BA and Project Columbus III
Walsh apparently has no credibility and should resign?
BALPA have led their members a merry dance of some sort?
Finances at BA are just peachy?
BASSA is a caring, sharing, thinking outfit?
All according to Stallpusher .....
But somehow we should all believe Stallpusher, who never answers a direct question, keeps his fingers in his ears saying la la la la, and writes in the manner that a 1970s shop steward would speak. Unbelievable. In every sense of the word.
BALPA have led their members a merry dance of some sort?
Finances at BA are just peachy?
BASSA is a caring, sharing, thinking outfit?
All according to Stallpusher .....
But somehow we should all believe Stallpusher, who never answers a direct question, keeps his fingers in his ears saying la la la la, and writes in the manner that a 1970s shop steward would speak. Unbelievable. In every sense of the word.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Guildford
Age: 35
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You're correct, it is an "entertaining thread". But I think thats not the major point of the topic haha.
Some of the opionions put forward (with no particular people mentioned) make me think I could get more sense out of a 10 year old having a tantrum.
That being said I think that I would feel exactly the same if i was in Stall Pusher's place. We all know that WW is trying to use the media and other ways to increase the support for cabin crew taking a pay cut, it makes sense for him to do that. That dosn't mean that its not needed though.
We are going through the hardest time in recent history in the aviation world. The loss of 400 million isn't fake, its real. Sure WW has emphasised things like "BA might go under" etc, but he's not just saying that to get the CC on side, he's saying it because he's trying to minimise the damage BA are going to take.
Stall Pusher, good luck to you. But you really need to face the fact that the premium market is basically dead at the moment. It may seem that loads are okay up there, but they are selling seats in F and J for a fraction of the price to how they were 1-2 years ago. I was once told by a finance manager that airlines could fly empty in coach, half empty in J and full in F and still break even. That was a while ago, but when your long haul planes are set up for a premium market, if you're having to sell the premium seats at a low low cost you're going to suffer big time.
It has long been said, in the GOOD days, that there is not a lot of money to be made out of running an airline. There isn't a big margain between cost and profit on any route. BA did really well in previous years with the 400 million profit, But it is going to be YEARS before the premium market picks up. Companies are downgrading their employees, and even economy passengers are either not travelling or swimming instead!
Stall Pusher, what you have to realise that your union isnt trying to protect you, its trying to protect itself. Both parties are fighting for power, and you lot are the pawns in the middle.
Some of the opionions put forward (with no particular people mentioned) make me think I could get more sense out of a 10 year old having a tantrum.
That being said I think that I would feel exactly the same if i was in Stall Pusher's place. We all know that WW is trying to use the media and other ways to increase the support for cabin crew taking a pay cut, it makes sense for him to do that. That dosn't mean that its not needed though.
We are going through the hardest time in recent history in the aviation world. The loss of 400 million isn't fake, its real. Sure WW has emphasised things like "BA might go under" etc, but he's not just saying that to get the CC on side, he's saying it because he's trying to minimise the damage BA are going to take.
Stall Pusher, good luck to you. But you really need to face the fact that the premium market is basically dead at the moment. It may seem that loads are okay up there, but they are selling seats in F and J for a fraction of the price to how they were 1-2 years ago. I was once told by a finance manager that airlines could fly empty in coach, half empty in J and full in F and still break even. That was a while ago, but when your long haul planes are set up for a premium market, if you're having to sell the premium seats at a low low cost you're going to suffer big time.
It has long been said, in the GOOD days, that there is not a lot of money to be made out of running an airline. There isn't a big margain between cost and profit on any route. BA did really well in previous years with the 400 million profit, But it is going to be YEARS before the premium market picks up. Companies are downgrading their employees, and even economy passengers are either not travelling or swimming instead!
Stall Pusher, what you have to realise that your union isnt trying to protect you, its trying to protect itself. Both parties are fighting for power, and you lot are the pawns in the middle.
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: The Shadows
Posts: 202
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CM on 27K?
Jesus! Only maybe the golden ex Dan-Air girls (God love em!). Majority are on around the 18-19K mark (plus the hourly rate of course!).
Jesus! Only maybe the golden ex Dan-Air girls (God love em!). Majority are on around the 18-19K mark (plus the hourly rate of course!).
Last edited by WeLieInTheShadows; 22nd Jun 2009 at 21:36.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bodmin, Cornshire
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TOTAL. A lesson for Walsh
Mill owners all round the UK must have celebrated at the hard line taken by TOTAL bosses against workers at their Lindsey refinery, who walked out in protest over job losses. Even a few people on this forum got some comfort out of this news as an example that with the expected dispute in BA on the horizon, cabin crew would also get short shrift from a rampant Walsh.
So how lovely this-morning to see a tight lipped Human Resources Manager from TOTAL wheeled out in front of SKY cameras, to plead with the union to get his ball back.
And you can imagine the scenario now unfolding at BA. Walsh pathalogically unable to back down and refusing to compromise, harking back to his old days as a militant trade unionist, pushes BA's cabin crew into a corner and out go the strike ballots. He used 9/11 to scare Aer Lingus staff and now he is doing the same with the current downturn. How lucky can you get?
Viewing the various forums where cabin crew are speaking out, I was astonished to find that it is on BA's own ESS forum where without the protection of a pseudonym, BA cabin crew are lashing Walsh. Dozens of crew have stated exactly what the think of Walsh and his tactics. In fact he has even replied publicly on the forum to a letter from one steward, the tone of which has further incensed the cabin crew community.
This does not bode well for BA management who wish to push through their proposals, as all these crew have committed themselves to standing up to imposed change. Forum rules do not allow me to copy and paste, but I would assure you that the openess of the debate on the company website is startling. For a moment I thought I was on the BASSA forum!
But the cabin crew are mere pawns in Walsh's agenda, his real target is the government. By the time the restructured APD rates commence, BA will be in such a fragile state that the swingeing increases will automatically push the airline into bankruptcy. Will Gordon Brown dare introduce the new rates of APD whilst the UK's aviation industry is in crisis and risk killing the goose?
That is why Walsh has nothing to lose. It will all be over anyway next year.
So how lovely this-morning to see a tight lipped Human Resources Manager from TOTAL wheeled out in front of SKY cameras, to plead with the union to get his ball back.
And you can imagine the scenario now unfolding at BA. Walsh pathalogically unable to back down and refusing to compromise, harking back to his old days as a militant trade unionist, pushes BA's cabin crew into a corner and out go the strike ballots. He used 9/11 to scare Aer Lingus staff and now he is doing the same with the current downturn. How lucky can you get?
Viewing the various forums where cabin crew are speaking out, I was astonished to find that it is on BA's own ESS forum where without the protection of a pseudonym, BA cabin crew are lashing Walsh. Dozens of crew have stated exactly what the think of Walsh and his tactics. In fact he has even replied publicly on the forum to a letter from one steward, the tone of which has further incensed the cabin crew community.
This does not bode well for BA management who wish to push through their proposals, as all these crew have committed themselves to standing up to imposed change. Forum rules do not allow me to copy and paste, but I would assure you that the openess of the debate on the company website is startling. For a moment I thought I was on the BASSA forum!
But the cabin crew are mere pawns in Walsh's agenda, his real target is the government. By the time the restructured APD rates commence, BA will be in such a fragile state that the swingeing increases will automatically push the airline into bankruptcy. Will Gordon Brown dare introduce the new rates of APD whilst the UK's aviation industry is in crisis and risk killing the goose?
That is why Walsh has nothing to lose. It will all be over anyway next year.
Last edited by Stall Pusher; 23rd Jun 2009 at 08:22.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: glos
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The big difference between the two scenarios, SP, is that the Lindsey workers are both specialised AND demonstrating solidarity.
This does not apply to LHR cabin crew. There is a large and willing cadre of staff at LGW trained to exactly the same standards as those at LHR MORE than willing to come round the M25 and do the work, plus a huge number of crc checked former temporary contract staff desperate to have a more permanent job with BA.
With minimum crewing (and the inevitable strike breakers) there are plenty of people to keep the show on the road should BASSA push the self destruct button. Talk is cheap, and nowhere is it cheaper than on internet forums, but actions are much, much more expensive. The rest of BA can see that (the wholely unrepresentative) BASSA are willing to risk the future of the entire company through their intransigence and inability to handle change. There will be scant support for any industrial action from other departments, and a lot less within the cc community than you think. Time will tell.
This does not apply to LHR cabin crew. There is a large and willing cadre of staff at LGW trained to exactly the same standards as those at LHR MORE than willing to come round the M25 and do the work, plus a huge number of crc checked former temporary contract staff desperate to have a more permanent job with BA.
With minimum crewing (and the inevitable strike breakers) there are plenty of people to keep the show on the road should BASSA push the self destruct button. Talk is cheap, and nowhere is it cheaper than on internet forums, but actions are much, much more expensive. The rest of BA can see that (the wholely unrepresentative) BASSA are willing to risk the future of the entire company through their intransigence and inability to handle change. There will be scant support for any industrial action from other departments, and a lot less within the cc community than you think. Time will tell.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bodmin, Cornshire
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry RV. You are completely wrong. BASSA is part of UNITE who represent the majority of staff at BA. It is very unlikely that GSS will agree to Walsh's proposals either.
BASSA is not intransigent as it has already tabled proposals that give Walsh the savings he wants. All this mystical belief BASSA refuses to negotiate etc is absolute nonsense, peddled by a few people with a self serving motives.
As far as staff at LGW manning flights at LHR, they haven't enough crew for their own operation at the moment!!
BASSA is not intransigent as it has already tabled proposals that give Walsh the savings he wants. All this mystical belief BASSA refuses to negotiate etc is absolute nonsense, peddled by a few people with a self serving motives.
As far as staff at LGW manning flights at LHR, they haven't enough crew for their own operation at the moment!!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SP, if you bother to read a little more into the Lindsey dispute you will also see that the workers were sacked and then told they could come back to work on 'new contracts'. This is their sticking point and, as has already been said, they are specialised and difficult to replace workers.
Sadly, looking around the myriad of fresh, young faces at Brain Crank the other day, the same cannot be said for CC.
So take comfort from your rhetoric because it doesn't even apply to the situation at BA.
How defensible the current CC T's & C's are to the shareholders and investors is obvious. Totally indefensible. Currently doing the rounds are CC bunk rest lights. This is the 'biggie' of the day as the engineers are complaining that they seem to be getting broken with alarming regularity. Odd that when, if the bunk light is permanently 'on' (for safety reasons) when the swith is broken, then the CC can't get adequate rest thus trigger a £500, yes £500, discomfort bonus! So, please, please, please tell me how that is defensible?
Sadly, looking around the myriad of fresh, young faces at Brain Crank the other day, the same cannot be said for CC.
So take comfort from your rhetoric because it doesn't even apply to the situation at BA.
How defensible the current CC T's & C's are to the shareholders and investors is obvious. Totally indefensible. Currently doing the rounds are CC bunk rest lights. This is the 'biggie' of the day as the engineers are complaining that they seem to be getting broken with alarming regularity. Odd that when, if the bunk light is permanently 'on' (for safety reasons) when the swith is broken, then the CC can't get adequate rest thus trigger a £500, yes £500, discomfort bonus! So, please, please, please tell me how that is defensible?
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Slough
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SP, I think your ideas are from the Marcel school of industrial management!!
(Sorry folks, but Short-haul Cabin Crew will know of this one man strike machine).
Sadly, to replace us requires a bit of balls, good planning, some finance, checks through Disclosure Scotland, and minimal training.
We are not actually 'licensed' on any aircraft. We can be replaced. Lets not create our own self destruction.
(Sorry folks, but Short-haul Cabin Crew will know of this one man strike machine).
Sadly, to replace us requires a bit of balls, good planning, some finance, checks through Disclosure Scotland, and minimal training.
We are not actually 'licensed' on any aircraft. We can be replaced. Lets not create our own self destruction.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: glos
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ah, yes, this would be the same UNITE that pulled the rug from under the last "strike that never was". Face it, you are on your own. There is NO chance of secondary action, and yes, there are PLENTY of crew at LGW. You need one cc per pair of doors or 50 pax, so a 777 can go with 8 (vs 12 at LHR) and a 747 with 12.
BA HAVE to win this. Future investment in the company is conditional on work practice agreements being made more efficient (in the case of LHR cc, MUCH more efficient.) Without future investment the company will go under, so with that much at stake WW has to win or he might as well go home.
In that case, it would be a very pyrrhic "victory", but at least the cc would be able to congratulate themselves in the dole queue that they kept their box payments to the end!
BA HAVE to win this. Future investment in the company is conditional on work practice agreements being made more efficient (in the case of LHR cc, MUCH more efficient.) Without future investment the company will go under, so with that much at stake WW has to win or he might as well go home.
In that case, it would be a very pyrrhic "victory", but at least the cc would be able to congratulate themselves in the dole queue that they kept their box payments to the end!
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bodmin, Cornshire
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wobble there are three push button light switches on a 744 at the top of the stairs for the rest area. It would be very unusual that all three get broken. The electrics are a mulitplex system where there is no direct link between the switch and the lights. Same with passenger reading lights. That is why the CSD can switch reading lighs on or off from the computer in his/her 'office'. There is no such override for the lights in the crew bunk rest area unfortunately.
The reason the lights occasionally stay on in the rest area is due to a fault in the mulitplex system, not some sort of sabotage of the switches for financial gain as you have scurriously insinuated.
Generally as BA cuts back on expenditure, many of my colleagues are experiencing a deterioration in the onboard systems such as AVOD and aircraft being dispatched with unserviceable toilets. It would help that when faults are reported, that they are fixed back at base. It is not unusual for aircraft to be sent out with faults such as bunk rest lights stuck on, as hard presseed engineers at base prioritise repairs.
The reason the lights occasionally stay on in the rest area is due to a fault in the mulitplex system, not some sort of sabotage of the switches for financial gain as you have scurriously insinuated.
Generally as BA cuts back on expenditure, many of my colleagues are experiencing a deterioration in the onboard systems such as AVOD and aircraft being dispatched with unserviceable toilets. It would help that when faults are reported, that they are fixed back at base. It is not unusual for aircraft to be sent out with faults such as bunk rest lights stuck on, as hard presseed engineers at base prioritise repairs.
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: Slough
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SP, we need to alter our mindset...........and put our passengers first.
I noted you said "many of my colleagues are experiencing a deterioration in the onboard systems such as AVOD"................surely that means our customers are experiencing a deterioration in the onboard systems such as AVOD!!
I noted you said "many of my colleagues are experiencing a deterioration in the onboard systems such as AVOD"................surely that means our customers are experiencing a deterioration in the onboard systems such as AVOD!!
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
not some sort of sabotage of the switches for financial gain as you have scurriously insinuated.
All that aside I am just amazed at how BASSA can continue to crow that it has negotiated. BA want to change the core of the business to be able to compete in an new era of travel where the customer has less money to spend or is more circumspect in how they spend it. BASSA offered WW temporary savings over the next two years after it was made patently clear that permanent savings were required. (See case above). The temporary savings were then to have been paid back IN FULL when BA returned to profit as well as re-instatement of all previous T's & C's. So, not much negotiation there, just a begrudging temporary release of commitments, but we want it ALL back!
BA CC are good, some are better than others, some are worse. Fairly standard cross section of employees really. However, some of the top third are milking the system. Already on pay levels that far outstrip the industry standard they enjoy 'disruption' payments that are on an eye watering high scale. Coupled with an intransigence that defies belief when things actually go wrong and a total lack of consideration of the customer by demanding their 48 hours off after a diversion for example.
There are alot of willing new crew members and many of those on the lower pay structures or the SH fleets who are also fed up with this disparity.
BASSA (BA Senior Stewards Association) are clutching at straws now. They realise that WW will force through change and that they stand to lose an awful lot of face and members.
We need to concentrate our efforts on providing the level of CUSTOMER service that keeps people coming back not wasting vast amounts of money on nebulous payments to crew.
Fixed hourly rate, fixed flying payments and a fixed TAFB system for CC. Get rid of the 'credits' system and we can all operate off of a level playing field.
Hmm, sound familiar?
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Reading
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Imasteward, I totally agree.
A couple of things really upset me about BASSA's stance, and their apparent sluggishness in negotiating a deal for us.
They are playing a very high stakes game, risking our livelihoods, both present in salary, and future in pension. If they dont reach an agreement by the 30th, the Voluntary Redundancies will become Compulsory Redundancies.
Secondly......where else could we find such a 'gay friendly' employer as BA? I dont think there is one in the UK.
A couple of things really upset me about BASSA's stance, and their apparent sluggishness in negotiating a deal for us.
They are playing a very high stakes game, risking our livelihoods, both present in salary, and future in pension. If they dont reach an agreement by the 30th, the Voluntary Redundancies will become Compulsory Redundancies.
Secondly......where else could we find such a 'gay friendly' employer as BA? I dont think there is one in the UK.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Woking
Posts: 103
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A DOM (Duty Ops Manager) told me the other day they have had a big increase in the number of bunk lights unservicable due tripped circuit breakers, that is why they now have to get the engineers to verify a genuine fault before they dish out the huge discomfort payments.
I still find it amazing that crew couldn't possibly sleep with eyeshades on when pilots taking first rest on a non bunked aircraft have to try and sleep in a club cabin with lights on and the full service being done to a passenger in the seat next to them. (Lets not even discuss what charter pilots and cc do!!!)
Probably BASSA argued that cc have a much more safety critical job.
Remember that the person looking after wheelchairs is now assigned to a working position because it was found that all 15 crew were staying behind and then popping up to the DOM's to claim their next box payment/ overtime/ extended rest.
Act like children, get treated like children, what else do you expect?
Anyway back to the topic, airline in trouble, can't cut fuel costs, can't cut ATC charges or maintenance etc etc, whats left? Yup employee costs.
BA crew cost double the nearest competitor, with an £800 million budget you could thus save £400million and that would put the company on a break even from cc alone.
CC got off lightly really with only a 14% cut and not 50%, the proposal even keeps pay as it is and just reduces crewing levels and saves in the future with a new contract.
Could have been much, much worse but no, cc don't save, they don't work harder, they don't reduce terms and conditions, never have and never will without a fight.
So once again we will have a fight. (Lets remember the last strike was about removing 1 crew member and tackling excessive sickness rates, let alone removing several crew and introducing a new fleet)
There are lots of superbly written posts here, alas all wasted, you can't reason with people like SP, they live on their planet, we live on ours, unfortunately when they destroy theirs ours will go with it.
I wouldn't be surprised if Willie caves in the end, it's happened every time before, this may be different but I'll believe it when I see it.
It could all end in tears but don't be surprised if BASSA the great triumphs again, they do run this airline, they will be a hard nut to crack, cracked they should be but at what cost?
A worrying time for us all. In fact God help us really.
P.S. another great post wobble, will it turn the tide? Sadly, of course not.
I still find it amazing that crew couldn't possibly sleep with eyeshades on when pilots taking first rest on a non bunked aircraft have to try and sleep in a club cabin with lights on and the full service being done to a passenger in the seat next to them. (Lets not even discuss what charter pilots and cc do!!!)
Probably BASSA argued that cc have a much more safety critical job.
Remember that the person looking after wheelchairs is now assigned to a working position because it was found that all 15 crew were staying behind and then popping up to the DOM's to claim their next box payment/ overtime/ extended rest.
Act like children, get treated like children, what else do you expect?
Anyway back to the topic, airline in trouble, can't cut fuel costs, can't cut ATC charges or maintenance etc etc, whats left? Yup employee costs.
BA crew cost double the nearest competitor, with an £800 million budget you could thus save £400million and that would put the company on a break even from cc alone.
CC got off lightly really with only a 14% cut and not 50%, the proposal even keeps pay as it is and just reduces crewing levels and saves in the future with a new contract.
Could have been much, much worse but no, cc don't save, they don't work harder, they don't reduce terms and conditions, never have and never will without a fight.
So once again we will have a fight. (Lets remember the last strike was about removing 1 crew member and tackling excessive sickness rates, let alone removing several crew and introducing a new fleet)
There are lots of superbly written posts here, alas all wasted, you can't reason with people like SP, they live on their planet, we live on ours, unfortunately when they destroy theirs ours will go with it.
I wouldn't be surprised if Willie caves in the end, it's happened every time before, this may be different but I'll believe it when I see it.
It could all end in tears but don't be surprised if BASSA the great triumphs again, they do run this airline, they will be a hard nut to crack, cracked they should be but at what cost?
A worrying time for us all. In fact God help us really.
P.S. another great post wobble, will it turn the tide? Sadly, of course not.
Last edited by plodding along; 23rd Jun 2009 at 09:57.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
For those that complain about un-servicabilities in the cabin, come and have a look at most aircrafts Acceptable Deferred Defects (ADD's). I don't just mean BA I mean most airlines.
The problem comes not from 'over stretched engineers', though that is a problem for anything that can't be deferred, but time. An aircraft on the ground loses money. Plain and simple. Punitive slot time fines, airways fines and arrival delays cost a fortune. Hence, if the aircraft is on a short base turnaround and the fault is acceptable to the Captain then it goes.
Perhaps if we had to pay out less for the distress and discomfort of the crew at having an unservicable toilet or bunk lights then we could allocate more resources to making sure such minor fripparies like the passengers AVOD works correctly.
The company is there fore the shareholders, investors and passengers. Put them first.
The problem comes not from 'over stretched engineers', though that is a problem for anything that can't be deferred, but time. An aircraft on the ground loses money. Plain and simple. Punitive slot time fines, airways fines and arrival delays cost a fortune. Hence, if the aircraft is on a short base turnaround and the fault is acceptable to the Captain then it goes.
Perhaps if we had to pay out less for the distress and discomfort of the crew at having an unservicable toilet or bunk lights then we could allocate more resources to making sure such minor fripparies like the passengers AVOD works correctly.
The company is there fore the shareholders, investors and passengers. Put them first.
Join Date: Sep 2008
Location: Bodmin, Cornshire
Posts: 78
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks for the spelling lesson Wobble. I usually spend time correcting mistakes becuase I am hopeless at typing, not because I can't spell.
Yes Andy, I am sure that a lot of pilots are attracted to BA because it is so 'Gay friendly'. You are lucky to be in an occupation which offers you such a vibrant social life as a bonus.
Customer service will not be improved if you take crew off of the aircraft. Walsh changed the "core business" at Aer Lingus and now look at it...unable to compete with RyanAir as a low cost carrier.
If the circuit breakers have "tripped" Plodding Along, that means there are no lights. Don't you know that? I will be much more vigilant now about Flight Crew taking 'controlled rest' whilst they have a heavy crew member in the bunks. Thanks to you, I will be reporting the matter in the future. So please carry on with your attacks on cabin crew.
Yes Andy, I am sure that a lot of pilots are attracted to BA because it is so 'Gay friendly'. You are lucky to be in an occupation which offers you such a vibrant social life as a bonus.
Customer service will not be improved if you take crew off of the aircraft. Walsh changed the "core business" at Aer Lingus and now look at it...unable to compete with RyanAir as a low cost carrier.
If the circuit breakers have "tripped" Plodding Along, that means there are no lights. Don't you know that? I will be much more vigilant now about Flight Crew taking 'controlled rest' whilst they have a heavy crew member in the bunks. Thanks to you, I will be reporting the matter in the future. So please carry on with your attacks on cabin crew.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin
Age: 65
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TOTAL dispute
I just want to correct some misconceptions about the above which some posters appear to think has relevance to BA's ongoing negotaitions with staff. I think the two are very different. The Lindsay dispute is an example of what can happen where there are multiple employers involved, all acting independently, whereas the workforce thinks they ought to be acting in a more collective or collegiate manner.
A key point in the dispute at Lindsay is that TOTAL is not the employer, but is probably the party that is suffering most. TOTAL is a client of a company called "Jacobs", which it has engaged as main contractor to build an extension to the refinery. In turn "Jacobs" has sub-contracted work to a total of nine other firms, one of which is called "Shaw". The dispute started when "Shaw" made 51 people redundant at a time when some of the other sub-contractors were hiring. The redundant workers were apparently not able/allowed to apply for jobs being created by the other sub-contractors. Staff from all (I think) the nine sub-contractors went on unofficial strike. "Shaw" and some other firms sacked the strikers, but not all nine sub-contractors have sacked their workers.
Hence the reason why the TOTAL HR person was looking for a speedy resolution is that the dispute is holding up work on their project, but they don't actually have any direct link to the dispute. It's costing TOTAL a fortune (completion is behind schedule and over budget), and TOTAL desperately needs this up-and-running to boost refining capacity.
My understanding of what's happening at BA is that, firstly, all CC are directly employed by the company and hence there is only one employer. Secondly, although part of WW's plan is to put together a "New Fleet" with more flexible working conditions, all existing BA CC are entitled to move to that fleet if they wish. Thirdly, WW wants to standardise CC T&Cs generally, from the current position of multiple (and very different) terms depending on whether CC are SH or LH, LHR or LGW. So I don't think the Lindsay dispute offers much of an example whether you are for or against WW on this one.
A key point in the dispute at Lindsay is that TOTAL is not the employer, but is probably the party that is suffering most. TOTAL is a client of a company called "Jacobs", which it has engaged as main contractor to build an extension to the refinery. In turn "Jacobs" has sub-contracted work to a total of nine other firms, one of which is called "Shaw". The dispute started when "Shaw" made 51 people redundant at a time when some of the other sub-contractors were hiring. The redundant workers were apparently not able/allowed to apply for jobs being created by the other sub-contractors. Staff from all (I think) the nine sub-contractors went on unofficial strike. "Shaw" and some other firms sacked the strikers, but not all nine sub-contractors have sacked their workers.
Hence the reason why the TOTAL HR person was looking for a speedy resolution is that the dispute is holding up work on their project, but they don't actually have any direct link to the dispute. It's costing TOTAL a fortune (completion is behind schedule and over budget), and TOTAL desperately needs this up-and-running to boost refining capacity.
My understanding of what's happening at BA is that, firstly, all CC are directly employed by the company and hence there is only one employer. Secondly, although part of WW's plan is to put together a "New Fleet" with more flexible working conditions, all existing BA CC are entitled to move to that fleet if they wish. Thirdly, WW wants to standardise CC T&Cs generally, from the current position of multiple (and very different) terms depending on whether CC are SH or LH, LHR or LGW. So I don't think the Lindsay dispute offers much of an example whether you are for or against WW on this one.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You can report the flight crew all you want SP, management will simply tell you to get back in your box and whilst you're there to read your JPMs.
Anybody else read the latest BASSA communique? I have to say it did make me laugh! Their main thrust of attack now seems to be to imply Willie Walsh is actually mad! Wonder how effective that strategy is going to be, as they don't seem to have any other strategies on display.
Anybody else read the latest BASSA communique? I have to say it did make me laugh! Their main thrust of attack now seems to be to imply Willie Walsh is actually mad! Wonder how effective that strategy is going to be, as they don't seem to have any other strategies on display.