TightSlot

Just a gentle warning please...

We can all appreciate that these are difficult times for ALL Staff at VS - a strike will affect everybody. Under these circumstances, feelings will run high on all sides of the dispute and some people may find their own core beliefs challenged.

Please rise above the temptation to personalize arguments - Play the Ball Not The Player.

stansdead

O.K.

After Tight Slot's comments, let's move on.

I hope that all cabin crew in the Unite union use their vote. That way we will know it was a fair fight, no matter who prevails.

I still hope a strike doesn't happen, but there we go. That's my opinion and I stand by it.

I can't wait for this bad feeling to be over.

scoobydooo

What are those things you drew reference to ; "savings"


hmmm, it appears my previous response has been "Moderated" as I replied to you stansdead, probably as well as I was drawn into the personal side of things, it just grated me a little that evertime you responded you did so agressively. I think the Mod stepped in at the right time.

For the record strikers " ha ha" , I believe it was said in jest as per the "propoganda" being directed at us that a strike will cripple the company, as fruitbat correctly points out.

tin tin

I just want to fly wrote
Actually you get £454.77 in subsistence allowances alone. The actual sum BA crew receive on a similar trip is made up of more than just there subsistence allowance. So you were not comparing apples with apples.
You might want to check the BA figure for their subsistence allowances alone for a better comparison.
When Virgin crew compare themselves against BA crew, they must realise that it took BA crew many many years to get to where they are today, and this was only achieved by taking appropriate bites of the cherry at the appropriate time.
When BA (BEA or BOAC) were at the same age as Virgin is now, their crew were earning about the equivalent wage as virgin crew earn today. But their working practices were far worse. I have parts of a BEA stewardesses contract from 1950 in front of me now. Here is sentence taken from the section concerning on-board etiquette when in the presence of Pilots.
"Stewards/Stewardesses WILL show deference to Pilots"
hmmm

fruitbat

Still a bit short of 1200 pounds though!

vs_lhr

Management are not going to fold on this, as they know the strikers are the minority of the workforce. If it goes to a Yes to striking, the 4.8% offer will disappear, VS will batten down the hatches in terms of spending and many people will lose their jobs. VS will probably survive, but I doubt they'll want to keep strikers. The law is 12 weeks following the action they can shed those that strike as long as they don't discriminate and they shed all strikers. Given the queue of new recruits (and the fact they haven't stopped recruiting), I don't doubt they are considering that option.

fruitbat

It's funny then that your Flight Crew were allowed to look at BA pilots and demand similar amounts....so that 'age of the company' argument only works for CC obviously!

scoobydooo

That law isn't that simple VS LHR it actually is

The dismissal of any striking employee during the first 12 weeks of lawfully organised official strike action will be deemed unfair. If, as an employer, you lock out your workforce during this protected period, the lock out days are ignored when calculating the 12 week period. However, you can dismiss an employee after the 12 week period if you can show you have made genuine attempts to negotiate. This must include the proper use of any joint disputes resolution procedure.

So if the company fails to negotiate once industrial action is underway any dismissal after 12 weeks of an employee taking part in industrial action would be deemed to be unfair dismissal and said individual could sue for unfair dismissal. So it;s not as simple as after 12 weeks get rid of those carrying out Industrial action.

more information can be found using google which nets sites such as this http://www.safeworkers.co.uk/OnStrike.html

I am still unsure as to the timing as I have read action must take place within 4 weeks of the ballot giving employer 7 days notice , however I can not find clarity if this is within 4 weeks of initial ballot date or initial ballot result, I think it's close though.

tin tin

It is quite clear that Virgin Atlantic will be able work through any industrial action the Cabin Crew take, due to the small percentage of crew actually willing to take part in the process so far.

Yes there might be disruption.
Yes there might be financial strain put on the company and employees alike.
But this round of action is doomed to fail and therefore cannot achieve what the cabin crew ultimately deserve.

Virgin Cabin Crew are currently so divided, so disorganized and some so utterly unaware of the facts surrounding this dispute, their aims are now unachievable.

By voting yes to a strike, they will simply destroy all chance of achieving better terms and conditions for a very long time. There is simply not enough crew making the effort to make this a successful fight.

Your right to union recognition took a long time to get. Therefore you should protect it and use it wisely. DO NOT WASTE THIS PRIVALIGE with a strike that does not have enough crew behind it to make it work.

vs_lhr

Scooby, I fear the wording of the legislation is such that Virgin Atlantic could arguably claim that they have been negotiating since April and have failed to reach a resolution with those employees who found it necessary to strike.

Strikers are technically in breach of contract, so as long as they follow the 12 week rule, there seems little to stop them showing the door to them just as soon as they can (and if you can feel the temperature of the feelings in The Office, I wouldn't be at all surprised).

scoobydooo

VS LHR, you may be correct we shall just have to leave that one to the legal eagles. Everyone assumes its a small minority prepared to strike, ask a crew member in confidence and many are, ask them infront of others they say they are not. No one wants to be seen to be a bad egg, only the ballot will show all. I do think that everyone assuming its a small minority may be surprised, similar to the last vote which everyone thought would be a YES.

scoobydooo

Further info re 12 weeks

so I could interpret that as it' okay to take part in industrial action up to just short of 12 weeks, if you do not take part in action post that and are dismissed, it is deemed to be unfair. Again open to legal interpretation but that (source directgov) sates that if after 12 weeks the employer hasn't taken reasonable steps to settle the dispute, implying negotiations after industrial action have started. Either way I'm sure all the appropriate information will be sent with the ballot forms.

The only other reference I can find on workers rights which says it differently is

Again one for the legal eagles to chew over, seeing as Unite organise so many I'm sure they are aware of it and will make us aware of it, and so long as everyone has the facts to hand when they get the ballot form.

These are just my personal interpretations on the interpretation of the rules and I am not qualified to offer legal advice on such issues but I'm sure the CAB are, I will ask them tomorrow

alfamatt

Having been through the build up & sabre rattling of an imminent strike with my lot earlier on this year, there are a few things worth bearing in mind.
A strike is legal, as long as the build up to it is carried out within relevant employment laws, eg timescales etc.
I would expect a further round of talks & tweaking of existing offers if a strong yes vote for a strike is mandated. The amount of improvement to any offer may well relate to the % unity of the strike mandate.
It will get very heavy, with rumours of the company doing all sorts of nasty things to strikers. This seems to be already creeping into this thread, & will snowball.
Keeping pilots, engineers & others on-side will get more & more tricky
IMO, they won't suspend strikers, because after any disruption due to action, they will want to get back to a normal service asap, & to do this, they will need a full workforce.
A weak yes vote for a strike will be a tricky scenario.
Be realistic about the strength of the yes-no split, & remember that even after people have voted, a certain % will dither &/or change their mind as the harsh reality of entering industrial action as an individual gets closer.
It ain't pretty, but if you truly believe its worth fighting for......................................................... ....
Matt.

Fournier Boy

Indeed, everything said already with regard to dissmissal for taking part in strike action is accurate.

What many seem to forget is that the company can make redundancies sooner than that if it had to to protect the future of the company. If any strike action is truely disruptive and routes are dropped, planes get parked up or returned to leasors, and therefore for each plane that leaves the fleet, so does that aeroplanes worth of crew (I've no idea what that is, but assume its the number of crew at VS divided by the fleet).

Then it doesn't matter whether you are in the union or not. If redundancies come about to keep the company afloat then off you go. Thats not being fired for taking part in a strike, thats being made redundant because the company has lost lots of money - nothing illegal about that. If you are here over a year, you'll get a payout, if less, you don't. Then again, if there is no more company, there won't be a payout no matter how long you've been here.

The 911 downturn and subsequent redundancies is a very recent and real example of this happening.

Its happened before, in fact some of those in our department are here at VS because that exact thing happened to them at BA.

As an aside, worryingly, there seem to be a lot of accusations, and claims if true facts arising on multiple forums (not just this one) that are nothing more than speculation from galley FM. "I've heard this", and "the story is that", and "its rumoured that" are simply not a basis for some of the arguments that have been appearing recently.

I have to echo the opinions of some of the flightdeck here that it might just be time for some people to grow up and think logically before they post. All respect for tightslot stepping in earlier.

scoobydooo

Fournier,

Wouldn't disagree with anything you state, Industrial action is something that can effect everyone, that's why it's so powerful and scary too. It is something not to be taken without having thought it through and knowing the risk, however many of us are fed up with VS taking the pi$$ that it is simply a no brainer, and that far outweighs the risks having weighed them all up. In these situations people simply "fight or flight" based on their own individual circumstances, for me it's fight.

For other departments to tell us what they think of the cabin crew striking it is more than likely to be expected that we are "bad people". Whilst I don't agree with fruitbats angle in the reply to your post, I do think that netting >£3.5k per month + allowances plus £1k into a pension (source - http://www.pprune.org/forums/showpos...&postcount=111) makes our thought method very different to that of flight crew. It's very easy to jusdge people when you are not in their shoes or feeling the pinch we do when we take home £900-£1200 a month. [Not bitter of your earnings, you deserve every penny and have studied hard to achieve it and are rewarded justly - after your negotiations a few years back to bring you inline with BA]

For me personally I am sick that every month after all the bills have 'just' been paid and nothing is left or one is negative (please dont lecture me on curbing my spending habits, I am very careful and save allowances). The last set of negotiations were concluded with the promise of Christmas backpay, they were offered this time too and it hasn't happened I would say that is a demonstration that crew are getting more and more fed up with the companies attitude towards us.
Whatever the outcome I will accept what is democratically decided and go with the majority. I will regardless though try and get somehow involved with the union in trying to ensure new channels of communication are established with our colleagues in order to come to the table at the next set of negotiations fully armed with a true representation of what the crew want. I will also watch the flight crew negotiations with interest and see what the companies first offer is to flight crew for an RPI increase - yes it's not comparing apples with apples, but it is a demonstration of the respect in which the company holds the employees (and judging by the offers we received, we are held in a very low respect by the management).

Digitalis

I've read this thread, and listened to arguments on the aircraft and in crewrooms with much interest. I have to say that this is the most disorganised and ill-informed pay negotiation process I have ever seen! the fact that it has come to a ballot on industrial action, after the union has 'Strongly recommended' the deal, seems bizarre to me.

Scooby (and others), it seems to me that much of your argument with the company is based on rumours of other carriers' terms of employment and pay, rather than demonstrated facts. Where is your Union's spreadsheet showing you exactly where you stand in relation to other airlines, with verifiable data about those airlines' terms? I haven't seen or heard of one.

It's certainly true that Virgin's management has treated you guys with less than the respect you deserve, but it doesn't follow that a strike will achieve what you want. For a start, what do you want? Your Union doesn't appear to know! As far as they were concerned, they'd achieved as close as possible to what you told them you wanted as they thought they could - this time. Like the pilots' pay process, they were aware that Rome wasn't built in a day; it takes time and a plan (i.e. several pay deals) to achieve the uplift in pay and conditions that you are looking for. This was to be the first step in a long rosd - the pilots took 5 or 6 years to get from the equivalent of your situation now to a deal that more closely matches their position in the industry, and that was done with all the facts made available to everyone concerned - including the company.

Contrary to popular rumour, Virgin's pilots never threatened to strike. On their Union's recommendation, they rejected a number of company proposals. Once the Union was satisfied that the Company had moved as far as it could in each round of negotiations, the Union recommended the deal and the pilots accepted it - knowing that further improvements would be negotiated next time round. There is still some way to go in this process; it's far from over.

Where is the CC Union strategy now? What have they told you that they expect to achieve if you strike? It seems there is some unformed impression that 'something will happen' to magically improve the deal - but your Union agreed the deal, so there's nowhere left for them to negotiate!

It seems to me you would all be better served by rejecting the strike and taking the current offer, then replacing your Union negotiating team with one that communicates much more effectively with you, and takes your needs and wants more into account when they negotiate - and works to a long-term plan to achieve them. That kind of professional approach will result in more respect from the company, as well as being more likely to get you what you want.

This situation now is a mess, with no clear path to a resolution. You are poorly served with information and guidance, and you are heading, more or less leaderless, into a fight you almost certainly can't win. Back off now and regroup, with a better leadership and a better plan; no, sod it, any kind of a plan!

Good luck. I think you'll need it!

stansdead

scoobs

You cannot turn your pay negotiations into a comparison between my pay and your pay.

The two things are simply not linked.

In any organisation there will always be pay differentials. What I posted was a direct comparison of PILOT'S pay in a thread amongst PILOTS, not a comparison between pilot's and cabin crew. So, I think you should not use that source in this instance, but if you feel that you must, then please continue. However, I do not think it strengthens your argument.

There will always be a law of supply and demand and a law of pay vs responsibilities. The fact that pilot's get paid more than crew is a direct reflection of our scarcity value as potential employees vs our cost of training.

Sadly, the fact is this: Pilots cost a lot to train, so airlines pay us well to retain our services. We are NOT that easily replaced. It takes 6 months from interviewing someone, offering them a job until they are checked out on the line.

The same cannot be said for crew. It is nearer 3 months I imagine.

The other reason there will alwys be a big difference in crew vs pilot pay is that we, as pilots, are responsible for a very large chunk of company money in the form of a large jet aircraft. Our responsibilities are totally different to yours and hence the difference in pay.

Please reconsider the use of my wages in your argument. It has nothing whatsoever to do with your pay negotiations.

scoobydooo

Digi

Thanks for the reply, finely worded and rational. I shall attempt to address the points you have raised (from my personal opinion).

Regarding not following the unions recommendation to accept and then a strong recommendation to accept. Indeed from this statement alone looking in I would agree with you. Just looking however at the percentages which rejected these recommendations shows that communication needs to be improved in what the crew want and what the union believes the crew want (I will come back to this)

Arguments based on rumours and not facts. I have colleagues who have left us to work at BA and or other carriers and I have been through the terms with a fine toothcomb (with the thought of leaving). I dont like to wander in the dark and like to have a semi educated knowledge what I am talking about, so when I draw reference to delay payments/cap payments, duty payment, crew down etc etc it is all said comparing our terms with the known terms of other carriers.

Para 3, yes BALPA does appear to be far more organised, no weak links, we either have weak links between the crew not telling the reps what we want, or the reps not telling the next layer of representation, or the next or the next. Chinese whispers springs to mind.

Regarding - It seems there is some unformed impression that 'something will happen' to magically improve the deal - but your Union agreed the deal, so there's nowhere left for them to negotiate!

We will have to agree to disagree on this one, the company would be best served to avoid industrial action , if this means a subsequent offer then so be it, look how close the last vote was, in my eyes all the company has to do is modify the current offer to remove the extra month of standby, I believe that would possibly get the offer through, fixing year 2 increase (not just =RPI) would I believe almost certainly carry it through. Neither of those are an expensive exercise. I have communicated my personal requirements direct to Mr Boyd via email as I believe the channel in place are not sufficient.

Replacing the negotiation team (or the weak links not collecting or feeding back crew wishes) I totally agree. I believe as part of the T&G and Unite merger due to complete in 2008 this will be part of the process. I know I for one will be writing to T&G cc'ing Unite asking that the entire virgin negotiating structure is overhauled such that clear channel of communication can be established direct with the union (not via the company) without this in place things will be in a mess next time round also, however I do believe this will happen as part of the merger.

So with my belief that the union strategy and leadership will be different next time around due to the merger of unions I could also believe this is the last time the current negotiation team will be negotiating for us, i.e. we are moving on to bigger and better and stronger union - what would be achieved by backing down ?

If I thought things would stay like this for good - current union, current negotiating team then I would be inclined to agree with you regarding falling back regrouping and moving forward at a later date.

scoobydooo

Dear Stansdead,

As stated by myself in the post you refer to I fully acknowledge the flight crew are worth every penny they are paid.

The use of your historical post was merely to demonstrate that whilst you are fully prepared to tell us how "various phrases used wont repeat them" we are for being prepared to take part in the last resort of industrial action in an attempt to improve our terms, my(our) remuneration yours are very different and telling us to accept and move on is easily said from the side lines.

No offence intended

Well...Anyway cant spend all my leave on here debating, I wish you all a good day, Think I shall go and take in some winter air down on the beach, I may take my harmonica so I can busk to pay for a bacon roll

Digitalis

Scooby, thanks for your reply. I accept that it's your personal opinion. Therein lies much of the problem! For example, for you (and no doubt for many others), one of the major stcking points is the revision to the standby procedure. However, that's not universally a problem, as far as I can tell. Others have other objections, but no-one seems to be collating these opinions - and obviously didn't do so effectively before the last vote. The problem now is that no-one really knows what the strike, if it happens, is actually in response to, and what is needed to resolve the issues that you collectively have. For example, it may well be that a change to the standby arrangements would seal the deal for you personally - but for how many others? It seems to me that a strike won't address the fundamental problems that you face because your Union doesn't seem to be aware of what you want. Or, if they are, they're not telling you what the majority opinions are amongst your colleagues. That's no way to run a campaign!

As I see it, both the Union and the Company should take a step back and admit that their negotiations have been flawed and need to be re-started. As a gesture of good faith, the Company should honour the pay elements of the agreed settlement without imposing any changes to working practices, on the understanding that negotiated working practice changes will occur subject to Union ratification. The Union, for its part, should then rapidly and comprehensively canvas your opinions of working practice changes, and then go back to the company confident that it knows what you want, what you will tolerate, and what you object to. A deal can hopefully then be struck that makes the best compromise between the Company's needs and the CC's needs, and also makes it clear which direction future negotiations will take and what the eventual aim is for CC pay and conditions.

It shouldn't be up to you to ask your mates in BA or wherever what their pay is; the Union should be able to provide you with that information in a way which makes it unarguable. I understand they said that was impossible due to Data Protection provisions; that's rubbish, and you should tell them so!

I hope that the transition from Unite to the T&G will improve your negotiating power, but the majority of your negotiating strength comes from the abilities of the team in place and its leadership. It wasn't BALPA that did so well for the pilots, it was a certain (then) First officer and a team of excellent, resourceful, clear-headed individuals. BALPA gave them the backing of their negotiating experts, but the real stuff came from those guys. I hope you manage to find a team of equal quality who can do it for you.