British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations

[Human Factor]

I would guess so. BASSA are going to have to get their skates on pretty sharpish in order to notify BA of strike action ahead of the 16th.

That's not practically possible now. To prevent legal stoppers regarding the length of the ballot process for crews, three weeks is considered an acceptable amount of time to keep a ballot open. Due to the postal strikes, longer would probably be required.

If a "Yes" vote is forthcoming, the union have to give a week's notice of the first day of action. So ignoring the postal dispute, assuming BASSA sent out ballot papers today, the earliest a strike could happen would be on or about 22nd November, which gives a week or so of legally having to work to the new levels (ie. accepting them).

BASSA can ballot if they want I suppose but it looks like they've probably missed the boat. Which brings us back to my question from my previous post:

BASSA said they would ballot immediately if BA announced imposition. They haven't. Why not?

[bks]

. COST SAVING TALKS PAGE

. JOINT MEMBERS MEETING NOV 02

[keel beam]

How united?

So the 2nd Nov, a historical joint meeting, BASSA and CC89.

So how united is Unite?

I would suggest not very.

Unite is an amalgamation of unions joined together under one banner.

But wait, part of that amalgum has already agreed cuts etc. for BA ie engineering and ramp workers. So what now. Tony Woodley is not running a stable ship.

United we stand, divided we fall. The union is falling!

[wobble2plank]

Unite again asked why our proposal that delivered huge savings had not been accepted and the answer was avoided.

Perhaps they should read this thread where the answer to that question was posted months ago!

It became clear during the meeting that this was not about savings but about positioning “the business” for the future and that this was the first step.

What on earth does this mean? Of course the business needs to be positioned for the future. That has been the crux of this whole undertaking! To position the business to be able to continue to exist in the post credit crunch austere environment. Failure to do so would result in the failure of the business and any 'old school' contracts would be out of the window.

British Airways are imposing changes and will be breaking our agreements and contracts.

Agreements can be broken with a Union who refuses to negotiate in an effective manner and blocks any attempt at meaningful dialogue. Which parts of the contract are going to be broken? No one seems to be able to say!

Bill Francis sent out a statement cleverly worded to mislead you, emphasising some good news and either burying, or glossing over, the huge future impact this will have. Bill Francis knows exactly what it will mean for crew remaining, but he is not going to be honest enough to spell it out for you.

And neither it seems are Unite or BASSA willing to clearly state what those changes are will or will not be! Does anyone have clarity as to how, directly, the changes will affect crew, with figures, time in uniform and take home pay? None seem to have appeared as the whole shebang over massive losses seem to be conjecture.

Yet another informative press missive from Unite.

At least they have consistency in something.

[LD12986]

Question - If crew turn up and operate on the 16th and thereafter, will they be deemed to have accepted the new crewing levels? I take it that anyone that refuses to operate will be suspended - how many will do that if there is no guarantee of support for a strike?

If, as BA says, these changes are non-contractual, then from a legal point of view there should be no need for crew to indicate their acceptance, whether by written agreement or conduct.

I don't think crew operating at the revised crewing levels would prejudice a strike ballot either. If this point was ever raised, the defence would be crew had to follow instructions to avoid discliplinary action.

[TorC]

Unite again asked why our proposal that delivered huge savings had not been accepted and the answer was avoided.

Could actually be read that it was unite who "avoided" the answer that was given

[midman]

A little speculation

The fact that Bassa haven't balloted is the most interesting issue at the moment, I believe.

Bassa say that after the meeting the other day between WW and DS, they were consulting their QC. Now if Unite were confident that changes were contractual, there would be an immediate announcement of a forthcoming ballot. But there hasn't. There may be an explanation.

Perhaps DS has been told there is significant risk that BA could win on the contractural question, and has told Bassa that he won't allow the ballot. (He can veto the ballot but can't veto the strike that might follow.) Bassa now find themselves out on a limb, and their only option is to split from Unite, if they want to strike, but will expose themselves to financial ruin in short order if they aren't watertight in their legal argument.

So, they arrange a mass meeting to 'consult' with the membership to explain face to face that WW's pesky lawyers have denied them their democratic option to strike and that Unite have bottled it and let them down. Everyone else to blame but Bassa, but they get a way out without the destruction of the union.

Everyone applauds the magnificent leadership, has a meaningless vote on a couple of pointless resolutions, and goes home.

This is all conjecture, but it fits the picture?

[Ancient Observer]

Midman,
that makes sense.
The one thing that is very clear is that Woodley will not bet the Union (Unite) on a Bassa issue. He would not be allowed to do so by the union Exec. Cttee. If the lawyers have said that there is no "dispute", - no matter what Bassa might like to think, then industrial action becomes a loser for Unite.
Anyway, Woodley is much more focussed on the Vauxhall situation. Some real jobs at risk there with the possibility of involuntary redundancies - not cash laden VR as at BA.

[nuigini]

Latest info from BASSA is to operate all flights from 16th November and onwards with one less crew member. Crew should make a note of flight number and date and pass it onto BASSA for them to claim one down payment.

[overstress]

claim one down payment

That should be interesting.

[Dutchjock]

A very obviously desperate final trick from the geniuses at bassa...

Here's a beauty from their latest we-are-so-united propaganda missive:

"You are worth far more than the scant respect they credit you with.
You are the best cabin crew in the world. You have made British
Airways the company it is and you deserve to be treated far better
than this."

dear oh dear...

[midman]

Is that the best Bassa can offer their members?

BA will just laugh and say "Thanks Bassa, just put the claim forms over there, next to the shredder."

They really are desperate.

[Jean-Lill]

What will they claim for short haul because they will presumably be working with 2 down if they are crewing to LGW levels?

I travelled as a pax the other day on a 319 to LHR (2 hour flight) and there were 5 c/c on board with a very small club cabin of just a few rows.

One assumes they will soon have only 3 cabin crew on board?

[deeceethree]

Oh, good grief! BASSA to hold another rabble rousing meeting at a race course! They obviously have nothing better to do with the subscription money.

What can they possibly discuss (and I use that word advisedly) with a noticeable minority of their members, that can't be passed to those members by e-mail, or on their website. In fact, why has BASSA never given its members a single communique with hard facts, that the membership can make decisions on?

I suspect that the answer is that BASSA is incapable of communicating, and it has nothing of substance to communicate anyway. It is incapable of putting together anything coherent about the very deep hole it has dug for itself, and into which its members are being sucked.

Pointless get togthers at race courses? BASSA knows that only a handful (a couple of thousand out of a damn site more, is figuratively, a handful) of die-hards bother going to these things. But it likes to puff itself up as important, and with the die-hards there it can take all sorts of pointless votes with people who are happy to say 'yes' to anything, and make meaningless resolutions from them. Time wasters, the lot of them!

[flybymerchant]

Jill, if you think that's unsual, I flew to Heathrow from Manchester last week on a half empty 320.......SEVEN STEWARDS/STEWARDESSES!!! Can only have been about 100 passengers (no they were not all in club!) on a 25 minute flight! On enquiring as to where else they had been/were going that day, I was told, "home!"....how can BA hope to keep their head above the water when they're paying seven sets of hotel rooms, transport to and from the hotel, food and drink allowances x7 AND of course uniform costs, training costs, etc etc which some other airlines' staff have to pay themselves....FOR A TWENTY FIVE MINUTE FLIGHT?!?!?! They were strapped in for 15 of those too! As I understand it they don't even tidy up the cabin between flights as all other airhostesses do, they sit around relaxing while cleaners do it! Even the 'Safety demo' is a video recording! Pointing out the emergency exits? Some sort of low wattage flashing lightbulb might be in order!

How on earth can the cabin crew community hope not to be held responsible for all other departments in BA having increase productivity and take PAYCUTS when this is the sort of outrageous waste of money and resources that they refuse to change but that they know BAs competitors don't have to put up with?! JOIN THE REAL WORLD and stop bleating on about minor agreement changes, DONT RUN BA INTO THE GROUND BECAUSE YOU MIGHT HAVE TO WORK 5% harder....If the Union proposes a strike I think everyone hopes the union gets taken to the cleaners for holding a gun to the company's head and massively misrepresentig it's members- shame on bassa fatcats

[deeceethree]

flybymerchant

As I understand it they don't even tidy up the cabin between flights as all other airhostesses do ....

Whoops! I'm sure you meant cabin crew!

.... shame on bassa fatcats

The members of BASSA hold some responsiblity here too. The very cabin crew you mentioned in your example are likely to think that their 25 minute flight followed by going home is the norm.

[Re-Heat]

Are you sure that positioning crew weren't helping out on the service...?

[Carnage Matey!]

Positioning crew don't help out on the service, it's not in their agreement.

[Cavitation]

Why?

I'm mystified - why has there been no ballot since Unite and BASSA said strike action was "inevitable" if imposition was allowed to stand?

[bealine]

I'm mystified - why has there been no ballot since Unite and BASSA said strike action was "inevitable" if imposition was allowed to stand?

That's a no-brainer really.

Willie Walsh and his chums aren't stupid, neither are the Trades Unions.

The "imposition" of new terms only affects new entrants. Existing members are not affected.

As the Trades Unions can actually agree to about 80% of the company's demands for cost-savings, we believe that we are close to agreement - if only our management would (a) turn up to meetings at the agreed times and (b) be empowered to make decisions without having to run off and ask permission from the Royal Mail managers BA have appointed at grossly inflated salaries! (c) Remove the threat of compulsory redundancies altogether.(d) treaet the staff as human beings.

(I have to say, it's NOT Willie Walsh or the Senior Managers, but the middle rung of management who seem determined to p155 everyone off!) As with so many large companies, who needs all these middle managers anyway?

Contrary to the opinions expressed by some, UNITE, GMB and BASSA are all firmly standing together. We refuse to allow British Airways to be dragged under by "Lemmings".