesting debate.

Litebulbs

22nd Mar 2011, 22:48

I didn't wish to infer BA funding......The questions still stand though.
They seem to be struggling to get to the 40% required position. I would have thought they would have been there by now.

I doubt if they would have got 5000 signed up to their cause yet, as the current Unite membership is around 9000, but I have been wrong many times on here.

The big test will be if BA grant voluntary recognition. If they do, they will be seen as on side, if not then I imagine it will be a fair time yet until the PCCC are negotiating. Good luck to them anyway as they are listed as a union and better to have them in a TUC recognised union, than not!

MCOflyer

23rd Mar 2011, 00:44

In the UK, is there a provision for a company to reorganize under bankruptcy protecion such as many airlines have done in the US? In all such cases that I am aware of the unions were handled pretty harshly as to their terms and conditions.

Could such a thing happen if BA really wanted to change their culture?

Chuchinchow

23rd Mar 2011, 00:52

All this talk of the "inner workings" reminds me that many of us were taught to be cautious.

Juan Tugoh

23rd Mar 2011, 07:12

Simple answer - No.

Indeed the US airlines have used their bankruptcy protection in the past to effectively walk away from their debt and slash their costs. They they undercut the airlines that have not been so mismanaged as to end up insolvent and distort the market massively. The EU view this sort of behaviour as unair competition and do not allow it.

Those airlines in Europe that have gone bust and reappeared - like Swiss and the rump of Sabena are mere shadows of their former selves, they retain something of the livery and a few aircraft but have essentially been gutted.

Joao da Silva

23rd Mar 2011, 10:29

This dispute is not about pit working, it is about redistribution of wealth. Do you need to pay a crew member any more than what the new hat wearing crew are on? Do you need a Mercedes or a Mondeo in the cabin? Only time will tell if BA will loose or gain customers because of its cabin crew.The market has changed considerably over the past 15 years and the advent of low cost airlines has slashed margins on short haul flights.

BA undoubtedly needed to do something about the cost of crewing the cabin, but at the same time the company has taken a lot of cost out of the product, to the extent that business class shorthaul is not worth buying as a standalone product and longhaul is rather 'cheaper' than it was some years ago, although the seat is still up amongst the best.

In short, I believe that BA needs to improve the customer experience and this involves both the product and those delivering.

So, it is important to move on and find a solution that is acceptable to all, in or out of a union and at all the bases.

Only then will BA be able to start to polish up the brand, which is still strong, but tarnished - especially outside the UK.

MCOflyer

23rd Mar 2011, 16:28

Thanks Juan

MPN11

23rd Mar 2011, 17:59

BA undoubtedly needed to do something about the cost of crewing the cabin, but at the same time the company has taken a lot of cost out of the product, to the extent that business class shorthaul is not worth buying as a standalone product and longhaul is rather 'cheaper' than it was some years ago, although the seat is still up amongst the best.

In short, I believe that BA needs to improve the customer experience and this involves both the product and those delivering.

That is a fundamental marketing issue, and the core of the commercial future viability of BA.

I have a boring collection of data on my 'puter. That tells me, inter alia, that my UK-East Coast TATLs actually cost me [random samples to make the point]...

£612 VS PE 2003
£595 MaxJet Club 2006
£703 BA PE 2007
£641 BA PE 2009
£628 BA PE 2011

I think there's been a bit of inflation since 2003.
APD has grown to stupid levels.
Yet somehow the cost to me, the SLF, remains broadly constant. Part of that is obviously 'sale marketing', but there's no doubt that the core product has been pared to the bone to stay competitive.

If it wasn't for my ability to upgrade with BA Miles to Club, I could envisage a seriously sub-standard "Premium Economy" service. As has been noted here and in other places, the Club standard is nothing to get excited about either, apart from the nice seat. So something has to give somewhere ... either prices go up to cover costs, or service is degraded to match income, or BA's core costs have to come down.

The latter point is where we are ... BA has to be able to compete on cost and quality. Money spent on expensive CC is not being spent on the SLF. That simply has to stop.

mrpony

24th Mar 2011, 10:06

Here are a few messages from WtrsdWnkr for those interested:

*I have my flask ready for those cold picket line days bring the company to its knees they are treating the cabin crew like dirt i can't wait for the flight deck to start moaning on nightstops. We standby Bassa as you just can't trust this little i mean very little man and his foot soliders.
*I will be voting yes on my ballot paper as i have seen the way people are treated in BA and the imposition is just another example and i don't need to look anything up as my little cabin crew brain can still think for itself
*I can't help but tell you all the support has increased amongst crew for this dispute so your 5000 number mentioned will swell over the coming days of this dispute await the falling apart of the operation. The last few days I have updates from people on euf and ww telling me of loads of single figures on euf and figures below 30 on ww. Weakness is from the management side and strength from the union side little William your days are numbered.
*What a long game of chess this is turning out to be. I feel we are now stronger and prouder than before to be supporting our union against this dictatorship roll on Friday another great ballot result once again.
*Oh sometimes the truth hurts Bassa remains strong in the face of a broken regime.
*Message to BA cabin crew in dispute with this regime KTF

Keep the faith. Tee Hee. With what?

Juan Tugoh

24th Mar 2011, 11:03

The thing about faith is that it is a belief in a thing that cannot be proven due to a lack of facts. It does not have to be based on any form of reality, just faith. The people that believe that the world was created in six days have no proof that this is so, just faith in a book. Faith is wonderful but it will not pay the mortgage or feed the kids. The BASSAmentalists (and I deliberately use that word to describe people like watersidewonker, not all BASSA supporters are BASSAmentalists) certainly have faith but little hope.

Joao da Silva

24th Mar 2011, 11:28

Juan

I agree with the thrust of what you say.

However, a relatively small group of disaffected employees can be very troublesome.

When you have 5,000 voting for strike action, that is bound to have some effect on an organization.

I believe that this dispute needs to be ended, but that is not to say I believe that BA should give into the demands.

Mariner9

24th Mar 2011, 12:22

I have to say that Watersidewonker's posts quoted by MrPony above show an appalling lack of grammar, and make very little sense. Use of the search function reveals many more such examples from him/her, all along the same lines.

He/she sums up the BASSA mentality for me. Blind faith without any attempt at reasoned argument.

I hope I never fly with him/her, or any of his/her like-minded colleagues again. A further strike now would very possibly grant me that wish.

ChicoG

24th Mar 2011, 12:53

BASSA seem to me like a drowning man thrashing in the water screaming for help.

Everyone's standing there watching, and no-one is doing anything.

Meanwhile BASSA are convinced that someone or something is coming to the rescue.

I just don't see it. I just see BASSA dying a slow, painful death, with the recriminations coming later, too late to save it.

It's such as shame, because such a large group of employees needs a union, but it needs decent, intelligent and productive leadership, something that's been sadly lacking for a long time.

I've forgotten. When is the next ballot/ballot result?

LD12986

24th Mar 2011, 13:03

The ballot result is due around 1 April.

Historically, each additional ballot has lost approximately 2,000 Yes votes so it will be interesting to see whether this continues, and what impact the arrival of KW has on the Yes vote.

I think the vote may go below 5,000 but not lower than 4,000.

Colonel White

24th Mar 2011, 15:50

5,000 is a critical figure for Unite. Less than that means under 50% support from the members and more crucially only about one third of the workforce. If you follow this with an estimate of how many might follow through with industrial action, the figure drops even further. Not much point in calling for action if you can only mobilize about 15% of the workforce.

The trouble is that the scattergun approach of putting up 10 reasons for striking may backfire. Rather than bring in more votes in favour it could have the opposite effect. The absence of a single issue that all members can get behind is the biggest problem the union faces.

Apathy will play a large role in the outcome. I reckon that Unite will do well if they can get an 80% response to this ballot, with 63% of those voting supporting industrial action.

just an observer

24th Mar 2011, 18:04

I'd guess BASSA will still have a majority of yes votes amongst those who vote at all, but that the overall vote will be down again, and I would also guess that as the total number of yes votes go down, so the % of those voting to strike who actually would be prepared to strike will go up - as they are the diehards among BASSA.

Whether the union would call a strike if the yes vote is low compared to total union membership, as opposed to those who bother to vote, I rather doubt.

It would seem unfair of the union to ask their loyal members to lose their staff travel, possibly for good this time, and earnings, in a futile gesture, and it seems very likely any strike would be just that.

RealFish

24th Mar 2011, 21:29

Presumably with the ballot closing on 28th, the 4 weeks legal deadline will give Duncan the opportunity to call strike action in time for Easter and then on into the Royal Wedding and May Day Bank Holidays

This of course will allow Duncan to deliver his members up to Bob Crow in support of the Crow's hoped for Wedding Day Tube strike / TUC call for nationwide co-ordinated industrial action (or 'general strike' in any other name).

Looks like BASSA's members have their uses!

I am also struck by the phrase that I have heard and read throughout this clamity and which is at the forefront of Unites communications at the moment. The call for members to 'support their Union' or, alternatively, 'support your reps.' is a telling inversion of what a relationship between a union and its members should be.

Colonel White

24th Mar 2011, 23:25

Ahhh.. but you forget that
a) Unite have said that it's not about striking, it's about 'sending a message'
b) Len has said that there would not be strikes over Easter or the Royal Wedding
c) BASSA can't call strike dates. Only Unite can. BASSA is a branch.
d) BASSA have said that they don't need to strike, that the threat of strike action is sufficient to undermine customer confidence in BA
e) BASSA have also said that their cunning plan will be to announce strike dates and then call them off at the last minute - teehee.
f) Len has said that they won't strike but use 'wierd and wonderful' alternatives

Now, I'll cheerfully concede that the BASSA branch secretary (for the moment) may wish to run amok with announcing strike dates, particularly as it would seem that he has lost his appeal at tribunal and is rumoured to also have been threatened with arrest by Surrey Police (see the other place for this) . I'm not so sure that the Unite leadership will want to play this game though. The policy of calling strike action may of itself leave them open to penalties under TULRC if the action is seen to be unprotected. Moreover, in the macho game that is trade union leadership, I can't see Len wanting to be seen as backing down on a strike call if he doesn't get a response from BA management.

I would expect Unite to look very carefully at the numbers coming out of the ballot. If they think they stand a chance of bringing BA to a halt, they may go for strike action, but they would need 100% support in the ballot on 100% turnout and be able to convert that into real strikers. The trouble is that they are faced with a workforce that is predominantly female. Now whilst many may like the idea of watching a royal wedding, they will certainly not want to be associated, or seen to be the people who wanted to rain on that event. So any suggestion of a strike on April 29th or the run up to it may well backfire very badly. The public backlash would make the reaction to the '12 days of Christmas' announcement seem like a mild rebuke.

Bob Crowe may get away with it on the Tube, but then tube drivers are mainly male and probably don't care a toss for any Royal Wedding. There's not exactly an alternative for getting around a lot of London. BA is in a very different place.

Dawdler

25th Mar 2011, 00:00

Following statements attributed to union leaders, they are back to "sending a message". Isn't that what started all this mess?

I suppose they are saying this because they know they cannot rely on the troops to obey the Colonels' orders and actually go on strike.

pcat160

25th Mar 2011, 04:29

During the recent break in the action I have given some thought to the eventual resolution of this battle. There have been statements and opinions that there “has to be” an agreement so things can move forward and the various factions can “come together”. I am not so sure this is the case.

Let’s look at BA first. What would motivate BA to make additional concessions in order to reach an agreement with Unite/Bassa? In the past any agreement
BA have theoretically had with Unite has been vetoed by Bassa. GIven the current list grievances put forward by Bassa there is no way BA can address Unit/Bassa in meaningful negotiation. Currently the “facilities agreement” has been rejected by Bassa and apparently means Bassa and BA have no official recognition of one another. BA can therefor ignore Bassa. Only things that are “contractual” in CC’s employment agreement need to be addressed by BA. Based on personal experience as well as what I have read on this and other forums BA’s customer service on board has remained the same for the last couple years; OK but inconsistent. Mixed Fleet is here and will continue to grow. Mixed Fleet can not grow overnight so BA needs Legacy Fleet for now. It is generally acknowledged that any strike will be of little consequence but will cause strikers to suffer various consequences; permanent loss of staff travel, loss of bonuses, possible termination. Why should BA do anything to alter the status quo? With the passage of time the problem will go away. In fact with each passing month Legacy Fleet becomes less relevant and Mixed Fleet becomes the norm. During this period of transition those 2000 plus who have signed the new employment contracts have their situation established at least for the next several years. BA’s management is not there to provide some kind of feel good environment between every member of the staff. While this would be a worthy goal it is not the primary objective. I think BA should be very content to have a toothless adversary while making the transition to Mixed Fleet. Why should BA management do anything to accommodate Unite\Bassa?

I think the motivation for Bassa’s hierarchy to move forward have been well discussed on this and other forums. Basically there are none. Duncan and crew are history with any resolution of this dispute. I think it is safe to say there will be no resolution that envolves the current Bassa hierarchy.

With the current players in place it is my opinion that there will be no resolution of this dispute. What are the chances of Unite being decertified or Bassa undergoing a complete change of leadership? BA can proceed with their transition to Mixed Fleet and the onboard service will remain the same, inconsistent.

ChicoG

25th Mar 2011, 06:36

BA can proceed with their transition to Mixed Fleet and the onboard service will remain the same, inconsistent.

MF crew are significantly cheaper, ergo one can surmise that as their numbers increase, BA can consider adding CC back to the mix, thus improving service.

Of course, this spits in the face of BASSA diehards, but as it's pretty clear that most of them don't give a fig about the airline, can anyone give me a compelling reason why the airline should give a fig about them?

Joao da Silva

25th Mar 2011, 06:45

pcat160

If BA does what you are suggesting, the company exposes its brand to a slow burn over a period of time.

That would be very foolish, in my opinion.

Getting the cost end of a business right is only one part of the equation, the product has to be marketed, too.

Litebulbs

25th Mar 2011, 08:28

Ensuring the last strike have little consequence would have cost tens of millions of pounds, which is not of little financial consequence.

Juan Tugoh

25th Mar 2011, 08:38

Litebulbs is right, BA must be spending millions to ensure that a strike has minimal impact upon the operation. This one fact alone should be giving UNITE pause for thought. The issues here are more than just settling a dispute, after all BA could easily solve this dispute by giving in to UNITE, so if BA are prepared to pay millions to defy the blackmail of IA, you have to ask why.

This is about BA being able to manage it's affairs without the constant interference from a troublesome and out of touch union. It is not about union busting but about resetting the relationship between union and company, putting it on the same footing that the other branches of UNITE are on. BA have no problems with dealing with unions nor with UNITE branches other than BASSA.

BASSA are not management and have no right to be management, something that seems to be difficult for some of them to grasp.

Litebulbs

25th Mar 2011, 09:28

JT, agreed 100% with your last post.

Do you think that BA should allow discussions about integrating MF with legacy now? The offer was there before and as many have said, BA made its required savings with the crew numbers adjustment.

mrpony

25th Mar 2011, 11:03

...there was a post on here about five minutes ago on page 3 that described DH having received some sort of warning about what I'm guessing was a 'lack of judgement' on the internet, and that perhaps martyrdom was his goal since he has now decided to revisit the self-same subject.

Caught in the crossfire of:

1. Being an enfeebled power with absolutely no hope of continuing in post for much longer.
2. Having no strategy for achieving anything for BASSA's members and having achieved nothing but grief thus far.
3. Knowing that sooner or later the way the branch has been run will be put into the spotlight.

...martyrdom in the form of a prosecution by 'right wing henchman' or 'Willie's Bobby boot boys' in the course of fighting for the faithful might indeed be preferable to an embarrassing climb down and public humiliation.

THE POST REFERRED TO IS ON THE OTHER THREAD - MY ERROR

Ancient Observer

25th Mar 2011, 11:05

Like others, I do wonder how this dispute will end.
In the past I've been in many heavy duty Employee Relations disputes, (in the old days, we called them Industrial Relations disputes), but none quite like this.
From my perspective, the differences are perhaps small, but they do add up.
1. In any dispute the "sides" go through a period of hating each other. That is very true in this dispute. However, in most other disputes the key participants accept that in the end they have a vested interest in the Company surviving and prospering. In bassa's case, no-one appears to accept this. Rather, many would prefer to see BA go to the wall rather than compromise on anything.
2. The "best we can achieve by negotiation" settlement is normally either the end of a dispute, or the beginning of the end. In bassa's case it appears that "the best we can achieve by negotiation" was simply an excuse to put to-gether a longer list of demands. The Untie FTOs were made to look stupid by the bassa junta.
3. Most disputes where strike action is taken do not set back the members quite as much as bassa's actions have done. All that bassa members have done is to lose stuff, mainly due to bassa incompetence.
4. In most disputes, Managers take responsibility for getting out there and talking to staff. In widely dispersed maintenance operations across the UK, for instance, it was the managers job to be talking around the engineers and their colleagues. In BA, it would appear that managers either sit in their office, or they might turn up to the crew briefing zone. The managers don't appear to accept the responsibility for the behaviour of their staff, and don't get out and about enough. Why, then, are they managers?
These are only some of the things that look in my opinion to be different.
If much of this is the case, this dispute will not end until the bassa top junta are all removed, and until BA hold their managers accountable..

Hipennine

25th Mar 2011, 11:29

AO,

perhaps their managers aren't yet sufficiently confident that things have now changed, and they have the opportunity to manage without a threatened walk-out.

Also, in most businesses, anybody with "Director" in their title would be regarded as a manager, but it seems in IFCE that is not necessarily so. It's a strange topsy-turvy world thay live in !

Ancient Observer

25th Mar 2011, 11:58

H
Good point. Some of the "CSD"s are, in effect, strike leaders. Some, however, appear to want to earn their money and do provide pro-BA leadership.

When I've commented on their role in the past, some CSDs have posted on here, pointing out that they do see themselves as managers.

Whilst BA needs to do this from the moral high ground, I would find a way to fire those strike-leading "CSD"s.

LD12986

25th Mar 2011, 12:09

On the basis of comments by Keith Williams (to the effect that the major legacy issues have been addressed) and recent and current recruitment (Frank Van Der Post for example) it seems that there is to be a renewed investment in the product and service (catering improvements are coming in May) and a focus on growing the business. Cabin crew are obviously a big part of this and I suspect one reason why BA has allowed this to drag on for so long instead of forcing an end is because it knows it needs to pick up the pieces afterwards.

BA will have monitored forward booking trends as well as tracking perceptions of the brand amongst different groups and seems comfortable with the current situation and this seems to be borne out by the traffic statistics.

I take the point about managers getting out and talking to staff but if CC has been allowed over decades to become a separate empire within BA and BASSA (to give it some credit) has positioned itself as the sole source of the truth, this is not going to be reversed overnight. One of the major differences on Mixed Fleet is that the CSM is an actual BA manager grade, thus they are "management".

Diplome

25th Mar 2011, 12:18

mrpony:

There is a post on the Cabin Crew thread regarding Mr. Holley being warned by authorities regarding harrassment. I'm not sure what the source is or what the harrassment was specifically regarding.

Joao "nazi moedrating"???? A bit overwrought.

LD12986: Interesting comment regarding the management status at Mixed Fleet.

I've always been under the impression that if you are able to strike then you aren't true management.

Juan Tugoh

25th Mar 2011, 13:45

I think the offer that was on the table many moons ago was that the concept of MF would be dropped (as BF had listened to what the crew wanted when a feedback exercise was undertaken and crew wanted to avoid another fleet,) but this offer was rejected by BASSA negotiators before the first strike ballot. Given the additional cost that the dispute has caused to BA, and the fact that this cost was always going to be recouped from the IFCE budget, I think it will be a cold day in Hell before BA start to talk about integration of the two fleets.

BASSA does not have negotiating rights over MF and I think BA would rather that they never do. BA are only just starting to get a handle on the cost savings and flexibility in disruption that MF can deliver. MF work to Scheme and again it will be a cold day in Hell before BA allow MF to work to the same industrial limits that legacy crew have - the extra cost and loss of flexibility would be enormous.

I am sure that BASSA would love to have talks regarding the integration of the two fleets but that would defeat the whole point of MF; I doubt that BA would even entertain the concept - certainly not at the moment. I said that this dispute was "about resetting the relationship between union and company," until that is done, I think BA will only talk about settling this dispute on their terms. There may be a few very small concessions but nothing major. If, and only if, the disfunctional relationship between BA and BASSA is changed to BA's satisfaction then talks about integration of the fleets may take place. However, I do not foresee that happening for a long time.

In reality it is hard to assess what it would take for the rank and file membership of BASSA to end the dispute and return to work. The dispute has been handled in such a way as to concentrate all decision making into a few, dogma driven, individuals. The rank and file have had little say over whether to accept any of the BA proposals. If you believe the rhetoric that has come from BASSA it is hard to see how this dispute can be resolved. It would be instructive if an opinion taking exercise were to be done and see what people actually wanted, sadly, I suspect the BASSA leadership are happier telling their members what they want than listening to them. So the dispute will rumble on a little longer. I predict another No vote with a smaller turnout and a smaller majority - I stand by to be proven wrong!

Litebulbs

25th Mar 2011, 13:56

If you had to choose, would you go for adjusting current working arrangements to allow integration of MF, or maintain for as long as possible your current terms as MF grows.

Both will save and therefore allow for negotiation going forward, even though it was a missed chance before.

Juan Tugoh

25th Mar 2011, 14:04

That's a tough one. The longer term thinker would try to get everyone into the same negotiating group as then they would have a long term future but I suspect that the cost would be too high for many to stomach. This is though somewhat academic as BA will not, in my opinion, countenance BASSA having rights to negotiate for MF. Their track record is too troublesome and therefore the cost of gaining such rights would be prohibitive. So perhaps I would stick with the higher salary and hope it lasted for another few years. I would also start looking for a new job!

Litebulbs

25th Mar 2011, 14:11

Are you talking about Bassa as a negotiating group, or the membership as a whole?

Juan Tugoh

25th Mar 2011, 14:27

Oops I see what you mean.

In the long term legacy crew are a dying breed. This may take many years but the writing is on the wall for the fleet (not individuals), natural wastage will see to this. As MF grows and legacy crew numbers decline, they will be forced onto a more and more limited number of routes. So as the legacy crew do decline, albeit slowly, BASSA will become less and less relevant UNLESS they can in some way arrange to become the negotiating body for MF. So, at the moment, the two are the same - or could, for the immediate future, be used as a shorthand for the same thing.

If legacy fleet dies so does BASSA. I think the only way BASSA will get these negotiating rights will be by forced recognition, by getting the numbers in MF to the required percentage, and I cannot see BA being at all helpful here. For MF they would probably give voluntary recognition to the PCCC if for no other reason than to run interference. BASSA has to change or it will ultimately be sidelined and die. BA will be doing all they can to achieve this.

Litebulbs

25th Mar 2011, 14:36

And yet another question:)

Do you see legacy as pre 97 or pre MF?

Juan Tugoh

25th Mar 2011, 15:16

Pre MF - the rest are in the same negotiating group and operate the same routes to the same industrial agreements.

Sporran

25th Mar 2011, 15:27

Litebulbs,

Good point.

I think there are 2 sets of legacy crew:
- pre-97 are on the old contract and have a much higher basic salary.
- post-97 are on smaller basic salaries, but everything else is similar.
The only difference between these legacy crews is the change in basic salaries, evrything else in their contracts is the same and they still operate to some very out-of-date industrial agreements.

The new MF crews are on TOTALLY different remuneration packages. I think that there is NO chance of integrating MF crews with Legacy crews because they are two totally different entities. The legacy crews operate to some very restrictive industrial agreements, whereas the MF crew work much closer to the CAA scheme rules. BA are now able to open routes that were deemed to be 'marginal' because of the increased flexibilty that the MF crews offer.

I believe there have already been issues regarding MF crews and the length of flying duties - crew that have just operated S/H and different crew that have operated L/H trip and could be either aclimitised or not acclimitised. Add the additional complexity of industrial agreements and it would negate the benefits of MF being in place.

bassa could have had an influence in the use of MF and the manner it which routes were transferred. However, their unwillingness to enter into meaningful dialogue has left them as unwanted outsiders looking in!

Litebulbs

25th Mar 2011, 16:37

And those agreements are where future negotiation could happen. If I was a Bassa member, I would be looking at two choices now, either wither on the vine or mitigate loss. Both will add further savings to BA, but obviously one more than another over the next 50 years.

mrpony

25th Mar 2011, 16:52

That last post of yours has conjured up an image of a few very expensive 'legacy routes' being operated by silver-haired and rather doddery CC in 2025.
There is a pub somewhere near Southampton called 'The Yellow Pen'.

Sporran

25th Mar 2011, 16:58

Litebulbs,

Totally agree.

However, I do not think that kind of negotiation is remotely possible with the present militant 'leadership' who only seem to want confrontation at every turn. In my time in BA bassa have always had a very bad reputation for their seeming inability to negotiate. In the past it has worked, which is why BA cabin crew enjoy the T&Cs that they do. I would suggest that was not down to negotiating skills, but rather to weak management who inevitably gave in the moment bassa used their normal negotiating tactic of - 'strike unless we get what we want'!

Times have changed massively. All other unions / branches have recognised this - and negotiated accordingly. Alas, bassa have not moved with the times! They did not understand or appreciate the financial climate, they had made a deliberate and conscious decision NOT to look at the independant financial figures available, they felt they could offer a 2 year loan rather than proper savings and they seemed to feel it was acceptable for every other department in BA to make savings - except them!

The bassa leadership have been shown on many occasions to be extremely short on truth, but very long on rhetoric and blatant untruths. Their financial calculations have been shown to be childlike in there accuracy - £173M savings which turned out to be only about £52M. They have shown themselves to be complete amateurs dealing with professionals. Surely it is time for the cabin crew community to be represented by professionals as well. I appreciate that Untie officials are professionals, but that is of no consequence while bassa continue to veto any progress by the parent union!

Dawdler

25th Mar 2011, 17:04

How are the membership of BASSA (assuming they wish to) going to go about changing their representatives? Haven't BASSA cleared the way for not having any more elections until this dispute is over? All DH has to do is remain "in dispute" with BA ad infinitum, to keep his seat.

Litebulbs

25th Mar 2011, 17:31

No doubt we will see how the land lies after the ballot and look at numbers rather than percentages.

LD12986

25th Mar 2011, 18:46

I don't think there is any chance of BA now agreeing to the integration of EF/WW fleets with Mixed Fleet. The new fleet has been up and running for months and the differences in structure and working practices are too radical. Mixed Fleet has no seniority, one CSM with "Future Talent" crew acting as Pursers, Mixed Fleet cannot choose their working positions by seniority. And so the list goes on.

Add the inherent lack of trust of BASSA by BA and that BASSA has already expended its main weapon of industrial action to little effect. BA holds almost all the cards.

There's no doubt that not having the foresight to ensure there was no separate fleet at LHR has been one of the biggest failings of BASSA. How many of the reps thought that stonewalling the company would leave them filed under "too difficult"? Whilst I don't think the scaremongering about crew being starved of work will come true, BASSA's ability to resist productivity improvements and greater flexibility is going to be hugely diminished over time. BA will seek the productivity improvements (Fixed Links at LHR) and working practice changes to improve customer service over time.

Even if BASSA obtained bargaining rights for Mixed Fleet, the lack of seniority and relatively transient nature of the workforce and low wages means Mixed Fleet unlikely to be so willing to pay their monthly subscriptions and be so loyal to BASSA as EF/WW crew.

pcat160

25th Mar 2011, 18:55

Why is there this perception that in order for BA to move forward in improving the product in the area of cabin service some accommodation must be reached with Bassa. Has there not been an agreement in place for the last 15 plus years while at the same time service levels have decreased. The idea that CC service levels have decreased over this period is a perspective I have gained from this and other forums. My flights on BA have been over the last 10 years during which time I have noticed little difference although I more often travel in F now. I would suggest that the way to improve CC service levels is to accelerate the development of Mixed Fleet. In MF there is a structure where managers can manage and outstanding service can be rewarded with performance bonuses. I think it unrealistic to think work habits and attitudes will change just because there is an agreement in place. To reiterate my previous post I do not think this dispute will be settled anytime soon. Current Bassa hierarchy have a disincentive to settle the dispute while BA can get on with business. I understand this dispute is costing BA substantial sums, but I do not see an alternative for BA other than executing their business plan. That business plan for CC is a transition to Mixed Fleet.

Litebulbs

25th Mar 2011, 19:11

There is a financial reason to settle. The dispute is costing money. Without going down the SOSR route, natural wastage will take a long time to remove the legacy cost. BA will be paying a hell of a lot of basic money for current employees to sit at home whilst the MF crew take on more work.

I imagine it would take a change in redundancy laws to sweep out the cost; lucky we haven't got a Government that is looking at employment law legislation................

Bugger, we have!

hautemude

25th Mar 2011, 20:02

Although I enjoy many of you devil's advocate postings, you really are becoming less & less translucent.

MPN11

25th Mar 2011, 20:36

Betty girl

25th Mar 2011, 23:56

B F has always said it will take at least 10 years for Mixed Fleet to reach 40 % of the total cabin crew workforce. He is still saying this and he frequently pops into training courses such as 'In Touch' and Leaderships courses held for Pursers and CSDs and he draws on flip charts to show why this is the case.

It is only Bassa that says otherwise in an attempt to scare crew.

Mixed Fleet is due to grow fast at first to 1400 approx by next February ( by BA offering part-time to current WW and E/F crew and by route expansion) and thereafter it will grow as people on WW and E/F naturally leave or retire. Routes will only transfer to Mixed Fleet as the current fleets shrinks and this is to be done in a fair manner.

We have had situations in the past when Bassa has tried to scare crew but BA has always been true to their word and that is why I personally choose to believe BA and not Bassa. It is in BA's interest to have happy crew on all it's fleets and I truly believe that once all this has finally been sorted out, that's what we will end up with.

I notice that a lot of people post on here as if they have inside information and post as if they are speaking on behalf of BA. BA have been very clear on what will be happening in the future and they are committed to ALL our fleets.

These are my own views and I do not speak on behalf of BA.

Litebulbs

26th Mar 2011, 00:09

Makes some sense to me ....

Existing WW crews are going to be a fiscal drain on BA for years to come, until natural wastage takes effect.

Not sure why they're all going to be sat at home in the interim though, unless they all throw a sickie :)

Elaborate, please, Litebulbs.

MF grows training course by training course as the fleet grows. An amount of legacy crew will leave or retire. Now does the growth match the departure? Will BA only recruit to fill the gap?

What happens when there are more crew than crewable flights?

Litebulbs

26th Mar 2011, 00:11

Although I enjoy many of you devil's advocate postings, you really are becoming less & less translucent.

Why is a position that is not compliant to the thread bias, devils advocate?

Betty girl

26th Mar 2011, 00:29

Litebulbs,

It does not make financial sense to over recruit M/F crew and have any crew sitting at home whatever contract they are on.

BA have also made a commitment NOT to do this and are able to time training courses for new starters to coincide with crew leaving. BA have the ability to offer rest day working on all fleets including M/F and temporary part-time increases or decreases on WW and E/F in periods when they are under crewed or over crewed and they already currently use these methods to adjust crewing levels rather than taking on too many new entrants as you suggest.

It really is just a Bassa scare tactic to suggest WW or E/F will sit at home on their supposedly huge!! salaries and do nothing. It just would not make financial sense particularly as the offer includes guaranteed variable pay also on top of our salaries!! The whole point of all these changes is to make crew MORE productive not less, so leaving us sitting at home really does make NO sense at all!!

pcat160

26th Mar 2011, 00:56

If 2000 +or- CC decided to strike during an unprotected IA Mixed Fleet might get a jump start!

Litebulbs

26th Mar 2011, 00:59

I wasn't trying to scare, I was trying to make a point about a negotiating position. If you forget the top table at Bassa, which is a whole other discussion, then my point was about the viability of a negotiated and integrated fleet across all agreements.

Litebulbs

26th Mar 2011, 01:00

If 2000 +or- CC decided to strike during an unprotected IA Mixed Fleet might get a jump start!

Un/protected will be matter for the courts.

pcat160

26th Mar 2011, 02:59

"Un/protected will be matter for the courts." Of course!

ChicoG

26th Mar 2011, 06:14

Un/protected will be matter for the courts.

Although probably not for very long.

:}

VintageKrug

26th Mar 2011, 07:06

Un/protected will be matter for the courts.

It may end up in court, but of course if Unite itself believes any of BASSA's 10 reasons for strike (http://uniteba.com/LATESTNEWSUPDATES.html) could expose them or their membership, then they have the right not to authorise a strike called by BASSA's end-of-the-line leadership, and if they do authorise such an action, then they have a moral obligation to inform crew of the very real risks.

The clue that one of these reasons might be be related to previous action can be seen in bullet point 2, and the phrase "related to the previous dispute" which BASSA has cleverly spelled out for all to see....

It's also important BASSA members are aware of the basis on which the courts will assess the case; in doing so they can judge for themselves whether it's worth the risk of being fired:

Taking part in industrial action : Directgov - Employment (http://www.direct.gov.uk/en/Employment/TradeUnions/Industrialaction/DG_179248)

If you continue to take part in protected industrial action for more than 12 weeks your rights are different. If you are dismissed for taking part after the end of the 12 weeks your dismissal will only be unfair if, at the time of your dismissal, your employer has not followed reasonable steps to settle the dispute with the trade union.

Dismissal and unprotected industrial action

Official industrial action organised by a trade union is 'unprotected' if:

the trade union has failed to hold a postal ballot in-line with the law

the trade union has not told the employer, in-line with the law, about the industrial action ahead of a ballot or ahead of the industrial action

it has been disowned by the trade union (eg because someone without authority called for the action, or because the trade union considers the dispute to be resolved), sometimes called 'repudiated action'

it is secondary industrial action (in support of workers of another employer), sometimes called 'sympathy action'

it promotes ‘union labour only’ practices (also known as a ‘closed shop’)

it is in support of any workers who have been dismissed for taking unofficial action

other aspects of industrial action law have been breached by the trade union

If you are dismissed while taking part in unprotected industrial action called for by your trade union, you cannot normally claim unfair dismissal if all the other employees taking part are dismissed as well.

You can complain about unfair dismissal if you are dismissed:

for an automatically unfair reason (eg because of your duties as a health and safety representative)

while taking part in the industrial action but others taking part are not dismissed

for taking part in unprotected industrial action, after you stopped taking part

Just because you can make a claim for unfair dismissal does not mean it will be successful.

Of more interest than the above to Unite will be the potential for BASSA's strike to be counted as incitement for someone to breach their contract.

That is serious stuff, because if any TU officer (and that would include Branch Sec, for instance) induces someone to breach their contract outside a protected dispute, the employer can take that TU officer, and the TU, to court.

It is not clear to me whether this allows for recovery of all and any costs and losses arising from the breach, or is capped at £250,000.

That could create a significant personal liability for some.

More info here:

www.freshfields.com/publications/pdfs/2009/apr09/25765.pdf

Having said all that, I personally believe that BASSA is a busted flush, its actions are now irrelevant to BA as they don't affect the Operation, and BASSA isn't motivated to compromise or settle this dispute, which is effectively lost.

So it's very much a case of "Keep Calm and Carry On" whatever the result of BASSA's latest April Fool's Day Ballot.

Betty girl

26th Mar 2011, 09:09

Hi Litebulbs,

Good, as it would have been, to have Mixed Fleet integrated into WW and E/F, I am afraid that, that boat has well and truly sailed.

There was a small chance, right at the start, that Bassa might have been able to negotiate this by making some changes to our agreements and by making us more cost effective but that opportunity was lost a long time ago.

Now that Mixed Fleet is up and running, the savings of that fleet, are large and BA have seen the Golden goose's eggs!! Reintegrating them, with their very different structure, would now I feel be impossible and I cannot see BA being interested in doing this as the terms and conditions are so low that, BA will now have the large turnover of cheap crew that they seem to want on Mixed Fleet, so why would they want to change that ? !!.

Nice thought though and what many of us wanted Bassa to negotiate at the start but I am afraid it is now just a dream and what they should be now doing is working with the company to make these changes work in a way that protects us WW, SFG and E/F crew and also helps Mixed Fleet. We do need to somehow improve their agreements which are not good at all and I really do feel for them because some ARE very tired, underpaid and finding their rostering hard at times but of course I do know that as well as this, many are loving working for BA which is great for them.

These are my own personal views and not those of BA

kappa

28th Mar 2011, 01:49

I read this posted on another BB
BASSA > Latest News

TOMORROW
Mar 27th, 2011 by admin

Tomorrow is your day.

On Monday, 28th of March 2011, the results of the fifth ballot of British Airways cabin crew will be made known.

Whatever the outcome or the result, we are proud of you and proud to represent you.

Every single one of you should also be proud of yourselves, for the unwavering support that you have given, not only to your union but also to each other.

Other groups can only dream of having this solidarity and camaraderie. No other dispute in history has had so many ballots over so long a period of time; such ongoing support is unprecedented. Indeed it is this very determination that in the end will secure you the settlement you so deserve.

The nay-sayers have predicted the end of BASSA at every turn, yet here we are still together and still strong. They may have tried their damndest to destroy us, but to that end they have failed - and that is completely down to you and the support that you have given to us.

Far from thousands leaving Unite, the reality is far more encouraging. Our very first ballot was to around 12000 people, our last one went to around 10000. In the interim, 1,800 cabin crew have left British Airways employment, so obviously can no longer be members. To put this into some kind of context, the BA backed PCCC have had to disclose in a legal document submitted for Mark Everard’s tribunal case, that they have less than two hundred members. Considering that it’s free to join, most people appear to have already worked out that you get what you pay for.

You were so right to keep the faith.

It’s easy for other groups to scoff, but you know what, it takes true courage to put your money where your mouth is, to actually get off your backside and do something, rather than just talking about it.

When push comes to shove, you either have to stand for something in this life or you end up standing for nothing. It is always far easier to talk than to do, and you have proven over and over again that when it comes to doing, cabin crew are not afraid.

Whatever the outcome tomorrow, we are grateful to you from the bottom of our hearts for the support you have given us thus far; cabin crew have proven to everybody that they have not only the heart but also the wisdom to know when there is no other option but to fight for what is right.

XXXX

“Believe in yourself

And all that you are.

Know that there is something inside you

That is greater than any obstacle”

Christian D Larson.

JUAN TRIPP

28th Mar 2011, 07:09

Apparently many crew on another forum think this is the best message of the whole dispute! Just another of DH's fairy tales - not a fact in sight.

Mariner9

28th Mar 2011, 08:23

Give Duncan his due, he has managed maintain the support of ~5000 and somehow avoided mass resignations in the ~ 5,000 members who dont support strike action despite earlier demanding they resign. And he hasn't completely omitted facts - he mentioned the PCCC's 200 membership number apparently revealed in Mark Everard's Tribunal - (relevant of course due to the Porn links posted by Mr Everard - a fact DH omitted to mention)

Likely he'll have another "deeply satisfying" ballot result in a few days time to further comment upon.

ChicoG

28th Mar 2011, 08:30

I find it amusing that Mark Everard is even trying a tribunal.

Unless of course he is claiming he delegated the creation of the website and had nothing to do with the pr0n.

Richard228

28th Mar 2011, 09:00

It is always far easier to talk than to do, and you have proven over and over again that when it comes to doing, cabin crew are not afraid.Quite the opposite, in fact Mr DH.

Bassa gets thousands to vote on another pointless round of Industrial Action, as I'm sure will happen again today, but far fewer ever take that Industial Action tthat they have voted for.

And even fewer of them, turn out at Bedfont to drink Pims and eat samosa's.

Bassa members dont have much history of "doing", even its leadership have contended that its all about "sending a message" apparently....?

Hipennine

28th Mar 2011, 10:08

As a matter of interest, does anybody have any indication of the costs of running a circa 10000 member postal ballot x 5 ? All this democratic process must be costing quite a bit - and who pays, BASSA or Unite ?

And speaking of democratic consultative processes, given that the members weren't allowed to express their views on BA's last substantive offer, what happened to holding members meetings at the racecourse ? Surely the Exec Committee would want to have a 2-way communication after all that has happened since the last one, given all that has happened, and to seek members' views on a way forward beyond keeping the faith ?

mrpony

28th Mar 2011, 10:35

Here's my uneducated guess:

Cost per member - post 1
BASSA admin 2
3rd party ballot 2
Total 5

That's 50000 per ballot for 10000 members. Minimum 25000, maximum 75000.

ChicoG

28th Mar 2011, 13:03

What a surprise....

BA cabin crew are understood to have voted eight to one in favour of strike action.

Sky News has reported sources have told it the outcome of the ballot, which raises the prospect of a fresh round of strikes this Easter.

Union Unite remains in dispute with BA over the airline’s handling of a dispute last year which led to 22 days of industrial action.

About 10,000 members of BA’s 13,000 crew were eligible to vote in what was the fifth ballot organised by trade union Unite in a dispute that has dragged on since 2009.

From Sky itself:

Sky sources say that BA cabin crew have voted by more than eight to one in favour of further industrial action.

Some 5,811 Unite members voted yes, sources say, but dates for industrial action have yet to be set.

More follows...

Who has the previous numbers?

Llademos

28th Mar 2011, 13:13

Last Ballot - 7,482 in favour.

ChicoG

28th Mar 2011, 13:16

Last Ballot - 7,482 in favour.

Dropped by 22%. I wonder when they'll start to get the point?

jimd-f

28th Mar 2011, 13:21

PCCC have had to disclose in a legal document submitted for Mark Everard’s tribunal case, that they have less than two hundred members

now i don't expect anyone from PCCC to give us their membership figure, but it must surely be considerably higher this, otherwise there does not seem to be much future for them.

fincastle84

28th Mar 2011, 13:27

Sky are now reporting that the 'Yes' vote is 28 higher than last time on an increased turnout. Maybe I'll wait for the official result.

Mariner9

28th Mar 2011, 13:28

If Sky's numbers are correct, the maximum number of votes cast is 6537, which leaves around 3,400 (per DH's missive) who didn't vote.

I'm sorry but that is pathetic. Around 1/3 of BASSA members do not have the wherewithal to have a say in their own futures, and blindly pay subs to BASSA regardless. How can these people be trusted to make safety-critical decisions?

leiard

28th Mar 2011, 13:28

21 January 2011 - Last invalid vote

British Airways cabin crew members of Unite have voted in support of industrial action by a huge margin.
Unite balloted 10,220 cabin crew. They voted as follows on the question “are you prepared to take part in strike action”:

Number of ballot papers returned = 7,335
Number of ballot papers found to be invalid = 5
Total number of papers counted = 7,330
Number voting YES = 5,751 (78.5% of valid vote)
Number voting NO = 1,579 (21.5%)

mrpony

28th Mar 2011, 13:28

I think the 200 number must have arisen at the time of the offense i.e. yonks ago. The tribunal would only be able to ask for numbers at the time of 'porn redirection scam'. Not its business to know the numbers now which are far higher I believe. Highflyer might pop in to help on this one.

LD12986

28th Mar 2011, 13:30

Maybe the Christmas period influenced a slight dip in the previous ballot?

I wasn't expecting the Yes vote to stay broadly constant. That's a pretty strong hardcore that's not giving in.

hellsbrink

28th Mar 2011, 13:45

understood to have voted eight to one

From news sites:

5,811 crew voted for strike action, and 1,170 voted against. Turnout was 72% and only four voting papers returned were invalid.

So, can someone explain where the "8 to 1 in favour" claim has come from when my calculator says 4.967 - 1? And that's before we consider the small matter of the amount who actually voted and compare that to the actual membership (around 9701, by my reckoning) and the actual number of crew.

Guess it's time for some seriously ridiculous claims from Bassacolytes regarding "8 to 1".....

mrpony

28th Mar 2011, 13:52

Simples!

1100 vote NO.

Number balloted say 10000

8 x 1100 = 8900

8 to 1 didn't vote no so are in favour of strike action!

Ha. It's a gift I have.
P.S.
As Len says:
Of the just under 10,000 crew polled, some 83 per cent of the 6,981 who returned valid voting papers voted yes to strike action.!!!!!

As others might say:
About 60% of those polled voted yes. This represents roughly 45% of all cabin crew.

OSAGYEFO2

28th Mar 2011, 13:58

Once again the turkeys have voted for christmas.

HOWEVER

They have talked the talk

BUT

Will they walk the walk?

ExXB

28th Mar 2011, 14:10

Since the last time we were screwed around by BA CC strike, costing us a days holiday, we have sworn that we will not fly BA again until the idiots, on both sides, sort this out.

The idiots, if anything, appear to be more prevalent.

I don't care whose fault or who is to blame. My money is going elsewhere, perhaps forever.

notlangley

28th Mar 2011, 14:11

0.0 _ Invalid strike vote 16 November - 14 December 2009

_____________________Total__Yes____No___Spoiled__Not returned
Number of ballot papers 12780__ 9514 ___770____2______2494
Percentages__________100%_-_74.0%__6.0%__0.01%___19.5%

1.0 _ Valid strike vote 25 Jan - 22 Feb 2010

_____________________Total__Yes____No___Spoiled__Not returned
Number of ballot papers_11691_ 7482 __1789___11______2409
Percentages__________100%_-_64.0%_15.3%__0.1%___20.6%

2.0 _ New Contract offered by BA. reported by the Electoral Reform Service on 20 July 2010

_____________________Total___Yes___No___Spoiled_Not returned
Number of ballot papers_11311__1686__3419___3______6203
Percentages__________ 100%_-15.0%_30.2%_-0.03%__54.8%

3.0 _ Flawed Strike Ballot (reported by Unite) 21 December 2010 - 21 January 2011

_____________________Total___Yes___No___Spoiled_Not returned
Number of ballot papers_10220__5751__1579___5______2885
Percentages__________ 100%_-56.3%_15.5%_-0.05%__28.2%

　
4.0 _ Consequential Strike Ballot 1 March - 28 March 2011

_____________________Total___Yes___No___Spoiled_Not returned
Number of ballot papers_-9824__5811__1170___4______2839
Percentages__________ 100%_-59.2%_11.9%_-0.04%__28.9%

The references for all these ballot numbers are listed at
http://w
ww.pprune.org/6335650-post123.html

Chuchinchow

28th Mar 2011, 14:12

I won £10 on the National Lottery last Saturday evening.

I could do with a good laugh, so I think I might invest my winnings in buying a copy of the judgment handed down in Duncan Holley's Employment Tribunal appeal.

Can anyone tell me where I can obtain same, please? Copyright permitting, I could be persuaded to disseminate the full contents of the judgment here.

OSAGYEFO2

28th Mar 2011, 14:14

BASSA said that the vote would not result in a strike but would send a message.

The message it sends is that the dispute is not over, therefor Duncan keeps his job and the cash continues to roll in.

Ancient Observer

28th Mar 2011, 14:15

Shouldn't the bassa junta declare a "real" strike? One where the strikers walk out for 12 weeks (at least) and do not return until the issues are resolved?

"Real" strikes used to be the norm. The employees would really hurt the employer, and would be seriously out of pocket themselves.

Who gains from these strikes that only last a few days? These "holidays" for the BMW driving, Pimms swilling hobby jobbers?
No-one...........other than the bassa junta them selves, who prolong the strike and keep raking in the money from the branch funds.

notlangley

28th Mar 2011, 14:23

References are the following links
0.1 _ paragraph 4 of:-___link (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWHC/QB/2009/3541.html)

0.2 _Total number of ballot paper is stated in:-___ link (http://www.slaughterandmay.com/media/913485/p_and_e_update_employment_04_feb_2010.pdf)

1.1 _ paragraph 8 of:-___link (http://www.bailii.org/ew/cases/EWCA/Civ/2010/669.html)

2.1 _ link (http://uniteba.com/ESW/Files/BA_ballot_result_consultative_20_7_2010.pdf)

3.1 _-link (http://www.unitetheunion.org/news__events/latest_news/british_airways_cabin_crew_bal.aspx)

4.1 _-link (http://www.unitetheunion.org/news__events/latest_news/ba_vote_shows_cabin_crew_remai.aspx)

4.2 _Total number of ballot paper is stated in:-___ link (http://freepdfhosting.com/287a681774.pdf)

Chuchinchow

28th Mar 2011, 15:19

This is bad news for passengers.

I am quite sure that most passengers will be simultaneously pragmatic and phlegmatic about the result of the most recent BASSA vote.

British Airways is not the only airline in the world.

MPN11

28th Mar 2011, 15:22

This is not bad news for passengers, as BA will function perfectly adequately, as usual.

There is NO strike declaration [I assume 'Daddy' has to approve that, and it would possibly have been pre-agreed anyway].

We'll just carry on as usual, with grumpy crew and inconsistent service, on a reliable and safe airline. Those who are younger than I may see the final fanfare as the last of the legacy crew retire.

BetterByBoat

28th Mar 2011, 17:35

I have friends who have refused to fly BA since the strike votes in 2009 on the basis they don't know what will happen. I have continued to fly BA along with MPN11 but I'm not sure we are in the majority. Would be interesting to see how this hits bookings and margins.

Interesting to see how BA plays it. They have told strikers what to expect and then followed through with that promise. Hopefully BA will take a stronger stance and actually use this opportunity to improve customer service by removing crew who don't want to be there. If only disgruntled crew would actually really vote with their feet and find another job but I guess a lack of transferable skills means they can't get the same pay \ conditions anywhere else.

LD12986

28th Mar 2011, 17:45

In one sense, the number voting Yes is not surprising. The 5,000 odd crew who did go on strike don't have much to lose by voting Yes again. Add in the regular empty promises and you get your Yes vote.

That said, it is disappointing that Keith Williams' gesture in paying the bonuses to strikers (and the departure of WW to IAG) has had no effect. Nor has any loss of credibility in connection with the last failed ballot.

If crew have been conditioned to believe that BASSA is the sole source of the truth and everything BA does is part of a sinister plot to crush BASSA and crew then little can be done to turn this around.

Also, sadly, if the claim that the PCCC has 200 members is true then I'm sorry to say but I think the ship has sailed as far as establishing it as a credible alternative to BASSA.

fincastle84

28th Mar 2011, 18:06

I have continued to fly BA along with MPN11 but I'm not sure we are in the majority.

We've just flown LGW-GND-LGW in J & the flight was chocker both ways, in all classes. You are definitely not alone in backing BA.

Our future (LHR) flights are booked up to March 2012.

VintageKrug

28th Mar 2011, 18:24

Also, sadly, if the claim that the PCCC has 200 members is true then I'm sorry to say but I think the ship has sailed as far as establishing it as a credible alternative to BASSA.

I think that 200 number would only be at the time of PornGate, when the website was launched and more public profile was first adopted. Can't remember when all that kicked off? Anyone...?

PCCC – Professional Cabin Crew Council (http://www.mypccc.co.uk) probably has many more members by now, though probably not enough to make a play for recognition yet.

The result of this ballot is being largely ridiculed, or worse, ignored, on other passenger forums.

Neptunus Rex

28th Mar 2011, 18:26

This is not a strike, it's a "strikette," as was the last one. It will not succeed (if it ever takes place) because there will be plenty of volunteers to take up the slack.

It is, however, time for BA to get tough with the miscreants. Including strikers in the bonus scheme was a grave error of judgement.

MPN11

28th Mar 2011, 18:39

Our future (LHR) flights are booked up to March 2012.

There's posh!! I'm only booked up to October this year. ;)

This is not a strike, it's a "strikette," as was the last one. It will not succeed (if it ever takes place) because there will be plenty of volunteers to take up the slack.

And there's the [expensive] point of this ongoing farce.
Having spent BASSA [??] subscriptions on yet another ballot, and got a "Yes" from 5,800 people ... where's the Strike Dates?
Are Unite waiting to see the massive support before allowing DH to go ahead?
Or do they even care about this embarrassing outfit?
...............
For those with short memories, there was a series of 4 strikes last May [nothing to do with the volcano, which affected April]. I flew through 2 of those, and thousands of other people did as well. we all [with a few exceptions] proceeded from A to B. NOW, in 2011, BA has even more VCC ... and a completely new Fleet who aren't interested in preserving the perks of the pre-97 senior crew [enough said on that aspect].

IF Unite agree IA, I'll be surprised.
IF IA is agreed, and it has any significant impact, I'll be surprised.
IF Duncan Holley allows a democratic vote on the BASSA leadership, I'll be surprised.
IF BASSA releases its accounts, I'll be surprised.
It could be an interesting year :cool:

Entaxei

28th Mar 2011, 18:59

This is most inconsiderate of all CC concerned in Unite/BASSA, I am due to go to Porto during or close to the likely strike period, nowI am going to have to adjust my dates and booking to go to Lisbon, as BA don't fly to Porto, then fly or drive to Porto.

All to show my backing for BA and belief that any strikers should be given a straight boot up the a*se with a P45 and, refusal of any reference other than stating that after being given a bonus, they refused to carry out their duties and went on strike. Which reminds me, can that bonus be removed?

And ...... the union movement is worried about foreign labour taking over 'British' jobs!!! - Don't worry, Len Mcluck is on the way again, he's used to dealing with large numbers of redundancies - can anyone remember how many the Docks used to employ before he got going?

The stupidity and cupidity of people continues apace :ugh:

MPN11

28th Mar 2011, 19:21

:ok:

Enjoy a pleasant drive/fly to Porto :cool:

Frognal

28th Mar 2011, 19:28

As a long time lurker, I decided to register and give a view today.

It is ridiculous that the biggest airline in the UK has a Mexican stand off with nearly 15% of it's workforce, after all this time.

Time for the company to resolve the situation, management should manage.

The legislation is there to take action and the justification is clear.

Action this day.

MPN11

28th Mar 2011, 19:44

1. Hello, Frogal. I share your grief, but BA is playing a long game. I think the evidence is that they know what they're doing ... see next.

2. From the CC Thread ...
There won't be a strike. BASSA Reps have been telling crew that they fly with that the next step will be to announce strike dates, then cancel them. Then Re-ballot, round and around the BASSA merry go round until BA gives into their demands.

The reason is that members have expressed concern about the financial implications of further IA. So BASSA's strategy is to just cancel and re-ballot as they know they will not have the support they had last time.

I have heard this from quite a few sources, but does anyone know if they can do this? Surely if they cancel they have no justification to re-ballot?

3. BASSA/DH are possibly intent to play silly bu66ers, as was pre-warned some time back. That does precisely nothing to further the cause of the CC, of course, but does have the potential to cause minor damage to BA's forward bookings.

4. Following on from 3, I hesitate to mention the fact that DH appears to have engineered a situation where he remains in his salaried post as long as there is an on-going Industrial Dispute, despite the fact that he is no longer employed by BA and is technically un-entitled to be Gen Sec of BASSA. However, one day those 5,811 union subscription payers will realise what's happening ... especially if the "unavailable" BASSA accounts ever surface.

This is a DIRTY fight, and BA are remaining impressively calm. I do earnestly hope there will be some severe retribution in the future ... not for the individual CC, but for those who have created this farce.

fincastle84

28th Mar 2011, 20:19

There's posh!! I'm only booked up to October this year. ;)

I'm using an Amex voucher plus BA miles to CPT. As you well know, if you don't book 353 days in advance, the 2x only J class seats have gone. I'll be updating our return flights later in the week. Navigators were always renowned for their planning, now we're just like the Do-Do!

Returning to the topic, I notice that the BBC have eventually stopped reporting the fictitious report that the Bassa majority was in excess of 8 to 1. I guess that the left wing BBC initially happily reported an untrue Bassa leak prior to the release of the official figures.

I wonder how long it will be before the ballot is declared illegal?

cdtaylor_nats

28th Mar 2011, 21:18

LD12986

28th Mar 2011, 21:23

If, as soundings suggest, BASSA is aware that the strike is unprotected, I don't think we'll even get to strike dates being called. As soon as Unite does that the meter starts running on the damages claim against Unite.

Litebulbs

28th Mar 2011, 22:24

Are the damages not limited to £250k? It is a big number but less than 1% of member revenue. Come to think of it, that is less than 50% of the extra Bassa charge their members.

Believe me, I would want to retain that money in Unite coffers, as a percentage of that is mine, but who is set to loose more, BA or Unite?

Dawdler

28th Mar 2011, 23:26

If they go ahead with the tactics of declaring and then cancelling strikes, how long will it be before a Conservative led government decides its time to amend the legislation to make the tactic illegal?

I thought it already was illegal. Wasn't there some discussion some weeks ago about an American airline (Alaskan?) being subject to this sort of action and having to succumb? I think at the time it was stated that such behaviour was not possible (without penalty) under UK laws.

I believe the tactics used in USA were something like, declaring a strike but then turn up for work, then declare another strike a few days later, but again turn up, then actually go on strike without notice. I may have the details wrong but I think the basis is about right.

Entaxei

29th Mar 2011, 03:36

On the CC thread, there are two comments being made (among many);

A. "That Bassa Reps are spreading the word that there won't really be a strike, just threats." Is there a list of Bassa Reps anywhere, as it was reported many months ago that a large quantity had been sacked by BA for various actions/discipline problems. Bearing in mind that BASSA supposedly cannot elect anybody to any positions whilst there is a dispute in place, so there should not be any replacement Reps voted in, but DH did advertise for unpaid!! volunteers - again if there is, presumably BA have to be advised accordingly - and agree? - but as the facility agreement is no longer in place? are Reps still recognised? - or allowed to do anything.

B. "That Unite are negotiating with BA (KW) to reach an agreement over the IA issues." The only problem with this as Woodley found out before handing over to Mclucksky, is that BASSA claimed the sole rights to agree a dispute - and Woodley agreed and withdrew the Unite statement recommending acceptance of the offer that he agreed with BA - so where's the dog and where's the tail?

Don't you just love a nice tidy ordered world!! :rolleyes:

notlangley

29th Mar 2011, 05:00

I notice something interesting._ It might be a coincidence, but didn’t someone once say that there is no such thing as a coincidence?

On 22 February 2011, Brendan Gold of Unite, sent a letter which very carefully and methodically calculated the cabin crew membership of BA to be 9824._ Now this figure was just about exactly 400 less that the numbers who had been balloted in the 21 December 2010 - 21 January 2011 strike vote._ Quite a big drop in such a short amount of time._ Comparing that ballot with the one announced yesterday I see that the YES vote is pretty well the same, the spoiled votes about the same and the DIDN’T RETURN BALLOT paper also just about the same._ But look and behold - the NO vote dropped by approximately 400 votes._ Please forgive me for suggesting this, but could it be that those cabin crew who received a ballot paper despite having resigned from BASSA decided to take advantage of this and vote against the Union that they no longer liked?_ If they did this, then that would have been naughty.

Mariner9

29th Mar 2011, 06:52

GrahamO

29th Mar 2011, 07:05

Could someone explain to me the difference between the current system where anyone sacked can go to an Industrial Tribunal for an independent right/wrong decision (which I thought was in place now) and what BASSA are asking for in their long list of demands. Why ACAS arbitration when ACAS don't understand employment law as well as the Industrial Tribunal folks?

Me confused - can't understand the difference?

Thanks

Litebulbs

29th Mar 2011, 07:20

An employment tribunal will look at the facts and merits of the case and judge whether the actions taken by the employer were reasonable. The key thing is the the ET cannot make its own judgment on the facts and impose its view.

So if BA carried out and investigation (internal) and then followed its own disciplinary procedure (internal) including appeals and came to a decisions to dismiss (internal), then unless there was something so perverse, then the dismissal will be fair.

Even if the tribunal found that the dismissal was unfair, there would be no obligation to reengage the dismissed employee, just pay them.

What I believe Bassa are asking for is arbitration by an independent, who will judge on the facts of the case, not whether the process followed was fair.

Does this make sense?

Basil

29th Mar 2011, 10:20

there won't really be a strike, just threats
Oh no! . . and there was I thinking there would be more staff travel seats available for me when all the strikers lost theirs :}:p

mrpony

29th Mar 2011, 10:24

Having emailed and texted searching questions about BASSA's accounts and pay of its officers to Victoria Derbyshire's show which featured CC in all its diversity this morning, I was disappointed it never came up!

Someone called Ian spoke up on behalf of BASSA quite eloquently until falling into a great big putrid hole filled with his own bile. He likened the plight of BASSA with that of the Jews on Kristallnacht. What sort of stupid insensitive tow-rag does that?

Kristallnacht - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kristallnacht)

VintageKrug

29th Mar 2011, 10:56

Symptomatic of its bankrupt arguments, BASSA has a history of deploying frankly abhorrent Nazi imagery to ram its perverse message home:

http://daylife.sky.com/imageserve/0dmM91Edndabg/610x.jpg

http://daylife.sky.com/imageserve/0d...ndabg/610x.jpg (http://daylife.sky.com/imageserve/0dmM91Edndabg/610x.jpg)

And again a BASSA propaganda sheet littered with references paralleling this "struggle" to the Holocaust:

http://bassa.co.uk/bassa/downloads/N...DFFile-785.pdf (http://bassa.co.uk/bassa/downloads/NewsArticlePDFFile-785.pdf)

They also have a penchant for using children to make their point, which is deeply unpleasant, reminiscent of Saddam Hussein’s “Human Shield”:

http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/94c16cff08.jpg

www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/94c16cff08.jpg (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/94c16cff08.jpg)

call100

29th Mar 2011, 11:09

Symptomatic of its bankrupt arguments, BASSA has a history of deploying frankly abhorrent Nazi imagery to ram its perverse message home:

http://daylife.sky.com/imageserve/0d...ndabg/610x.jpg (http://daylife.sky.com/imageserve/0dmM91Edndabg/610x.jpg)

And again a BASSA propaganda sheet littered with references paralleling this "struggle" to the Holocaust:

http://bassa.co.uk/bassa/downloads/N...DFFile-785.pdf (http://bassa.co.uk/bassa/downloads/NewsArticlePDFFile-785.pdf)

They also have a penchant for using children to make their point, which is deeply unpleasant, reminiscent of Saddam Hussein’s “Human Shield”:

www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/94c16cff08.jpg (http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/94c16cff08.jpg)

Get a grip. You are no better than those you complain about using comparisons like that.
I don't support BASSAs use of Nazi images, but, it always amazes me how people who think they are better than them make the same mistakes...:rolleyes:

Diplome

29th Mar 2011, 11:41

VintageKrug:

call100 makes a valid point.

Does anyone believe that we will actually see strike dates called?

A part of me says "No"...but another part says that it difficult to try to gauge what such a radical group will do. The dispute is no longer issue driven and seems to be more about emotion.

just an observer

29th Mar 2011, 11:45

A couple of posters on the other thread suggesting that all it would take is the full return of ST and independent arbitrations for those dismissed. Somewhat different to the 10 items of dispute heralded by BASSA.

I wonder if that is the majority view? And I wonder if BA offered it, would the knowing-they-wont-be-re-employed Messrs Holley, Everard etc allow their members to vote on it? my bold

BA did offer ACAS arbitration in the October 2010 offer, see extract below. And no, CC weren't allowed to vote on it.

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

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

Any arbitration hearing will take place only after British Airways' internal appeals procedure has been exhausted. In any such case British Airways will have the right to approve or reject the arbitrator proposed.

BA did retain the right to reject the arbitrator, don't know how important that is, but I daresay that might be waived in any current negotiation, as it's all ACAS. Does the ACAS scheme result in re-employment if dismissal found to be unfair, or just financial compensation/penalty?

just an observer

29th Mar 2011, 11:53

Further to my final sentence/question, on googling around I found this ACAS arbitration scheme Q&A Acas - Acas Arbitration Scheme Q&A (http://www.acas.org.uk/index.aspx?articleid=2007)

In a case of alleged unfair dismissal, what will the arbitrator award if they decide that the dismissal was unfair?
If the arbitrator finds that the dismissal was unfair, they have the power to award reinstatement or re-engagement with or without compensation. If reinstatement or re-engagement are not sought by the former employee or are not considered appropriate by the arbitrator, they can award compensation.

See also -
Will we be allowed to choose the arbitrator appointed to hear the case?
No. However, if a party feels that there are exceptional circumstances which may affect the named arbitrator's ability to be impartial, for example if they have a connection with one of the parties, contact the Acas Arbitration Section immediately. Acas arbitrators are under a duty to disclose any actual or perceived conflict of interest, and will not be appointed to hear a case if a real conflict of interest is identified.

PaddyMiguel

29th Mar 2011, 12:12

Saw this comment in today's Independent which made me smile...:)

Someone needs to send Len McCluskey a dictionary with the word "perk" underlined, then knee him in the groin and show him the door before he kills off BA completely and makes all of his BA members unemployed.

Wikipedia:

The term perqs (also perks) is often used colloquially to refer to those benefits of a more discretionary nature. Often, perks are given to employees who are doing notably well and/or have seniority. Common perks are take-home vehicles (http://www.pprune.org/wiki/Take-home_vehicle), hotel (http://www.pprune.org/wiki/Hotel) stays, free refreshments, leisure activities on work time (golf (http://www.pprune.org/wiki/Golf), etc.), stationery (http://www.pprune.org/wiki/Stationery), allowances (http://www.pprune.org/wiki/Allowance) for lunch (http://www.pprune.org/wiki/Lunch), and—when multiple choices exist—first choice of such things as job assignments and vacation scheduling. They may also be given first chance at job promotions when vacancies exist.

Diplome

29th Mar 2011, 12:39

An interesting statement made in regards to BA's confidence in being able to handle its schedule in the event of a strike from the Independent:

But Mr McCluskey has dismissed Mr Williams's confidence, saying: "He has no way of knowing what weird and wondrous initiatives we might take should we engage in industrial action."

Does he not understand that it is statements such as the above that have made striking BA Cabin Crew loathed by the general public?

The business end makes dismissal of all striking crew unrealistic but it would be nice to know that I would never have to be served by an individual who shared the above mindset.

Lou Scannon

29th Mar 2011, 13:12

But Mr McCluskey has dismissed Mr Williams's confidence, saying: "He has no way of knowing what weird and wondrous initiatives we might take should we engage in industrial action."

Boy, does that mean they will abandon their priciples and start handing out hot towels?

I am flying BA in May and knowing Bassa, have total confidence that the flight will depart on time.

Litebulbs

29th Mar 2011, 13:57

Now on iplayer -

BBC iPlayer - Victoria Derbyshire: 29/03/2011 (http://www.bbc.co.uk/iplayer/episode/b00ztcth/Victoria_Derbyshire_29_03_2011/)

Lively debate!

Diplome

29th Mar 2011, 14:45

Why is it that BASSA members can never simply state what it would take to end this action?? They can't seem to do it.

Instead we hear hysterics about people losing their homes, etc., etc...

If someone is losing their home during this action its because of poor financial planning, not BA.

There are times I believe that there is simply no way to negotiate with this group of individuals. They can't articulate what they are willing to compromise on and refuse to accept the fact that BA is making financial progress specifically because of managements decisions to manage.

Litebulbs

29th Mar 2011, 14:51

You do have Barry (56 mins) that is equal and opposite!

notlangley

29th Mar 2011, 15:47

This looks very positive from BA:-___strike schedule (http://www.britishairways.com/travel/strike-schedule-plans/public/en_gb)

Dawdler

29th Mar 2011, 15:54

I noticed at one point Victoria didn't seem to accept that BA's disciplinary system had investigated a blocked toilet accusation, suggest that one of the passengers did it, as well as graffitying the mirror. Perhaps her interviewee would have been betterr served by raising the desecration of crew bunk beds, then Ms Derbyshire would have had more difficulty in making her suggestion.

Earlier the flat denial of BASSA reps walking out of meetings by (I think) "Nickie" was indicative of the mindset of some union members, even though it is a fact and proved to be so in a court of law.

GrahamO

29th Mar 2011, 18:19

Thank you for the perspective - I understand now.

We could debate about whether it makes sense but thats another subject for another day (perhaps).

SLFLurker

29th Mar 2011, 18:21

Thanks Notlangley....

We've got a domestic to longhaul and back again lined up over the potential strike dates so here's hoping the domestic end holds up...

MPN11

29th Mar 2011, 18:39

It appears that's exactly what Holley is trying to do ... damage BA by upsetting passengers, by holding ballots that threaten strikes, but not actually striking ... so that none of the potential strikers get penalised.

If that turns out to be the case, I think BASSA's legal ice might prove very thin.

VintageKrug

29th Mar 2011, 18:56

This does appear to be the case, Holley having stated as much on his 'feeling downhearted" blog, dated 13th February 2011:

This is a different phase of the dispute that we are now in, it’s no longer about rushing into strike dates; it is all about sending a message..….You no longer need actual strikes to pressure the company - ballots can have the same effect, since they carry the threat of strikes. It would now appear that a simple, well-placed cross on the ballot paper removes some of the need to actually lose money and stand on picket lines.

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

SLFLurker

29th Mar 2011, 18:58

MPN,

I'm sure BA will sort us out so that we are not too disadvantaged. I flew domestic last May (just escaped the ash clouds one way!) and BA rescheduled and the rescheduled again no problem when the strike was called off.

I booked in Nov / Dec fully aware of the dispute but given my experience in May, I have no qualms that BA will sort it - but just could do without the hassle right now - we have a relatively early LH out of LHR so may have to come down the night before.

AlpineSkier

29th Mar 2011, 19:23

Can anyone definitely tell me if BA has gone after Unite and secured costs for any of the 'illegal" actions and if so, how much ?

In spite of following the whole saga i haven't caught this .

Thanks

binsleepen

29th Mar 2011, 22:15

How long to BASSA have in order to call a strike? I Know they have to give 7 days advance notice, but how long does the ballot mandate last?

Regards

LD12986

29th Mar 2011, 22:23

I think they have to start the strike within 28 days, so in light of the notice period, they have 21 days to call a strike.

Colonel White

29th Mar 2011, 23:25

They have 28 days from the date that the ballot result was announced in which to commence strike action, but need to provide BA with 7 days notice of any proposed strike dates. Assuming that the strike action is protected (i.e. it is not seen as a continuation of an existing dispute) the union has a period of 12 weeks in which it can call for strike dates. Thereafter, protect ceases to be in place and any industrial action taking place is not protected. The protection gives employees the right to claim for unfair dismissal if they are sacked solely for taking part in industrial action. It also provides some indemnity for the union.

The problem that Unite face is that the 10 items in their list of grievances include wording that inextricably links this lates ballot with the previous strikes, hence it is likely that any industrial action would be unprotected. Whilst BASSA and co may wish to call strike dates, they are powerless as only the union is able to do that. If Unite feel that in doing so they would open themselves up to substantial legal action, not just from BA but potentially from the membership for not providing the whole truth about the legality of the current situation, they may well back down.

StoneyBridge Radar

30th Mar 2011, 06:35

Is there anyone of sufficient legal mind to answer me this?

Mr Holley has admitted himself that BASSA are now resorting to the tactic of merely threatening industrial action in order to deflate forward bookings. Is there legislation to cover, or do BA have any legal recourse to argue, vexatious action ?

To my mind, this is an abuse of the legal entitlement for an employee to take industrial action. How long before this government turn their eye to this abuse and close the loop hole ?

It is not only BA cabin crew whom Mr Holley and his cohorts are sending over the abyss; dare I suggest, he is putting into jeopardy the current freedom and rights of all employees and their current right to exercise their right to strike by opening up the procedure to public and government scrutiny.

Another thought which crossed my mind whilst listening to the Radio 5 live debate; do BASSA members not realise that by realising savings through NF., those NF boys and girls are actually protecting the T & Cs of those on old contracts. Without NF, where would the necessary savings have come from in IFCE? Phone a friend anyone? 50/50? Ask the audience?

Message to the BASSA hardcore: NF is not the bear in the room you all fear. NF will not take your jobs, NF will not affect your T & Cs., NF will not take all your cushy routes and box payments, NF is not responsible for you going one down onboard (incase you have forgotten, that is what this stupid dispute was all about initially), NF will only increase proportionate to the natural decrease in old contract numbers. Get it in your heads, BA had to adjust to survive; you need to too.

Chuchinchow

30th Mar 2011, 07:57

Colonel White - in an otherwise excellent posting on the crew-only thread - has written:

If cabin crew are targetting Easter (or more accurately Passover) does this mean we are in for further parallels being drawn with BA management taking the role of Pharoah and the BASSA executive and there cronies assuming the role of the Jewish people in Egypt?

Passover this year commences on 18 April 2011, while Easter falls on 25 March 2011.

Colonel White

30th Mar 2011, 08:49

CCC
I believe you are mistaken. Easter is on April 25th. Passover runs for 7 days commencing on April 19th. :O

Hotel Mode

30th Mar 2011, 09:04

while Easter falls on 25 March 2011.

Easter was 5 days ago???????

Wheres my easter eggs?

MPN11

30th Mar 2011, 09:09

Several interesting comments and questions above, especially from Col White and Stoneybridge.

Much will, of course, hinge on what Unite chooses to say and/or do following the ballot result. They have 3 weeks to make up their minds. The perception of many here and on other forums is that the planned strike[s] will be unprotected, thanks to the 10-point linkage to the previous action. In parallel is Holley's implication that they will not actually do anything, which opens up the vexatious action question.

I suspect that BA's legal people have a variety of pre-prepared folders to address those [and other] issues. :cool:

Meanwhile, as noted on ba.com ...
Unite has not set any dates for the proposed strike action and we remain in talks with them.

If a strike does take place, we have strong contingency plans in place. We will:

Operate a normal schedule at London Gatwick and London City
Aim to fly 100 per cent of our longhaul flights to and from London Heathrow
Aim to fly the majority of our shorthaul flights to and from London Heathrow

BA cabin crew dispute 2011 - ballot result - British Airways (http://www.britishairways.com/travel/strike-ballot/public/en_gb)

VintageKrug

30th Mar 2011, 10:26

It is not only BA cabin crew whom Mr Holley and his cohorts are sending over the abyss; dare I suggest, he is putting into jeopardy the current freedom and rights of all employees and their current right to exercise their right to strike by opening up the procedure to public and government scrutiny.

There are already some significant provisions in place which permit employers to sue a Union for carrying out industrial action where statutory immunity is not valid (i.e. an unprotected action):

http://www.freshfields.com/publications/pdfs/2010/oct10/29082.pdf

The last paragraphs are especially relevant, where BA could sue Unite for up to £250,000, can sue Union representatives individually for organising unprotected pickets, and where individual passengers can sue the Union for losses incurred because of a failure to deliver services as a consequence of unprotected action; I can imagine BA is all over this.

Further backing for the position that Unite is unlikely to authorise any walk-outs.

mrpony

30th Mar 2011, 10:49

Agree that Unite won't back a strike. BASSA's members are dead in the water. They can vote but they can't strike. They have no voice at the negotiating table for any purpose.

MPN11

30th Mar 2011, 11:31

Accepting, hopefully, that Unite do indeed 'walk away' from the situation ... what happens next?

Does DH just sit back and do/say nothing? Or just call for another ballot when this one expires? Or embark on some bizarre wild-cat action?
Will the hard-core BASSA membership ever recognise what's going wrong, listen to FACTS instead of DH's fictions, and do something about introducing some legitimacy and credibility to their Union's position?
Will BA just implement contingency plans, and watch another round of negative publicity? Or will they start taking robust action against the causes of the problem?
The majority of BA's employees have already made major concessions, and have shown no inclination to support BASSA's fringe activity. The Public may be slightly concerned, but regular users of BA now know that any strike has little [if any] effect.

Something has got to give, surely?

VintageKrug

30th Mar 2011, 11:47

It’s a difficult conundrum.

The only way I can see it changing is for some of the broader BASSA membership (not the BASSA reps/management) to take an interest in the running of their Union Branch. I wouldn’t be surprised if Unite themselves would be keen to see this happen, either.

The first stage of this is to gain access to the accounts of their own £1.5m+ annual subscriptions, as they are legally entitled to do. Then to look in more detail how the money is disbursed; it’s all perfectly legal I’m sure, but there is always room for improvement and increasing value for money for members.

Having that financial understanding is the first stage to being able to launch a credible, democratic challenge to current ways of doing things, not to “bust BASSA” but to make it stronger and attempt (if that’s possible) to mend its tarnished brand.

BASSA is now a zombie union, with unelected leadership, disconnected from the employees they claim to represent as they no longer work there, no longer involved in any negotiations with BA by dint of BASSA terminating the Facilities Agreement itself, and an active interest in destroying the livelihoods of those they claim to represent in order to exact supposed revenge, as well as an active disinterest in settling, alongside a rather nice stipend as long as this dispute is ongoing.

Thankfully BA realises this, and is carrying on regardless; frankly I rather hope for a proper strike which should flush out the real level of BASSA’s support.

Meanwhile, forward bookings remain strong and my colleagues and I continue to fly BA without any fear of significant disruption.

LD12986

30th Mar 2011, 12:15

MPN11 - DH has no authority to call a ballot. This rests with Unite. The slightest hint of any unofficial action will be shot down immediately by Unite.

However, I genuinely don't see a settlement without a change in leadership at BASSA. This may just rumble on and taking the temperature of the response of passengers to Monday's announcement, BA's regular customers are to a very large extent not troubled by the threat of strikes. The ballot announcement also got relatively little media coverage.

Arguably, the neutering of the threat of strikes is something of a watershed. The threat of a strike has in the past been as significant (if not more) than the strikes themselves.

mrpony

30th Mar 2011, 12:53

This is a viable option - something doesn't have to give.

1. Those who haven't signed up to the new contact will find themselves being paid 6-7%% less than those that have in the near future. That's about 20 million in salary costs saved annually.
2. As long as BASSA is disabled (having shot itself in both feet), BA can run its own business. This is extremely valuable, must be a huge relief, and has already allowed BA to plough its own furrow with regard to MF at huge annual savings of 150 million plus. Would BA give this freedom up without a fight? NO!
3. Think of the day-to-day savings associated with not having to deal with a bunch of jobs-worth gob****es, diverting this and invoking that left, right and effing centre - my guess is 25 million annually but it could be double that.
4. Expect a further 'step-drop' in BASSA numbers after this latest ineffectual wet sock of a ballot, and more drifting away as time goes on. All good news for BA.

BA can just wait until BASSA in its current guise is a thing of the past. This year, probably. Next year, certainly. A few Cabin Crew look a bit miserable sometimes. So what?

I agree with you LDnumbers. Neutering of the strike threat is a watershed.

Chuchinchow

30th Mar 2011, 13:02

Mon Colonel,

You are quite correct about the date for Easter 2011. My apologies to you (and to Hotel Mode) for the careless error.

However, Passover (like all Jewish festivals) commences on the evening before, i.e. 18 April this year. The Hebrew date for the beginning of Passover is 14 days after the new moon that heralds the month of Nissan.

Passover is observed for seven days in Israel, but for eight days in the Diaspora (like several other Jewish religious holidays). The reason for this anomaly is that, in Biblical times, Jews living outside "the Holy Land" could not be sure of the exact Hebrew date, so the extra day's observance is an insurance policy, if you will.

Best wishes and Hag Sameach (happy festival) from a veteran and confirmed matzah addict!

NB: None of the above implies that I will eschew the consumption of Easter eggs!

Richard228

30th Mar 2011, 15:47

BA can just wait until BASSA in its current guise is a thing of the past. This year, probably. Next year, certainly. A few Cabin Crew look a bit miserable sometimes. So what?excellent summation of BA's stance to date, I think.

BA have won so much already, whilst BASSA has failed to make any wins so far. This has never been about Union busting... and playing the long game is, as you point out, fiscally to BA's advantage.

Cant help but feel that ghastly behaviour by BA staff, such as the disgusting comparrison by BASSA to Jewish war dead can only be tolerated to a point by BA however... and they can easily change their course and issue 90 day notice for those still not on the new contract.... job done.

... the remaining BASSA members should think through their position very carefully IMHO, actions have consequencies...

BetterByBoat

30th Mar 2011, 16:32

A couple of points that I'd disagree with Richard:

"Cant help but feel that ghastly behaviour by BA staff, such as the disgusting comparrison by BASSA to Jewish war dead can only be tolerated to a point by BA however" - can we not tarnish everyone at BA with the same brush. It was a small minority of BA cabin crew who took this disgusting action and not "BA staff" as a whole (or even cabin crew as whole).

"And they can easily change their course and issue 90 day notice for those still not on the new contract.... job done." - BA can't do this selectively so this action would also hit cabin crew who have not voted for strike action. BA would be shooting themselves in the foot with this approach.

I personally thought that BA wouldn't intefere with the last strike ballot and when it went ahead sack strikers on day 1 to effectively end the dispute and rid itself of disruptive crew. The fact they didn't suggests they won't do it now. It looks like they will be happy to take the "do nothing" approach that mr Pony suggests.

MPN11

30th Mar 2011, 16:34

LD12986 ... DH has no authority to call a ballot. This rests with Unite. The slightest hint of any unofficial action will be shot down immediately by Unite.

Indeed, and I thought I made the distinction between BASSA and Unite perfectly clear in that respect. Whether the result of this vote is actually 'official' may, of course, be tested again in the Courts.

My question is when, and how, Unite's leadership does something about the BASSA 'loose cannon' ... failing so to do just undermines the entire concept of a decent Trades Union environment.

Is Unite really content to allow this farce to continue, driven by DH and 'others'?
If they are content to sit idly by, it speaks volumes about what Trades Unions may have again become ... a mechanism for dislodging an elected Government, or wrecking Companies from self-interest.
If not, they should DO something.

This has gone too far, and for too long, under the most tenuous of circumstances.
Unite should be working to resolve this [for a change] by forcing, at the very least, proper electoral processes within BASSA ... and entering into adult, responsible discussions with BA [if necessary over the heads of BASSA, even if that is regarded as "imposition"] ;)

mrpony

30th Mar 2011, 16:39

Yes, that Kristallnacht thing might even prove to be a tipping point. There can't be many of the 5700 YES voters who don't find it reprehensible.

I can't think of a single move made by BASSA in recent history that hasn't been self-destructive. It is an exceptional organisation in this respect. If BASSA were a person it would be diagnosed with a mental illness.

LD12986

30th Mar 2011, 16:47

Sadly, I don't think it will make any difference whatsoever. The conciliatory gesture by KW in paying bonuses, Unite's incompetence in its handling of the last ballot and not admitting its failings until the last minute made no difference to the yes vote.

Ancient Observer

30th Mar 2011, 17:06

MPN,

Whilst mccluskey wants Column inches in the media, unite will do little or nothing about bassa. He continues to want column inches in the media to keep up his influence/status/prestige within the Broad Left coalition. Their current campaign is about embarrasing the present Government. (It has nothing whatsoever to do with retaining jobs in the public sector.......believe that and you'll soon see flying pigs).

bassa are already operating way outside Unite's rule book. See Rule 6 about lay officials, and rule 18 about workplace reps. Both insist on elections, at least every 24 months.

"6.5 The electoral period to hold lay office shall be two years unless otherwise provided
for under these rules."

Also, if you really want the anorak prize, go and read rule 17 about Branches. I attach a bit of it below. bassa are way out of these rules.

bassa's other leverage over mccluskey is malone's presence on untie's Executive Council.

Lizanne Malone Region 1 [London, Eastern & South East] Additional Women’s Rep
mccluskey will not want to be told by his executive council that he is not supporting one of the EC members....

By the way, note that malone is a Region 1 rep. Getting in as a Region 1 rep suggests that she's got some high quality contacts in untie. The Civil Aviation rep is Sean Beatty. (whoever)

Bits of rule 17
17.3 Branches shall have direct access to a proportion of membership subscriptions. Such a
proportion and access arrangements to be determined by the Executive Council, and
may be conditional on performed compliance with financial reporting requirements.
These funds may be used to meet the cost of administering the Branch; for recruitment
and other campaigns approved by the Executive Council; for local affiliations; to assist
members or their dependants who have suffered misfortune; or for any other worthy
cause, subject to any provisions elsewhere in these rules, and that no general
purposes funds shall be used for political objects. Any payments made in connection
with any form of industrial action must be made strictly in line with Executive Council
guidance applicable at the time.
17.4 All the property of the Branch including the books and other effects of the Branch, shall
be the property of the Union and shall, on request by the Executive Council, be
produced for inspection and audit. In the event of a closure, merger or dissolution of the
Branch, all property of the Branch shall be dealt with as directed by the Regional
Committee subject to the overall control of the Executive Council.
17.5 The Regional Committee shall be required to ensure that each Branch meets at regular
intervals and operates in accordance with the standing orders provided for in clause 10
of this rule. Where a Branch fails to convene an Annual General Meeting of all
22
members that Branch shall be suspended and members of the Branch shall be
allocated to a Branch which meets subject to the right of the Branch to appeal to the
Executive Council.

MPN11

30th Mar 2011, 17:27

Thanks, AO ... perhaps the rest of the Planet should start flagging this sh1 t up to the Media?

There must be some Right Wing outfit that would appreciate some Mail on the subject? ;)

Rescue3

30th Mar 2011, 17:43

AO - "public sector.......believe that and you'll soon see flying pigs"

blast, does that mean the price of bacon will be going up with everything else???

lowcostdolly

30th Mar 2011, 17:58

Churchinchow re your request of the 28th re tribunal judgement:

Employment Tribunal Field Support Office
1st Floor
100 Southgate Street
Bury St Edmonds IP33 2AQ

Tel 0845 795 9775 to check current prices. You have to apply by post or in person.

Enjoy!!

west lakes

30th Mar 2011, 18:34

Hi LCD how's it going

There is a lot of discussion on the other thread about some vandalism on an aircraft that led to a number of dismissals.
If this was the one in Japan, from the information I got at the time there is absolutely no doubt it was a member of crew that was the culprit.

VintageKrug

30th Mar 2011, 19:22

McCluskey has stated he is at the whim of the democratically elected Union/BASSA membership, and will only take action if they want it.

That is why the issue of access to the BASSA accounts, and challenging the electoral process is so important. It's a matter for BASSA members to bring about change from within; trouble is there doesn't seem to be anyone brave enough to stick their head above the parapet and risk the bullying and victimisation which would inevitably ensue. Can't say I blame them, really.

I can't think of a single move made by BASSA in recent history that hasn't been self-destructive. It is an exceptional organisation in this respect. If BASSA were a person it would be diagnosed with a mental illness.

And the individual who most encapsulates BASSA has an "unfortunate event", not to say a mental breakdown, last night on another forum (he is alleged to be HUW):

CabinCrew.com: BASSA militant exposed! (http://cabincrew.com/ccnetwork/forum_posts.asp?TID=43198&PN=1)

This was my favourite bit, when I think the G&Ts really kicked in:

Yes you are a pilot you f**king knobhead - dont be trying to f**king hide - see a coward to the f**king end - you sh*thouse

I had never heard the phrase "spineless masturbator" before; I will have to drop it into conversation, though one would think that if you masturbated a lot, being spineless might not be such a disadvantage :8

RTR

30th Mar 2011, 21:20

That Cabin Crew.com link has to be the most revealing insight into a man that is in need of some psychiatric treatment.

It is indicative of Holley who has no ability to hold any kind of conversation. His bitterness is truly illuminating and his angst is in the upper bracket of lost control. Sadly it also shows that BASSA as a whole is a lost cause.

The question has to be how long will Unite support BASSA - especially after a reps terrible use of 'KristalNacht' on Victoria Derbyshire's show yesterday. It suggested in the strongest terms that BASSA is anti-semitic.

west lakes

30th Mar 2011, 21:23

I'm sure within Unite's rules there is something about members bringing the union into disrepute!

lowcostdolly

30th Mar 2011, 21:42

Hi Westlakes I'm good thank you :ok:

Due to take a BA flight soon so thourght I'd look in.

Some very entertaining stuff on here this evening courtesy of the other forum!!

Anyway I'm off to Vegas soon a new MF route. Any comments from those of you who might have been on an MFflight?

west lakes

30th Mar 2011, 22:05

Not MF but LGW to MJB. If MF are half as good it will be excellent

LD12986

30th Mar 2011, 22:05

That thread is proof, not that it was required, that there is absolutely no prospect of a settlement whilst he is calling the shots at BASSA.

Imagine what he must be like in meetings!

Fender Strat

30th Mar 2011, 23:20

Um... without wishing to pour cold water on anyone, the cabincrew forum is, like Pprune, populated by posts from individuals operating under pseudonyms. There is absolutely nothing to say that the individual who clearly lost it in spades on the thread in question was Mr Holley, although various members on that forum seem to have suggested otherwise. It is pure speculation.

That said, the outburst by the individual in question was completely out of order. Had it taken place on Pprune I feel certain that the mods would not only have pulled the posts, but also pulled the plug on the id that posted them. Clearly the OP in the thread touched a very raw nerve for someone. Given the anonymity of forums I did wonder if the individual who went into such a public tirade of abuse might have been closely related to the people in the article.

Dawdler

30th Mar 2011, 23:25

They did pull the thread and put him in the cooler for a while.

Lord Bracken

31st Mar 2011, 06:27

Yes, that Kristallnacht thing might even prove to be a tipping point. There can't be many of the 5700 YES voters who don't find it reprehensible. It's because your average BASSA member (of the 5700) is pretty low down on the intelligence scale, combined with an arrogant manner derived from being told for decades that they're wonderful (if we're talking mastubatory frenzies, surely nothing can compare with the "the best crew in the world" circle-jerk that existed in IFCE in the first decade of the 21st Century?)

So they throw around phrases like Kristallnacht or use images of Iwo Jima because they think it makes them look wordly and wise, without realising how deeply offensive it is to link those events with an industrial dispute that can be summed with in the phrase "too posh to push."

Betty girl

31st Mar 2011, 06:52

I hope you lot don't drag this thread down to the level of that thread.

Posters on both sides of that discussion are no better than each other and many of them don't even work for BA!!!!

I really hope that those kinds of discussions can be left there please and not brought over to Pprune.

call100

31st Mar 2011, 08:12

Well said Bg.....:ok:

VintageKrug

31st Mar 2011, 10:43

Well said BG.

CabinCrew.com: BASSA militant exposed! (http://cabincrew.com/ccnetwork/forum_posts.asp?TID=43198&PN=1)

It's a dreadful little site and if it only gives a smidge of the level of debate typical on other fora, it's no wonder this dispute (which isn't really a dispute as there's no coherent resolution being argued for) has dragged on so long, and will continue to do so.

Betty girl

31st Mar 2011, 11:39

VK,
Don't you think by posting that link YOU are bringing that over here.

I expect that some of the contributors are posters on here anyway but please if you want to debate all this gutter stuff please don't do it here because it has little to do with the dispute except to show what nasty people exist on both sides.

We all know that in human nature you always get some people that take things to there lowest level (on both sides it appears) but here on pprune we don't need to go that low.

Why not set up another thread to discuss all this or go and post over on that actual site if it is of interest to you.

gr8tballsoffire

31st Mar 2011, 11:56

Sorry BG, I don't agree wth you. The level of debate on here is invariably conducted in an adult manner with the exception of the rare BASSA supporter.

All the unpleasant invective comes from one side only.

Juan Tugoh

31st Mar 2011, 12:03

BG has a valid point. Posting the link once was perhaps reasonable, though questionable in my opinion. Repeating the link seems to suggest that the original post did not engender enough "chatter" and indignation. We all know that the level of debate on some other forums is not as reasoned and courteous as it might be - there is no news in that. Demonstrating that some posters in different places are not "playing nicely" and then inviting comment upon that does not really do anything except provide a potential start point for a Daily Mailesque indignation bus.

Betty girl

31st Mar 2011, 12:30

gr8ballsoffire,

You do always debate in a very good manner and I was not saying anyone on here dose not in general debate well.

If you have read that link and the subject they are discussing, you will surely see why I was suggesting it not be brought over here.

With that I will leave you because I myself have actually started to talk about it and I really don't want to.

P.S. Just to clarify I was not talking about the link to 5 Live which is very relevant but the link to another Forum and a particular thread there.

gr8tballsoffire

31st Mar 2011, 14:12

Fair point about the link.

mrpony

31st Mar 2011, 16:08

I am indignant about the price of bus tickets.
angrily yours
mrpony
tunbridge wells

MPN11

31st Mar 2011, 16:32

I am indignant about the lack of Reward Seats on the BA flights that keep happening during pseudo-strikes. Passengers are NOT being inconvenienced, which is a pretty poor show.

Bah ... and Werther's Originals.
MPN11
Somewhere Else
:cool:

fincastle84

31st Mar 2011, 21:01

Have you been having early cocktails????

At present I'm listening to a replay of Victoria Derbyshire's broadcast from Tuesday morning. I think that she has come in for some very unfair criticism. She let all sides have their say & allowed the Bassa members to hoist themselves by their sheer blind stupidity.:ugh:

call100

31st Mar 2011, 21:18

OK.....Tightslot, why has my post been removed twice? There was nothing insulting in there.
Is someone getting special treatment? :eek:

Litebulbs

31st Mar 2011, 21:47

Your right to protest is being kettled......

Get used to it!

call100

1st Apr 2011, 08:33

It was total stupidity when you read the posts that are ignored!!
Still awaiting an answer...:ugh:

jersey145

1st Apr 2011, 09:14

Strike or no strike. It'll only be a big joke that back fires in BASSAs direction. Why bother. such little disruption last time. Had a lovely flight on Astreaus, an excellent professional crew. They couldn't do enougth for me and my elderly nan. If only they could replace some of the services plagued by BASSA members this time. The rest of the BA workforce have moved on, time for BASSA to follow.

Want an effective strike?? Be a Spanish ATCO!

TightSlot

1st Apr 2011, 09:46

The posts were removed by another (senior) moderator - at the time I was working back from Hong Kong to Heathrow. This happens from time to time, since my employer takes the view that I should occasionally perform some duties in order to justify the many millions of £'s that I am paid every month.

If you'll permit I'll use an analogy - this thread (and that in CC) is rather like cooking a casserole meal - we have to try and keep it edible (i.e. readable) and simmering but not boiling. Ingredients are added by contributors, but too much of one thing or another and the balance is lost. Some people chuck in a load of chilli peppers, others regularly add meat: Some simply stir the pot - you get the picture (sorry if this is a bit hard to follow, I'm rather jet-lagged at the moment and will be making another espresso shortly!).

To preserve readability, posts that contribute little, or simply repeat, agree, or generally stir the pot will be deleted. If you choose to take offence, then that is up to you, but using the thread to express outrage is probably unwise. It is also probably unwise to suggest that mods are giving preferential treatment to one side or another. We are in the unenviable position of the police at a demo: Either too heavy handed or too lily-livered - nobody is ever satisfied with the activity. Therefore, in the words of our friends at the Met...

"Move along now please - there's nothing to see here"

Wow! From cookery to coppery in one post - I really need to go back to bed.

mrpony

1st Apr 2011, 10:30

Blimey, Litebulbs was right but underestimated the extent to which things are cooked up on here.

Wot's next.......roasting?

call100

1st Apr 2011, 10:42

TS
Apologies if it wasn't yourself, but, all well and good except that the post did not come into any category you have chosen to describe as outlawed.
No outrage was expressed. There was nothing there to 'stir the pot'.
Having re-read a few of the recent posts that have been left alone I do think it was a ridiculous move by the moderator who did it....
As it's his playground and he decided to be a bully it will stand as disappeared.
As for some being afforded protection. I'll form my own judgement on that one.

Dawdler

1st Apr 2011, 10:54

The Mods here are not superhuman, they have the same talents, failings and prejudices as all of us. Someone coming fresh to the debate may have read something in your post that was not there or that you did not intend. I am afraid you will have to live with that. Mostly the Modding in these (two) threads has been excellent, but we will all have our own perspective of individual incidents.

fruitbat

1st Apr 2011, 12:00

Ryanair Thanks Unite For Yet More BA Flight Disruptions
Source: Ryanair
29/03/2011
Ryanair today (29th Mar) delivered 18 red roses to UNITE bosses, to mark 18 months of British Airways strikes which have caused repeated disruption to BA’s passengers, who are now suffering more uncertainty after UNITE confirmed that more strikes are imminent, but refused to reveal which dates it will again plunge BA passengers into misery and chaos.

Ryanair called on British holidaymakers to protect their precious Easter and summer breaks by snapping up one of Ryanair’s £8 fares and avoid the latest UNITE BA strikes, which could begin as early as next week. Clearly UNITE don’t care about passengers or their families.

Ryanair’s Stephen McNamara said,

“Ryanair is starting to really warm to the UNITE union, who continue to cause uncertainty for BA holidaymakers at peak times of the year and now, with their fourth set of strikes in less than 18 months, they will encourage even more BA passengers to switch to Ryanair’s low fare strike free flights this Easter and summer.

We have sent UNITE 18 red roses to mark the 18 months of holiday misery and uncertainty they have inflicted on BA passengers and their families and we have placed these dinosaurs at the very top of our Christmas card list as we welcome their efforts to encourage BA passengers to switch to Ryanair’s strike free low fares services. We think UNITE is a wonderful, if sadly misguided and deluded, union.”

RYANAIR’S STEPHEN MCNAMARA AND CABIN SUPERVISOR DARIA, SEND ‘WE LOVE UNITE’ ROSES TO UNION BOSSES TO THANK THEM FOR YET MORE BA STRIKES

Northern Flights

1st Apr 2011, 12:45

...a wonderful, if sadly misguided and deluded, union.

Ouch! :O

How long will Unite put up with this growing embarrassment?

VintageKrug

1st Apr 2011, 13:04

The general indication from McCluskey is that he will wait until his membership call for change.

We could be waiting a while....but that's BASSA's problem, not BA's.

fincastle84

1st Apr 2011, 13:23

I have to confess to not being a fan of the Ryanair product but this embarrassment of Unite is a classic.:ok: They've really cut down to size the union bully boys.

One question, are they bright enough to realise that the p*ss is being taken?

Hipennine

1st Apr 2011, 14:04

There is a much more subliminal but significant message in this caper, and that is that every time Unite/BASSA engage in industrial shenanigans with BA, the non-unionised Ryan (and probably other non-unionised Locos) is going to take every opportunity to take some of BA's business. What a strategic folly on Unite's part. So much for representing their members' best interests.

Frognal

1st Apr 2011, 14:08

Hipennine

Surely fear of losing business to competitors is one of the pressures that a strike applies to the employer?

Strikes do cause risks for the members, this is one of them.

Neptunus Rex

1st Apr 2011, 14:09

One question, are they bright enough to realise that the p*ss is being taken? Of course not, Fin. McCluskey has yet to realise that BASSA is asking him to go into the gunfight with a tomato-peeler.

There will be tears before bedtime!

PAXboy

1st Apr 2011, 15:09

Hi Frognal, welcome aboard.
Surely fear of losing business to competitors is one of the pressures that a strike applies to the employer?

And BASSA has now discovered that the threat that worked so successfully for 30 years - now has zero effect. Since they have no other weapon in their armoury, they have no choice but to capitulate or just keep repeating the same thing. Either way, they lose.

I am not pleased by this but I am pleased that BA has managed to realise that the managers of the last 30 years were wrong. They, however, are happily retired on pensions and beyond active criticism.

vctenderness

1st Apr 2011, 15:19

I'm sure within Unite's rules there is something about members bringing the union into disrepute!

How do you bring a thoroughly disreputable union into disrepute?

:E:E:E

GrahamO

1st Apr 2011, 16:08

Surely fear of losing business to competitors is one of the pressures that a strike applies to the employer?

Its is indeed, but it pales into insignificance compared to the risk to the business in a competitive market of allowing a small minority of crew to run the company for their own convenience and to undertake practices which cause more long term competitiveness damage.

Hipennine

1st Apr 2011, 16:16

Frognal,

I am well aware of the concept of applying economic pressure on the employer through loss of business to competitors - indeed this now seems to be DH's sole tactic.

However, BA do not exist in a monopolistic world, and any uncertaintity created in customers mind will result in SH passengers being driven to use the likes of Ryan, which is vehemently anti-union, and many would say is leading the erosion of T+C's for all airline employees. In the end, this could result in compulsory redundancies in BA of Unite members if BA had to reduce SH capacity because of lost volume. That's not a risk of striking -it could be a very quick reality for some. How on earth does that benefit the members of BASSA, Unite, or any other UK union in air transport ?

Ancient Observer

1st Apr 2011, 16:18

If you read my post 187, you'll see that bassa has already broken so many untie rules that they could be cast adrift..............However, that post says why they will not be cast adrift.

LD12986

1st Apr 2011, 16:18

Doesn't really say much.

FROM THE GENERAL SECRETARY
Apr 1st, 2011 by admin

TO ALL UNITE BA CABIN CREW

Dear Colleagues

First of all let me congratulate you all on the fantastic result of the latest industrial action ballot. You have sent the clearest possible message to British Airways management about your strength, unity and consistency of purpose. Thank you for the support you have shown your representatives and the union as a whole.

Any mature management would now have to take notice and realise that there can be no possibility of a return to normality at the airline without an honourable negotiated peace. I hope that this possibility now exists. You will have heard from your reps and read in the press that informal discussions have taken place designed to restart that negotiating process. Negotiations themselves on the outstanding issues of substance will directly include your representatives, for the first time in over a year.

There has been a welcome change in tone from BA at the top, and I hope to see that reflected in a changed approach in practice, at all levels of the company. Unfortunately, this is not yet the case, and crew continued to be subject to unjustified disciplinary sanction and to other petty harassments on a daily basis. This cannot be allowed to continue. I would hope to have a positive basis for a “ceasefire” from management within the next few days. Failing that, please be in no doubt that I will be consulting with your representatives over the form that industrial action that we will be asking you to take, on the basis of the clear mandate in your ballot.

Of course, we all hope that the more positive mood will now be speedily built on and start to yield definite results. Either way, Unite’s commitment to securing for you an honourable conclusion to this dispute is firm and undiminished.

Yours sincerely,

Len McCluskey

General Secretary

MPN11

1st Apr 2011, 16:49

Oh, well ... Unite and BA are [sort of] talking. No doubt that will lead to nothing, especially if "negotiations on the outstanding issues of substance will directly include your [BASSA] representatives".

So, in the almost certain scenario that BA will not lie down and be kicked by the 5,800 ... it would appear that the Unions will just have to put their members' money where the leadership's mouth is. Good luck: you'll need it.

As to whether the travelling Public know or care, I have no doubt that some elements of the Meeja will make the expected noises.

"DON"T PANIC" ... BA flies the vast majority of flights, regardless of IA by BASSA. I'm less worried about the threat of IA than I am about the weather at my intended destination later this month. :)

mrpony

1st Apr 2011, 16:57

Any mature management would now have to take notice and realise that there can be no possibility of a return to normality at the airline without an honourable negotiated peace.

That's exactly what BA don't want!

Juan Tugoh

1st Apr 2011, 17:02

I'm not sure which way this will pan out. With BASSA reps involved in negotiations will they adopt a more hardline stance than the UNITE reps or will the reality of negotiation bring a spot of reality to them? On reflection I think the likelihood of a strike just increased - not that it will do any good for them.

MPN11

1st Apr 2011, 17:26

Agree the above ... the un-necessary remark about "mature management" and the incorporation of BASSA reps [if that's the correct interpretation of McC's missive] suggests that there's little prospect of any meaningful negotiation.

So sad, so pointless ... and of course so expensive for the 'rank and file'. McC, DH, LM and others will as always be completely insulated from the personal consequences.

Litebulbs

1st Apr 2011, 17:35

I think that there will be a possibility of movement. If the negotiating team is made up of all parties, then all parties will have responsibility for the outcome and will be directly accountable to the membership for content.

It will be a negotiation and as negotiators they will all be reporting back at some point and the crewing levels will remain the same and MF will still be in existence.

LD12986

1st Apr 2011, 17:43

I'm not so sure the chances of a strike have increased as such. The elephant in the room is still the issue of whether any action would be protected.

The restarting of negotiations may be a positive step as long as BASSA and CC89 put aside their rivalries and we don't see a repeat of the two branches refusing to sit in the same room, turning up late, storming out of meetings etc.

RTR

1st Apr 2011, 17:50

Negotiations themselves on the outstanding issues of substance will directly include your representatives, for the first time in over a year.

That will of course, exclude Holley and his cohorts.

If only those accounts can be got now - but that's another story. :=

Frognal

1st Apr 2011, 17:58

Hipennine

You said

That's not a risk of striking -it could be a very quick reality for some. How on earth does that benefit the members of BASSA, Unite, or any other UK union in air transport ?

The definition of a risk is an event that may take place in the future, with an impact.

I respectfully suggest that your logic is a little out.

If one votes for a strike, then one risks the consequences.

The members need to take considered decisions and accept the responsibility of their decisions.

PAXboy

2nd Apr 2011, 00:36

Frognal If one votes for a strike, then one risks the consequences.But if you vote for a strike and then do not go on strike???

BA know exactly how many (and who) attended work and how many no longer belong to the Union.

Frognal

2nd Apr 2011, 07:18

Paxboy

My response was in reply to the posting of Ryanair's 'roses' to Unite and in the context of Hipennines comment about the consequences of threatening strike action.

So whilst voting yes and then working might shield individuals from specific BA sanctions, the uncertainty caused and potential loss of business elsewhere is still a risk that the members should consider.

Having been lurking around here for a while, it seems one theme of this thread is about the responsibility of the union/branch, which is a fair point.

However, with the power to act (vote) comes personal responsibility and the several thousand who have repeatedly voted for industrial action cannot be excused this.

As my old school teacher used to admonish the kids blaming others 'If <insert name> told you to jump off a cliff, would you do it?'

AlpineSkier

2nd Apr 2011, 08:42

On the other thread Miss M wrote :

BA management are not treating us with respect

Well damn, aint nutttin wos then a multiiii nashunal organisation dissin you , is there Miss M ?

Time to git together wiv de bruvvers and sisters from de hood and give dem a good kickin , yah !!

Oh, you already tried that , didn't you ?

VintageKrug

2nd Apr 2011, 09:22

BA management are not treating us with respect

Like others, I do admire MissM's tenacity, however misguided it is.

There is a culture of entitlement, which I think has always existed, but is now more prevalent than ever here in Britain, which simply does not accept that with rights come responsibilities and that there is a difference between employees and management. Respect must be earned.

From my own perspective, I consider the dispute over, and lost by BASSA.

BA has won back the right to manage its own operations; if BA Management can be criticised it is for abdicating this responsibility over the course of decades post privatisation.

As DH's recent loss at the Employment Tribunal has proven, BA has followed procedure to the letter, and has demonstrated considerable restraint in the face of taunting, bullying and personalisation of a dispute which was always about power and control, and never about minor variations in working practices. This is most succinctly summed up by this image, which has graced the . FRONT PAGE HOME PAGE (http://www.UniteBA.com) website for over a year:

You can see the recent statement by Red Len that even he is cackhandedly attempting to engineer a solution which allows Unite to escape with some dignity.

This has moved far beyond BA's cabin crew to a political p*ssing contest.

It is clear BASSA's current leadership will NEVER settle, no matter what; they have no personal, professional or moral motive whatsoever to do so.

BASSA no longer has the capacity to impact the operation by withdrawing labour, similarly its strike threats have zero effect on the higher margin corporate customers who sustain profits, and minimal effect on the lower yield leisure travellers decision to choose BA; forward bookings remain encouraging despite the wider economic climate.

It's hard to see a way forward; I can understand scepticism about PCCC – Professional Cabin Crew Council (http://www.mypccc.co.uk) but similarly I can see no evidence that it is a management plot and it does seem that it would be a good thing if it gained the required 40% (?) to negotiate a new deal for those cabin crew who are already suffering a pay scale behind that which would be the case were they not a member if Unite.

BASSA's leadership is personally discredited, quite possibly suffering some from psychological issues, in some cases no longer employed by BA and needs a clear out.

The real question now is who from within BASSA's ranks has the ability and knowledge about BASSA to challenge the status quo, and whether they will have to wait until DH and LM's stated intention to resign and hold elections in October.

hellsbrink

2nd Apr 2011, 09:27

So whilst voting yes and then working might shield individuals from specific BA sanctions, the uncertainty caused and potential loss of business elsewhere is still a risk that the members should consider.

There is only "uncertainty" if strike dates are announced. Now, since BA have the bases pretty much covered with VCC, mixed fleet, those who have resigned from Bassa, etc, and the fact that previous strike action has not only failed to "cripple" the airline but has not resulted in a massive drop off in bookings then, imo, the only people who should be "uncertain" regarding the future are those who believe that a strike will somehow advance their cause.

As we have seen, striking and the threat of strikes has no effect on BA's resolve. The dispute is effectively over, Bassa have failed to impose their will, have failed to get the public on their side and have failed their own members. They are finished.

MPN11

2nd Apr 2011, 09:39

Indeed ... another staggeringly arrogant input from the wonderful MissM.

I cannot think of a single instance where BASSA has not treated BA Management with respect ... apart from red-eyes, underpants and a few dozen other things.

Oh well, just get on with it, BASSA. No doubt you'll be describing empty aircraft circling LHR again.

LD12986

2nd Apr 2011, 09:56

However, with the power to act (vote) comes personal responsibility and the several thousand who have repeatedly voted for industrial action cannot be excused this.

I see where you're coming from. This situation is largely a problem of BA's making in that historically it has encouraged a culture where unions can use the threat of strikes and/or a strong mandate for strike action to force the company to back down. I wonder how many of the 9,514 crew that originally voted for strike action thought that the company would just give in?

Add to this a culture of dependency rather than personal ownership and accountability (let's not forget that there used to be 2 SCCM for every 1 main crew on a 747) and, to give BASSA some credit, they have done a remarkable job in positioning themselves as the sole source of the truth and create a "we're all under siege" mentaility by managing to twist every step the company takes as an orchestrated plot to crush BASSA.

Although BASSA have obtained a mandate for strike action that many other unions would envy, in the context of BASSA's historically high union membership and support, for them to have lost nearly 3,000 members and 4,000 votes is significant for BASSA. And as Mixed Fleet grows and EF/WW retire/leave BASSA is only going to get weaker.

Frognal

2nd Apr 2011, 10:10

There is only "uncertainty" if strike dates are announced.

I don't wish to get into an argument of pedantics, but clearly any customer service organization with an ongoing industrial dispute places uncertainty into the minds of some customers. How large the problem is another matter, but the original premise that I was replying to assumed that customers may be driven to Ryanair.

LD12986

I agree with your analysis, with the only rider being that after 18 months, you might think that the members would have realised that their threatened strike action is not going to cause the company to give in.

I guess that my point is one can only blame BASSA/Unite to a certain degree, if the members voted 'no', then the dispute would end.

mrpony

2nd Apr 2011, 10:55

....with apologies to the likes of BettyGirl.

I grew to detest the attitude of some BA CC during 20+ years of business travel and would actively seek out alternatives to avoid the risk of flying with an 'uppity' lot who gave out bad vibes(man). I commuted to Edinburgh weekly for a few years and would drive an extra 20 miles to go from Stansted with British Midland in a Fokker Friendship, which added further to the journey time, rather than go with BA from Heathrow. I knew many who felt this way and I appreciate more fully why so having observed all this.

The fact of the matter is that there are a fair few BA CC who have an overblown sense of entitlement and importance - traits that are particularly distasteful - combined with disdain for their employer, other BA employees and SLF. This comes across and is bad for business. How do you sort that out?