BA and Project Columbus III
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
7 Posts
Very funny.
However it does nothing to achieve a balanced argument. It just underlines my belief that certain members of this site simply hate cabin crew and Bassa.
But, it was funny.
However it does nothing to achieve a balanced argument. It just underlines my belief that certain members of this site simply hate cabin crew and Bassa.
But, it was funny.
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
7 Posts
The issue of the letters.
They simply point out what many people are thinking. On one hand Walsh tells the world that BA is going out of business, then whilst workers are being asked to work for nothing, it is revealled that not only do current members of the board still recieve free unlimited first class travel, but it is for life, regardless of whether they are still a BA employee, and extends to their spouses and children under 24yrs. Current members of the board having such a perk I could cope with. But to extend this perk whilst we are desperate to save cash. Mixed message.
The issue of bullying is particularily sinister. It has transpired that some senior department managers issued an email to all their staff which listed the BRS options. They were required to submit a response. The final option was on the lines of 'I do not wish to help the company out and I will not be taking any of the options'. Ticking this box, it was suggested, would lead to a discussion with the reciprients manager on how they could help the company. Figures are not being released to indicate a department breakdown of where the options were exercised. To make matters worse those who have opted to work for free are to lose 2 days annual leave!
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle6586907.ece
They simply point out what many people are thinking. On one hand Walsh tells the world that BA is going out of business, then whilst workers are being asked to work for nothing, it is revealled that not only do current members of the board still recieve free unlimited first class travel, but it is for life, regardless of whether they are still a BA employee, and extends to their spouses and children under 24yrs. Current members of the board having such a perk I could cope with. But to extend this perk whilst we are desperate to save cash. Mixed message.
The issue of bullying is particularily sinister. It has transpired that some senior department managers issued an email to all their staff which listed the BRS options. They were required to submit a response. The final option was on the lines of 'I do not wish to help the company out and I will not be taking any of the options'. Ticking this box, it was suggested, would lead to a discussion with the reciprients manager on how they could help the company. Figures are not being released to indicate a department breakdown of where the options were exercised. To make matters worse those who have opted to work for free are to lose 2 days annual leave!
http://business.timesonline.co.uk/to...cle6586907.ece
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
7 Posts
Another interesting artilcle. Walsh's messages do not add up.
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/blog/europeinsight/archives/2009/06/how_bad_is_it_a.html?chan=top+news_top+news+index+-+temp_news+%2B+analysis
http://www.businessweek.com/globalbiz/blog/europeinsight/archives/2009/06/how_bad_is_it_a.html?chan=top+news_top+news+index+-+temp_news+%2B+analysis
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue of the letters: do you think the cost of free (note the word free) first class travel for board members compares in any way to the volume of savings the company required from IFCE? How do you think the cost of travel for former board members compares to the cost of travel for retirees from BA?
The issue of the letters: do you think, given the fact that BA apologised to the unions over two weeks ago, admitted the emails were poorly worded and stated that nobody should have been asked to work for free, that publically criticising the error in an open letter is a little mischievous?
With reference to the rather short Businessweek article, I think it's been pointed out more times than enough that BA have to invest in their premium products in order to keep market share in what few profitable business areas there are. The LCY route has strong forward bookings from the one of our major customers. Do you think the better business strategy is to keep on providing what the passengers don't want to pay for, or provide something new that they do want to pay for?
The issue of the letters: do you think, given the fact that BA apologised to the unions over two weeks ago, admitted the emails were poorly worded and stated that nobody should have been asked to work for free, that publically criticising the error in an open letter is a little mischievous?
With reference to the rather short Businessweek article, I think it's been pointed out more times than enough that BA have to invest in their premium products in order to keep market share in what few profitable business areas there are. The LCY route has strong forward bookings from the one of our major customers. Do you think the better business strategy is to keep on providing what the passengers don't want to pay for, or provide something new that they do want to pay for?
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The latest thing on the BASSA forum is to criticise Bidline (and how apparently expensive it is!!) and the pilot hotel agreements (and apparently how expensive they are!!!!)
So let's get this right then:
No-one can even suggest the CC agreements are expensive because they are 'of no concern of anyone apart from CC'
yet CC are allowed to comment on other work force agreements, no hang on, pilot agreements, demanding cuts etc so that BASSA can preserve.......
looks like double standards to me!!!
Never mind eh!!!!
SS
What little support I have for my CC colleagues is fading fast - and just to emphasise my position I wish the best for the CC as I don't want to see people out of work etc but.....
So let's get this right then:
No-one can even suggest the CC agreements are expensive because they are 'of no concern of anyone apart from CC'
yet CC are allowed to comment on other work force agreements, no hang on, pilot agreements, demanding cuts etc so that BASSA can preserve.......
looks like double standards to me!!!
Never mind eh!!!!
SS
What little support I have for my CC colleagues is fading fast - and just to emphasise my position I wish the best for the CC as I don't want to see people out of work etc but.....
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
7 Posts
What I think and what I'm told to think is the issue. In the same way that, as cabin crew, I'm told that I can only think if bassa tell me it's alright, I also have BA telling me how to think.
Daily I receive missives from BA telling me how bad things are, premium travel has collapsed, premium travel may never recover, the banking sector has vanished, the banking sector was a major premium customer, the banking sector business may never recover.
Oh, by the way we've pushed ahead with plans to launch a business only route, financed by the banking sector.
I think the LCY-JFK route is a good idea. I'm not certain about the timing. Whilst I think Walsh is over-egging the situation for his own ends, I also think that Bassa is under-reacting. The vast majority of members on this site subscribe to Walsh vision. The Business week article rather sums up the thoughts I've had for sometime.
Time for change, agreed, opportunistic smash and grab by BA, expected - why shouldn't they try. Why am I challenged for reading between the lines, because Walsh has made it a pre-requisite that no deals go forward unless all departments have a deal. This may explain why the polite and friendly Captain joined me for lunch in Cranebank recently, told me he had applied for VR and was ready to leave, then told me that I would have to earn less and work more, so he could take his cash and go. You wonder!
Daily I receive missives from BA telling me how bad things are, premium travel has collapsed, premium travel may never recover, the banking sector has vanished, the banking sector was a major premium customer, the banking sector business may never recover.
Oh, by the way we've pushed ahead with plans to launch a business only route, financed by the banking sector.
I think the LCY-JFK route is a good idea. I'm not certain about the timing. Whilst I think Walsh is over-egging the situation for his own ends, I also think that Bassa is under-reacting. The vast majority of members on this site subscribe to Walsh vision. The Business week article rather sums up the thoughts I've had for sometime.
Time for change, agreed, opportunistic smash and grab by BA, expected - why shouldn't they try. Why am I challenged for reading between the lines, because Walsh has made it a pre-requisite that no deals go forward unless all departments have a deal. This may explain why the polite and friendly Captain joined me for lunch in Cranebank recently, told me he had applied for VR and was ready to leave, then told me that I would have to earn less and work more, so he could take his cash and go. You wonder!
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes
on
7 Posts
The bidline argument is a reaction to pressure from pilots that we, as cabin crew, must change our T&Cs.
For what it is worth I believe it is an unnecessary and unwelcome distraction that plays no part in my departments negotiations. However I cannot tell you how many, otherwise friendly pilots, have placed pressure on cabin crew, critisied cabin crew, and delivered un-prompted lectures to cabin crew. There is bound to be some form of backlash. It doesn't help and I've ignored it, but it's to be expected. The term, it runs both ways, could be considered.
For what it is worth I believe it is an unnecessary and unwelcome distraction that plays no part in my departments negotiations. However I cannot tell you how many, otherwise friendly pilots, have placed pressure on cabin crew, critisied cabin crew, and delivered un-prompted lectures to cabin crew. There is bound to be some form of backlash. It doesn't help and I've ignored it, but it's to be expected. The term, it runs both ways, could be considered.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Let me guess SS, does it go along the lines of "pilots have guaranteed upgrades to rooms that cost BA sooooo much money"?
Partly true. The business only route is being launched to serve a single bank. One of our biggest, if not the biggest, customer. If we can deliver something they really want and which also ties them to us for a few more years it would be madness not to.
I really don't mean to be rude but I hope you've been thinking more than they have. That article is so brief, so superficial and so lacking in analysis and insight that it's borderline worthless.
Evidently he was confused. The cash for his VR offer comes from the central budget of £78M set aside for VR, in common with all other VR payments. The productivty improvements which allow him to access VR funding come exclusively from the pilots.
the banking sector business may never recover.
Oh, by the way we've pushed ahead with plans to launch a business only route, financed by the banking sector.
Oh, by the way we've pushed ahead with plans to launch a business only route, financed by the banking sector.
The Business week article rather sums up the thoughts I've had for sometime.
This may explain why the polite and friendly Captain joined me for lunch in Cranebank recently, told me he had applied for VR and was ready to leave, then told me that I would have to earn less and work more, so he could take his cash and go
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It does rather prompt the question (from PC's balanced post) as to how you would structure the airline if you have a clean sheet.
In the absence of BA's terrible management (which I think we can all agree is atrocious), how would you set up the system to be (a) simple, (b) cause the minimum of back office costs to support, and (c) pay a fair, competitive wage.
In the absence of BA's terrible management (which I think we can all agree is atrocious), how would you set up the system to be (a) simple, (b) cause the minimum of back office costs to support, and (c) pay a fair, competitive wage.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: london
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The posts about bidline over on another forum, were posted at the same time,(saturday night about pub shutting time) and in the same "style" as one of the contributors here, unfortunately by Sunday lunch time the entertaining posts had been removed from this debate here on pprune
Any newly appointed CEO, will do exactly as WW is doing, in that he/she would have no choice. Except that any new CEO would have a clean sheet, and BASSA would not be able to deliver any diversionary rehtoric against them.
Food for thought when all they want is Willy out.
Any newly appointed CEO, will do exactly as WW is doing, in that he/she would have no choice. Except that any new CEO would have a clean sheet, and BASSA would not be able to deliver any diversionary rehtoric against them.
Food for thought when all they want is Willy out.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: T5
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nope. I certainly don't hate CC and I havent seen any vitriolic postings on here from flight crew expressing that either.
I do have some strong opinions about BASSAs current methods - but that opinion is backed up with facts. Hatred.. ? No - hatred is totally inaccurate.
I do hear that some of the posting on BASSA Crew forum are really quite quite threatening to flight crew. I guess that's what you get if a union pumps out inaccurate & Goebbelsesque documents deliberately designed to inflame and incite. Making forum posters accountable for their postings and doing away with the anonymity would be a good start.
BIDLINE
Ask any flight Ops manager whether they want to get rid of Bidline. His answer will be no. Why ? Simply because it puts the onus on the pilots to make achieve the flying hours each month. If we dont achieve the required hours we lose a significant amount of pay at the end of the month. We are also placed on a naughty list when we have around 800 hrs and are at risk from being taken off flights due to CAA limitations (not industrial limits note). Do you also want the evil that is Draft assign - as that is an integral part of Bid Line rules.
Yes, there is an extra cost to administer BLRs, but that cost is absolutley minuscule when compared to the massive efficiencies BA gets from the flight crew.
Now, lets get back to the issue in hand.
I do have some strong opinions about BASSAs current methods - but that opinion is backed up with facts. Hatred.. ? No - hatred is totally inaccurate.
I do hear that some of the posting on BASSA Crew forum are really quite quite threatening to flight crew. I guess that's what you get if a union pumps out inaccurate & Goebbelsesque documents deliberately designed to inflame and incite. Making forum posters accountable for their postings and doing away with the anonymity would be a good start.
BIDLINE
Ask any flight Ops manager whether they want to get rid of Bidline. His answer will be no. Why ? Simply because it puts the onus on the pilots to make achieve the flying hours each month. If we dont achieve the required hours we lose a significant amount of pay at the end of the month. We are also placed on a naughty list when we have around 800 hrs and are at risk from being taken off flights due to CAA limitations (not industrial limits note). Do you also want the evil that is Draft assign - as that is an integral part of Bid Line rules.
Yes, there is an extra cost to administer BLRs, but that cost is absolutley minuscule when compared to the massive efficiencies BA gets from the flight crew.
Now, lets get back to the issue in hand.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: london
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
PiB
Yup, and that's exactly what any CEO would have to do in todays world, they must be certain that its they that run the company and not the unions.
Just one more day before Willie Walsh rejects the BASSA proposals.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems the new fleet will now not go ahead, and instead, the BASSA proposal that the savings be made by integrating (another) new contract into the existing fleets is on the company agenda.
So now the New New contracts can moan about the new contracts and the new contracts can moan about the old contracts - grief! I don't know whether this is a coup for BASSA or a worrying development....
So now the New New contracts can moan about the new contracts and the new contracts can moan about the old contracts - grief! I don't know whether this is a coup for BASSA or a worrying development....
From Stall Pusher:
SP, you're wrong, fundamentally wrong. Read your own post again, carefully - "working for free" and unpaid leave are not the same thing! Mr Bunker tried to put you right with this:
However, PC767 joined you in your fundamental error by similarly posting:
Wrong again - you are both confusing unpaid leave and unpaid work! They are not interchangeable terms here!
Leave is usuallly accrued according to the number of days you work in a year. If you take unpaid leave, you get less annual leave, because you have worked less, and therefore haven't earned the pro-rated leave-paid days. To illustrate - if the paid leave wasn't pro-rated in some form then someone taking unpaid leave, and plenty of it, could end up getting more paid leave days than someone on a part-time contract, but both of them having 'worked' the same number of days in a year! Not fair on the part-timer, and perhaps not legal either.
The devil is in the detail - but that has never been BASSA'a strong point.
For those of you who have been bullied into working for free to enhance Willie Walsh's future pay reward package, you will lose your holiday pay entitlement for the period!!!!
Two days will be deducted if you opted to work for a month for free!!!
Two days will be deducted if you opted to work for a month for free!!!
SP, it's a legal requirement to pro-rate annual leave for anyone taking unpaid leave as to not do so would disadvantage contracted part-timers.
To make matters worse those who have opted to work for free are to lose 2 days annual leave!
Leave is usuallly accrued according to the number of days you work in a year. If you take unpaid leave, you get less annual leave, because you have worked less, and therefore haven't earned the pro-rated leave-paid days. To illustrate - if the paid leave wasn't pro-rated in some form then someone taking unpaid leave, and plenty of it, could end up getting more paid leave days than someone on a part-time contract, but both of them having 'worked' the same number of days in a year! Not fair on the part-timer, and perhaps not legal either.
The devil is in the detail - but that has never been BASSA'a strong point.
Join Date: May 2003
Location: london
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think its classic BA v BASSA, I have said all along BA have been playing the long game, give BASSA something to hang a victory on and the rest will fall into place
Apparently
Apparently