BA BASSA Message - TUPE
Guest
Posts: n/a
LD12986
You are quite correct that I could easily maintain silver or gold status, but that would mean losing status on either EK or LH, both of whom I prefer to BA.
The way to get me back (and many others I know) is to improve the customer experience and in the interests of fairness that includes the whole London experience.
E.g. the Malta flight arrives at LGW and the transfer to LHR (which I have to pay for above the ticket price) is unreliable (coach on the M25) and expensive.
DXB, FRA and MUN offer a far easier transfer.
You are quite correct that I could easily maintain silver or gold status, but that would mean losing status on either EK or LH, both of whom I prefer to BA.
The way to get me back (and many others I know) is to improve the customer experience and in the interests of fairness that includes the whole London experience.
E.g. the Malta flight arrives at LGW and the transfer to LHR (which I have to pay for above the ticket price) is unreliable (coach on the M25) and expensive.
DXB, FRA and MUN offer a far easier transfer.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One of the main reasons for outsourcing has been the constant aggro caused by high levels of sickness. Ascot 2008 has seen some of the highest casual sickness records ever, particulary on Ladies Day.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just to add - people join a company and plan their lives around what they are expecting to earn, and the lifestyle they expect to enjoy.
We all know that times change - that in itself is insufficient excuse for a company to unilaterally change terms and conditions, torpedoing people's expectations of their lifestyles.
However, it is unacceptable for union intransigence to lead the workforce down the garden path, failing to recognise that the workforce must work with the company to improve the offering to customers, in order to maintain the salaries, when operating in a competitive market.
BASSA antics are shameful, particularly when - as it seems in this case - the entire communication to members was based upon rumour and conjecture, with no fact verification whatsoever.
I would not want my union dues based upon such tosh. Particularly when so much of them ultimately end up funding the prats in politics.
We all know that times change - that in itself is insufficient excuse for a company to unilaterally change terms and conditions, torpedoing people's expectations of their lifestyles.
However, it is unacceptable for union intransigence to lead the workforce down the garden path, failing to recognise that the workforce must work with the company to improve the offering to customers, in order to maintain the salaries, when operating in a competitive market.
BASSA antics are shameful, particularly when - as it seems in this case - the entire communication to members was based upon rumour and conjecture, with no fact verification whatsoever.
I would not want my union dues based upon such tosh. Particularly when so much of them ultimately end up funding the prats in politics.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Note (http://www.cipd.co.uk/subjects/emplaw/tupe/tupe.htm)
TUPE does not apply to:
TUPE does not apply to:
- transfers of a contract to provide goods or services where this does not involve the transfer of a business or part of a business
- transfers of undertakings situated outside the United Kingdom (although these may be covered by the regulations of other member states).
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: uk
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
sad to say,but BA staff cannot believe a word that their management spout to them.how many times have they been deceived and lied to ?? far too many to recall.i find it unbelievable that a customer focussed business seems hell bent on it's relentless persuit to totally demoralise ,at every opportunity,the very frontline staff that deliver the product and service to the customer.british airways staff,consistently deliver a superb product to the customer,despite the dismall management failings.just look at the T5 fiasco,those highly paid decision makers,shown to be clueless when it comes to running an operation,leaving the helpless staff to face the flack and try to restore the integrity of the operation.staff costs now pale into insignificance,compared to fuel prices and government imposed security taxes.BA has plenty of critics,many hailing from the long since passed days of nationalisation.in general the employees are loyal,motivated,highly trained individuals,who make a real contribution to the company's success.it's about time the misfits at waterside and the board in general,realised this fact and changed the confrontational management style,that has wrecked the sucess that this company should now be enjoying.get the staff to feel valued and who knows what the future holds.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
staff costs now pale into insignificance,compared to fuel prices and government imposed security taxes
The other point to bear in mind is that while fuel cost rises can be partly offset by hedging in the short term, government taxes are non-negotiable whereas staff costs are something under the control of the company.
It may not be a pleasant prospect and do nothing for staff morale and customer service, but if the prospect is no job then when the company come asking for 10% pay cut across the board + 5000 redundancies due reduced flying programme what will be your answer? The usual BASSA mantra of 'no, no, no' or a more adult discussion?
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: London
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Misfits at Waterside & Board...?
Oh come on Bermuidariangle...misfits at waterside ! and the board. Yes T5 was a mess. However, some people have paid the price, and things have moved on...
I bet a lot of other airlines would love to have had a bunch of missfits who could bring in a profit 400 million plus. Times are a changing, and we have to change with them, or SINK.
Those missfits are trying very hard, searching every which way possable to make sure there is BA in the future. One only has to take a look across the pond, to see what is happening to airlines and staff.
I think your comments were unkind, and unhelpful.
I bet a lot of other airlines would love to have had a bunch of missfits who could bring in a profit 400 million plus. Times are a changing, and we have to change with them, or SINK.
Those missfits are trying very hard, searching every which way possable to make sure there is BA in the future. One only has to take a look across the pond, to see what is happening to airlines and staff.
I think your comments were unkind, and unhelpful.
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Dublin
Posts: 1,806
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFB, Are you for real in your defence of the current BA management????
Indeed I do not think anyone is trying to undermine the current crises facing the aviation industry, infact here in Ireland it has just been announced that we are due to have our first major recession since the 80's however BA's management are perhaps the worst bunch of scoundrels to ever inhabit Waterside.
T5 was simply the icing on the cake, lets not forget the price fixing fiasco, the summer after summer of strikes, the recent showdown with both cabin crew and flight crew, the pensions fiasco etc...and then the little things such as the New Club World mess up, BA038 crew getting bullying treatment after the crash, inability to get employee figures correct etc etc!!! Its just one cock up after another with this company and no one in Waterside seems to be learning their lesson. To blame those two chaps for the whole T5 cockup is an insult. Indeed they were not in control like they should have been but they too had managers reporting to them and those managers seem to have gotten off scot free!!!!
Bermuda is bang on in his/her comments and very eloquently too. Unless you actually are a manager or have not been effected by BA managements poor judgements then I think you would agree!
Indeed I do not think anyone is trying to undermine the current crises facing the aviation industry, infact here in Ireland it has just been announced that we are due to have our first major recession since the 80's however BA's management are perhaps the worst bunch of scoundrels to ever inhabit Waterside.
T5 was simply the icing on the cake, lets not forget the price fixing fiasco, the summer after summer of strikes, the recent showdown with both cabin crew and flight crew, the pensions fiasco etc...and then the little things such as the New Club World mess up, BA038 crew getting bullying treatment after the crash, inability to get employee figures correct etc etc!!! Its just one cock up after another with this company and no one in Waterside seems to be learning their lesson. To blame those two chaps for the whole T5 cockup is an insult. Indeed they were not in control like they should have been but they too had managers reporting to them and those managers seem to have gotten off scot free!!!!
Bermuda is bang on in his/her comments and very eloquently too. Unless you actually are a manager or have not been effected by BA managements poor judgements then I think you would agree!
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BT
is the part of your I was discrediting. They can by no means be considered insignificant. Whether or not it is justified I will leave to others to judge
staff costs now pale into insignificance
Join Date: Jul 2006
Location: London
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Misfits at Waterside...?
I am not in a position to "blame" anyone. However, what happend at T5 was not down to any one person/s. Our house has been put in order, cannot comment on any one elses house.
I have to take issue with your use of such emotive language - Scoundrels..= rogues/crooks/villains.. I do not work with such people. But I guess if you really feel this way..then I am sorry. Why would anyone want to work for such a company ?
Your quite right to point out all the things that you feel we've done, wrong....But..the bottom line ...is 400 million.. (profit) Er dirty word..
Best of luck in your new job search ....
I have to take issue with your use of such emotive language - Scoundrels..= rogues/crooks/villains.. I do not work with such people. But I guess if you really feel this way..then I am sorry. Why would anyone want to work for such a company ?
Your quite right to point out all the things that you feel we've done, wrong....But..the bottom line ...is 400 million.. (profit) Er dirty word..
Best of luck in your new job search ....
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: london
Age: 41
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
i totally agree with paddyinuk at the moment it seems to be one mistake after another with no one taking the blame. Im based at Gatwick and i have seen one bad decsion after another.
1: Insufficicent recruitment meant not enough staff to crew flights resulting in one crew member down on all flights. Considerable cost to the company as this meant a one light payment for crew and the cost of chartering airlines to operate flights on behalf of BA.
2: the '900 hours rule' how the company couldn't see this coming is laughable, only 2 days off after longhaul trips and the mixed flying meant crew reached there 900hours before the year was up, this resulted in crew being grounded for a month. Rather than give out 20 days off in a month due to high hours would it not make more sense to even this out with 3 days off after all trips. Also the loss of allowances meant many crew had to find jobs elsewhere.
3. The role of Cabin Manager at Gatwick is still undecided with CM's having no pay scale and no idea of how long the role will last.
So you see unless the bad decsions that BA managemnt take do not effect you its hard to know what is really going on in the company.
1: Insufficicent recruitment meant not enough staff to crew flights resulting in one crew member down on all flights. Considerable cost to the company as this meant a one light payment for crew and the cost of chartering airlines to operate flights on behalf of BA.
2: the '900 hours rule' how the company couldn't see this coming is laughable, only 2 days off after longhaul trips and the mixed flying meant crew reached there 900hours before the year was up, this resulted in crew being grounded for a month. Rather than give out 20 days off in a month due to high hours would it not make more sense to even this out with 3 days off after all trips. Also the loss of allowances meant many crew had to find jobs elsewhere.
3. The role of Cabin Manager at Gatwick is still undecided with CM's having no pay scale and no idea of how long the role will last.
So you see unless the bad decsions that BA managemnt take do not effect you its hard to know what is really going on in the company.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: UK
Posts: 433
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SFBdoll,
That profit could have been a hell of a lot more without the price fix scandal. Care to blame anyone other than BA management for that little gem?
That profit could have been a hell of a lot more without the price fix scandal. Care to blame anyone other than BA management for that little gem?
Last edited by BerksFlyer; 24th Jun 2008 at 16:31. Reason: mis-type
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
7 Posts
Project Columbus isn't a rumour. It has been suggested that the leak came within senior Inflight Service management and was timed when the head of cabin services was out of the country and a new period of stability had been agreed between unions and management. The recent industrial relations settlement was due to be ratified soon. The head of cabin services only days before had taken the heads of the unions out to dinner to discuss and celebrate new trust and cooperation.
Somebody some where doesn't want peace.
Mr Talling Smith, head of cabin services better be watching his back. There is clearly a snake in his grass.
So much for new trust and cooperation. Same old two faced betrayal.
If, and its a big if, such a plan was implemented I would loose more than 10% of my salary. I'll share some facts. I'm on whats known as a new post 1997 contract. This is not the same contract that a few very senior crew are on which allows them higher salaries. 50% plus of my monthly pay is allowance and other variable payments based, often more than 50%. Last year my variable payments totalled (rounded up) £13,000. Replace these payments with a single hourly rate of £2.50 for duty pay and with a maximum allowable duty of 900 hrs per year I'll earn just a variable component of £2250. And if Mr Brown has his way it will all be taxed. A loss of £10750 per annum. The last tax year I took home £25,500. I have a mortgage, kids, car loan and a dog. Clearly the kids will have to go!
My colleagues at LGW already, unfairly, earn less. The company has a right to look at different plans and ideas. I have a right to at least maintain what I earn and like my colleagues will fight to make sure Columbus is not implemented.
Somebody some where doesn't want peace.
Mr Talling Smith, head of cabin services better be watching his back. There is clearly a snake in his grass.
So much for new trust and cooperation. Same old two faced betrayal.
If, and its a big if, such a plan was implemented I would loose more than 10% of my salary. I'll share some facts. I'm on whats known as a new post 1997 contract. This is not the same contract that a few very senior crew are on which allows them higher salaries. 50% plus of my monthly pay is allowance and other variable payments based, often more than 50%. Last year my variable payments totalled (rounded up) £13,000. Replace these payments with a single hourly rate of £2.50 for duty pay and with a maximum allowable duty of 900 hrs per year I'll earn just a variable component of £2250. And if Mr Brown has his way it will all be taxed. A loss of £10750 per annum. The last tax year I took home £25,500. I have a mortgage, kids, car loan and a dog. Clearly the kids will have to go!
My colleagues at LGW already, unfairly, earn less. The company has a right to look at different plans and ideas. I have a right to at least maintain what I earn and like my colleagues will fight to make sure Columbus is not implemented.
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Definitely not bad for a job that doesn't require any qualifications.
The missus is reading that post with interest. She is doing her marking now after spending the whole day at school and her take home was 20700 last year.
Not bitter and twisted, just saying that some crew do not know what the real world is like.
For info: pre 97 contracters earn a heck of a lot more. spoke to one girl (well lady), she has been 50% for a long time, earns between 1600 to 2000 pound a month working 2 trips a month on average. not bad ey.
its just the real world catching up....
maybe benchmarking yourselves against the other european flag carriers is your only option?
The missus is reading that post with interest. She is doing her marking now after spending the whole day at school and her take home was 20700 last year.
Not bitter and twisted, just saying that some crew do not know what the real world is like.
For info: pre 97 contracters earn a heck of a lot more. spoke to one girl (well lady), she has been 50% for a long time, earns between 1600 to 2000 pound a month working 2 trips a month on average. not bad ey.
its just the real world catching up....
maybe benchmarking yourselves against the other european flag carriers is your only option?
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: north of heathrow
Age: 55
Posts: 104
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How interesting Shaka Zulu, I've been flying 16 years for BA, and I wouldn't earn that much if I was 50%..And I know that because I did it for a year..If the lady you mention is on longhaul, she's either jobshare (calender month on or calender month off), or she's 28 days on/28 days off, so the period when she is working, she'll be earning 100% for that period.It means she's available to work 50% of a full-time contract, not earning 50% when she IS working..And if she's been with the company for a long time, shouldn't that count for something..??
I'm fully behind teachers, nurses, etc, I think they have a true vocation and a very important job, however, will me earning less make things better for them.?
Our job is more about character and personality, than paper qualifications, I know many people who couldn't do my job, and I couldn't do theirs, not through lack of qualifications. I've done 2 years in the bank, same thing every day, same faces on the tube, you could get up and do Riverdance and nobody would bat en eyelid.! Definitely not for me.. I have friends who freely admit they couldn't do my job, lack of routine, different day every day, different faces every time you come to work, not sure if you're going to make the kids birthdays or not..Please don't try and be insulting by bringing up the lack of qualifications business, it really doesn't come into it....
safe and happy flying to all....
I'm fully behind teachers, nurses, etc, I think they have a true vocation and a very important job, however, will me earning less make things better for them.?
Our job is more about character and personality, than paper qualifications, I know many people who couldn't do my job, and I couldn't do theirs, not through lack of qualifications. I've done 2 years in the bank, same thing every day, same faces on the tube, you could get up and do Riverdance and nobody would bat en eyelid.! Definitely not for me.. I have friends who freely admit they couldn't do my job, lack of routine, different day every day, different faces every time you come to work, not sure if you're going to make the kids birthdays or not..Please don't try and be insulting by bringing up the lack of qualifications business, it really doesn't come into it....
safe and happy flying to all....