British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
The management team had better realise that the cabin crew will not be bullied into accepting the imposition of major changes to their future career prospects and earning potential.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks Matt - yes I thought the Monthly Duty payment would have been beneficial. It should be very clear to even the hardest militants that UNITE have failed us on several accounts:
1. Despite having info about New Fleet over a year ago, it now appears to be firmly on the table.
2. The threat of New Fleet could have been eliminated via the Fixed Monthly Duty payment route but the opportunity was missed.
3. A strike will be disastrous for the whole company and would simply give us even more insecurity than we have now.
What will tomorrow's meeting bring? Will WW pull an ace out of his sleeve? Will he perhaps pull New Fleet off the table by gaining a No Strike clause in return?
I'm not convinced that New Fleet is what they really want, but they do want one crew off each plane and a new disruption agreement (which personally I have no objections to and any reasonable Union would have negotiated this well).
If WW pulls New Fleet off tomorrow, in exchange for No Strike, everyone saves face. We all live happily ever after....with one crew member down and a new disruption agreement, which is probably all they wanted anyway. Bingo! Let's see what tomorrow brings...
1. Despite having info about New Fleet over a year ago, it now appears to be firmly on the table.
2. The threat of New Fleet could have been eliminated via the Fixed Monthly Duty payment route but the opportunity was missed.
3. A strike will be disastrous for the whole company and would simply give us even more insecurity than we have now.
What will tomorrow's meeting bring? Will WW pull an ace out of his sleeve? Will he perhaps pull New Fleet off the table by gaining a No Strike clause in return?
I'm not convinced that New Fleet is what they really want, but they do want one crew off each plane and a new disruption agreement (which personally I have no objections to and any reasonable Union would have negotiated this well). If WW pulls New Fleet off tomorrow, in exchange for No Strike, everyone saves face. We all live happily ever after....with one crew member down and a new disruption agreement, which is probably all they wanted anyway. Bingo! Let's see what tomorrow brings...
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Age: 41
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HiFlyer
Do you really think BA don't want this New Fleet? If not, then what is the purpose in having all these ex-temp crew literally waiting in the wings, all referenced up and ready to go, give or take a few weeks notice periods in current jobs.
Plus the however-many crew that were recruited in February this year when BA randomly advertised for crew just as they were letting the first load of temporary crew go, and they are now sat in a hold pool waiting for a course date (remember, they didn't apply for any specific base or contract as the advert said "subject to operational requirements"?
Of course, everyone has there own opinions, and as an ex-temp, I do sway towards the idea of this New Fleet. Who knows if it will work, we can only wait and see what happens, who gets offered what and when. The only thing I am pretty certain about now, is that the ball is most definetly in BA's court and I think BASSA have pretty much lost the game/plot now.
Plus the however-many crew that were recruited in February this year when BA randomly advertised for crew just as they were letting the first load of temporary crew go, and they are now sat in a hold pool waiting for a course date (remember, they didn't apply for any specific base or contract as the advert said "subject to operational requirements"?
Of course, everyone has there own opinions, and as an ex-temp, I do sway towards the idea of this New Fleet. Who knows if it will work, we can only wait and see what happens, who gets offered what and when. The only thing I am pretty certain about now, is that the ball is most definetly in BA's court and I think BASSA have pretty much lost the game/plot now.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: London
Posts: 18
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Welshboy1982.
HiFlyer14 even if WW pulled New Fleet off the table tomorrow in exchange for no strike do you honestly believe they will be happy with the one crew member down and new disruption agreement? I personally don’t. All feel free to correct me if im wrong but how does the new crew compliment and a new disruption agreement amount to a £140m saving?
I understand your point but I don’t think that’s what will make everyone happy again. By even bringing the mention of a new fleet its very clear they want a dramatic change in contracts. Things like no box payments/destination payments/6 days in pvg etc etc etc. I thought those savings were hugely important to BA and if they weren’t getting them from current crew they would pass the trips over to NF and get them there?
HiFlyer14 even if WW pulled New Fleet off the table tomorrow in exchange for no strike do you honestly believe they will be happy with the one crew member down and new disruption agreement? I personally don’t. All feel free to correct me if im wrong but how does the new crew compliment and a new disruption agreement amount to a £140m saving?
I understand your point but I don’t think that’s what will make everyone happy again. By even bringing the mention of a new fleet its very clear they want a dramatic change in contracts. Things like no box payments/destination payments/6 days in pvg etc etc etc. I thought those savings were hugely important to BA and if they weren’t getting them from current crew they would pass the trips over to NF and get them there?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Peterlondon,
I'm not saying you're lying, but do you know if these guys are really BA crew? Without "evidence" (no, I don't want the link to that website, thanks), it's a rather sweeping statement to make. What are you trying to achieve?
Gg
And yes, cc can get tested at any time, if that makes you happy
I'm not saying you're lying, but do you know if these guys are really BA crew? Without "evidence" (no, I don't want the link to that website, thanks), it's a rather sweeping statement to make. What are you trying to achieve?
Gg
And yes, cc can get tested at any time, if that makes you happy
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There used to be only 2 certainties in life - death and taxes. Now there is a third - WW will get his cost reductions and he ain't gonna get that by just losing a single crew member on LH. He will get the new fleet, he will get more work out of LHR SH through LGW crewing levels and if a ballot is called then the cost of that to BA will be added to the IFCE cost-saving target. Expect more imposition, lots more. WW's reputation and the financial viability of the company are on the line, he cannot afford to lose.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA have said that New Fleet won't be in for some time yet and not until the business returns to profitability. I think it is something they may want in the future; but if it is the all-singing all-dancing way forward, why is it taking so long? He could have imposed at the end of June. He could have taken the vol redundancies at the beginning of the year and New Fleet could be here by now.
There are alot of complications with a New Fleet, not least of all experience levels on the aircraft. WW doesn't want a strike anymore than anyone else does - it would be suicidal. The one way to get the strike called off, and still retain his savings would be to abandon New Fleet. New Fleet came off the table before, no reason why it couldn't do so again today.
The Union have thus far failed us, and as a member I am furious. A New Fleet could mean the loss of our jobs in the very near future. I hope that the Union will see sense and take this last opportunity to agree to the crew complements and disruption agreement; in exchange for No Strike = No New Fleet. I have a bleak hope that it could still be a win-win.
There are alot of complications with a New Fleet, not least of all experience levels on the aircraft. WW doesn't want a strike anymore than anyone else does - it would be suicidal. The one way to get the strike called off, and still retain his savings would be to abandon New Fleet. New Fleet came off the table before, no reason why it couldn't do so again today.
The Union have thus far failed us, and as a member I am furious. A New Fleet could mean the loss of our jobs in the very near future. I hope that the Union will see sense and take this last opportunity to agree to the crew complements and disruption agreement; in exchange for No Strike = No New Fleet. I have a bleak hope that it could still be a win-win.
Join Date: Sep 1998
Location: Europe
Age: 53
Posts: 97
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HiFlyer
If I was you I'd be a little bit more cautious with the interpretation of BA's statement on New Fleet.
"We do not envisage any new crew joining BA until the business begins to grow again. "
is what they actually wrote, which to be honest can mean almost anything. The schedules are pretty thin right now, and there will almost certainly be more flights in Summer 2010 - does this count as the business growing?
Also note the use of the phrase 'do not envisage'. Hardly a guarantee is it? BA have a pretty strong record of seeming to promise one thing, only to rely on a strict interpretation of the wording later to justify doing exactly the opposite.
If I was you I'd be a little bit more cautious with the interpretation of BA's statement on New Fleet.
"We do not envisage any new crew joining BA until the business begins to grow again. "
is what they actually wrote, which to be honest can mean almost anything. The schedules are pretty thin right now, and there will almost certainly be more flights in Summer 2010 - does this count as the business growing?
Also note the use of the phrase 'do not envisage'. Hardly a guarantee is it? BA have a pretty strong record of seeming to promise one thing, only to rely on a strict interpretation of the wording later to justify doing exactly the opposite.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Runcorn,Cheshire,England
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hiflyer
If new fleet was "off the table" how do you suggest that £140million will be saved over the courseof the 2 year BP (of which only approx 20months remain!!) ?
There can be no "win-win", as you suggest without these savings as al other departments will be back to square one if ALL depts do not meet their targets!!
If new fleet was "off the table" how do you suggest that £140million will be saved over the courseof the 2 year BP (of which only approx 20months remain!!) ?
There can be no "win-win", as you suggest without these savings as al other departments will be back to square one if ALL depts do not meet their targets!!
I'm not so sure a strike would be suicidal. If you ever have to park up the fleet for a week or so, the best time to do it are when yields are so low that you are making no money by flying anyway. If the BA board have gone to the city and big institutional shareholders and told them they might lose £100million in a strike that is over proposals that will save £140million rising, it's a no brainer. BA went to the city to secure funding to see off the strike.
The strike will struggle to get off the ground with the VR and part-timers anti it.
It will be interesting to see how many will have the courage to fail to report for the first few trips that first morning when you can be sure the management will (rightly or wrongly) sack the first batch of no shows and then argue the toss later. Sacked just before Christmas - that'll do wonders for the intergity of the response and Bassa's unity.
I have a great deal of sympathy for anyone who is facing a bleak future but I have no sympathy or support for anyone who threatens my livelyhood by demanding the continuation of unrealistic and un-economic pay and conditions.
Rather like the MPs are finding at the moment - it's no good bleeting about "but that's what we've always been paid" if the tide of opinion has turned against you. The world has moved on, not just a blip - it has fundamentally changed and CC have to move with it.
The strike will struggle to get off the ground with the VR and part-timers anti it.
It will be interesting to see how many will have the courage to fail to report for the first few trips that first morning when you can be sure the management will (rightly or wrongly) sack the first batch of no shows and then argue the toss later. Sacked just before Christmas - that'll do wonders for the intergity of the response and Bassa's unity.
I have a great deal of sympathy for anyone who is facing a bleak future but I have no sympathy or support for anyone who threatens my livelyhood by demanding the continuation of unrealistic and un-economic pay and conditions.
Rather like the MPs are finding at the moment - it's no good bleeting about "but that's what we've always been paid" if the tide of opinion has turned against you. The world has moved on, not just a blip - it has fundamentally changed and CC have to move with it.
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Out and About
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA decided to announce the changes wef 16Nov fully aware that a ballot for IA was a highly likely outcome. It'll have been accounted (and probably even planned) for. It's a gamble, but a gamble that is heavily loaded in BAs favour.
Doing nothing, or "removing" New Fleet is simply not an option. The money has to be saved or BA will just go into a slow and painful decline. The result of which would in effect be the same as NF ..... less work and less £s for those of us currently employed as crew. It's just a case of being "managed" into it, or having it simply happen due to multiple outside influences.
Either way, we, as individuals, will have to deal with it and make whatever choices we feel are best for us, at the time that suits us.
Had the unions not been allowed to act as they have done (we all have some responsibility for that), we could all be in a very different situation now. The circumstances may not have altered, but the reactions and solutions to them could have been oh so radically different. But having realised that bassa puts the ASS into BA, that would just be a pipe-dream.
Doing nothing, or "removing" New Fleet is simply not an option. The money has to be saved or BA will just go into a slow and painful decline. The result of which would in effect be the same as NF ..... less work and less £s for those of us currently employed as crew. It's just a case of being "managed" into it, or having it simply happen due to multiple outside influences.
Either way, we, as individuals, will have to deal with it and make whatever choices we feel are best for us, at the time that suits us.
Had the unions not been allowed to act as they have done (we all have some responsibility for that), we could all be in a very different situation now. The circumstances may not have altered, but the reactions and solutions to them could have been oh so radically different. But having realised that bassa puts the ASS into BA, that would just be a pipe-dream.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that we could and should have been in a very different situation right now, but I don't really see what more we (as individuals) could have done. Unfortunately the rot is with the Union officials who should have explored all possible options, should have negotiated and should have consulted with the membership at every opportunity. Instead they have made rash decisions on our behalf (paycut, pay freeze, etc), refused to watch slideshows, refused to be in the same room with the other side of the same union (?) blah blah blah. We cannot be responsible for their behaviour.
The majority of crew are happy to work harder, so actually one crew member could have come off months ago. Yet here we are now looking New Fleet in the face, which could effectively put most of us out of work. That is a huge worry, especially since we have always been prepared to do our bit. It should never have got to this stage.
In this the final hour now, our Union need to show masses of decorum and professionalism, and do everything to negotiate some kind of settlement that will protect our jobs in the future. Whether they have the skill or even the good sense required to do that, remains to be seen.
The majority of crew are happy to work harder, so actually one crew member could have come off months ago. Yet here we are now looking New Fleet in the face, which could effectively put most of us out of work. That is a huge worry, especially since we have always been prepared to do our bit. It should never have got to this stage.
In this the final hour now, our Union need to show masses of decorum and professionalism, and do everything to negotiate some kind of settlement that will protect our jobs in the future. Whether they have the skill or even the good sense required to do that, remains to be seen.
Last edited by HiFlyer14; 14th Oct 2009 at 12:39.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HF14,
There's the rub isn't it? I suspect there's a significant majority of crew who think like you, who've been dictated to by a hardcore militancy at the very heart of BASSA. I hope and wish fervently for your preferred outcome, I think the majority of crew deserve such a conclusion. I fear, though, that BASSA have played their brinkmanship so far that the end result will be far worse than calm, measured negotiation might have achieved.
Not, before I'm lambasted with an insubstantial epithet from the CF journeymen, that I feel BA have acted with absolute integrity either.
MrB
There's the rub isn't it? I suspect there's a significant majority of crew who think like you, who've been dictated to by a hardcore militancy at the very heart of BASSA. I hope and wish fervently for your preferred outcome, I think the majority of crew deserve such a conclusion. I fear, though, that BASSA have played their brinkmanship so far that the end result will be far worse than calm, measured negotiation might have achieved.
Not, before I'm lambasted with an insubstantial epithet from the CF journeymen, that I feel BA have acted with absolute integrity either.
MrB
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Out and About
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that we could and should have been in a very different situation right now, but I don't really see what more we (as individuals) could have done. Unfortunately the rot is with the Union officials who should have explored all possible options, should have negotiated and should have consulted with the membership at every opportunity. Instead they have made rash decisions on our behalf (paycut, pay freeze, etc), refused to watch slideshows, refused to be in the same room with the other side of the same union (?) blah blah blah. We cannot be responsible for their behaviour.
The majority of crew are happy to work harder, so actually one crew member could have come off months ago. Yet here we are now looking New Fleet in the face, which could effectively put most of us out of work. That is a huge worry, especially since we have always been prepared to do our bit. It should never have got to this stage.
In this the final hour now, our Union need to show masses of decorum and professionalism, and do everything to negotiate some kind of settlement that will protect our jobs in the future. Whether they have the skill or even the good sense required to do that, remains to be seen.
The majority of crew are happy to work harder, so actually one crew member could have come off months ago. Yet here we are now looking New Fleet in the face, which could effectively put most of us out of work. That is a huge worry, especially since we have always been prepared to do our bit. It should never have got to this stage.
In this the final hour now, our Union need to show masses of decorum and professionalism, and do everything to negotiate some kind of settlement that will protect our jobs in the future. Whether they have the skill or even the good sense required to do that, remains to be seen.
For me, the answer to those questions would be a sad and regretful "No", "No" and "Yes".
Only those amongst us who have constantly questioned, voiced differing opinions and kept their hands down when everyone else's where up, can truly claim not to have any responsibility for the unions actions.
I took the easy option ........ I resigned ....... which apart from saving me £15pm, doesn't really help anyone or anything, I know.
HiFlyer14,
I am aware that you now seem realise that a horse has been allowed to bolt from the stables, so don't take what follows as personal criticism ....
Well, to be brutally honest, you (not individually, but as a cabin crew group) are all ultimately responsible. TorC has nailed it and is acknowledging that a good chunk of BASSA's members should have done more, long ago. If there really are, as we hope, a good number of clear-thinking, reasoning people amongst the BASSA membership then you should have thought more about the 'types' that you voted for in your BASSA hierarchy. It is too easy to let the 'noisy' climbers make their way into positions of responsibility in your union - perhaps you hoped/expected that the historical 'norms' and behaviour of the past would just allow BASSA to get away with its unreasonable demands and behaviour. Unfortunately that has backfired and the chickens have now come home to roost.
You have 2 major problems - the first is surviving the knife that is about to come carving through your livelihoods, and if you survive that, the second is sorting out the BASSA leadership. The latter problem is made more difficult because those self same 'leaders' (bad use of that word) have just decided (without a quorum or valid vote, I think), to delay any elections for posts in that hierarchy! BASSA members need to check very carefully the legality of what their 'leaders' did at Kempton the other day, with respect to delaying elections for BASSA posts. These people need removing quickly - all of them. They are a cosy self-seeking bunch, who have well and truly screwed the pooch! Many of them may even jump for voluntary redundancy, leaving you all to pick up the pieces!
You need to have hard-working, knowledgable, sensible folk at the helm - not selfish, noisy, illiterate, stuck-in-the-1970s table thumpers. It is up to you all to turn your union inside out and get it sorted. Out with all the old, because if you don't, the entire thing will remain tainted for decades, maybe even forever.
If you won't or can't clear out the dead wood, then start a fresh new union, with new people and let the old union wither and die, as it should.
I am aware that you now seem realise that a horse has been allowed to bolt from the stables, so don't take what follows as personal criticism ....
..... but I don't really see what more we (as individuals) could have done.
We cannot be responsible for their behaviour.
You have 2 major problems - the first is surviving the knife that is about to come carving through your livelihoods, and if you survive that, the second is sorting out the BASSA leadership. The latter problem is made more difficult because those self same 'leaders' (bad use of that word) have just decided (without a quorum or valid vote, I think), to delay any elections for posts in that hierarchy! BASSA members need to check very carefully the legality of what their 'leaders' did at Kempton the other day, with respect to delaying elections for BASSA posts. These people need removing quickly - all of them. They are a cosy self-seeking bunch, who have well and truly screwed the pooch! Many of them may even jump for voluntary redundancy, leaving you all to pick up the pieces!
You need to have hard-working, knowledgable, sensible folk at the helm - not selfish, noisy, illiterate, stuck-in-the-1970s table thumpers. It is up to you all to turn your union inside out and get it sorted. Out with all the old, because if you don't, the entire thing will remain tainted for decades, maybe even forever.
If you won't or can't clear out the dead wood, then start a fresh new union, with new people and let the old union wither and die, as it should.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA have presented a new Disruption Agreement at ACAS today. True to form, the CC unions refused to discuss it. The unions are pinning their hopes on BA reversing the impositions next Monday at a meeting with the Unite head honchoes. If BA don't (which they almost certainly won't) they are threatening a ballot for industrial action.