British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
747-436 WATERSIDEWONKER, there is no relevance to a Pilots (I am not a pilot) salary in this thread. Using your logic of a cap for a Capt, which is less than Easyjet pay, look at their website, then you would be happy for cabin crew to have a cap under what a low cost airline pay?
Works out at about £5,150 each month take-home.
8 years ago I lodged in a LHR long haul pursars house in Cheltenham and he was clearing £4k a month and I saw the pay slips. I was Go and earning half his pay and working twice his hours and I was driving. That's a long time ago now.
I hope that's brought some clarity to the thread.
WWW
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW,
It brings clarity but, sadly, I suspect we're no further to closure. The problem here lies in people simply not wanting to believe as the truth doesn't suit their world model. The industrial fashion in BA has always been for other staff groups to use the pilot remuneration as some sort of benchmark/target/gripe (depending on the point that's to be made). Truth, whilst abundantly available, is rarely taken on board unless it's the kind that says 25% paycut!!!, 500% productivity increase!!!, pilot share deal gives it all back to them!!!. I use the exclamation marks deliberately as dispassionate debate appears beyond the BASSA style representation. We now have a large cadre of staff who define truth by the simple yardstick of whether or not their union tells them. BA are liars, BASSA are paragons of truth and virtue. FACT!! (If you catch my ironic drift). Only a few seem willing and able to look at both sides of the argument and make up their own mind, hearteningly many of them seem to be contributing to this thread.
There's a fundamentally diseased industrial model at the heart of BA and it's fed by all sides. Frankly I'm ashamed somedays.
It brings clarity but, sadly, I suspect we're no further to closure. The problem here lies in people simply not wanting to believe as the truth doesn't suit their world model. The industrial fashion in BA has always been for other staff groups to use the pilot remuneration as some sort of benchmark/target/gripe (depending on the point that's to be made). Truth, whilst abundantly available, is rarely taken on board unless it's the kind that says 25% paycut!!!, 500% productivity increase!!!, pilot share deal gives it all back to them!!!. I use the exclamation marks deliberately as dispassionate debate appears beyond the BASSA style representation. We now have a large cadre of staff who define truth by the simple yardstick of whether or not their union tells them. BA are liars, BASSA are paragons of truth and virtue. FACT!! (If you catch my ironic drift). Only a few seem willing and able to look at both sides of the argument and make up their own mind, hearteningly many of them seem to be contributing to this thread.
There's a fundamentally diseased industrial model at the heart of BA and it's fed by all sides. Frankly I'm ashamed somedays.
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: sussex
Posts: 613
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What the management have failed to grasp is that the majority of staff are intelligent enough to know that the business as a whole is in a bad way but bargaining with different groups will only cause bad feeling.
BA's problem is its unmanageable pay structure and the associated rising pay bill (drift pay) that goes with it.
A percentage pay cut from top to bottom (reversible when profits come back)
would have been accepted by all without all the nonsense that is going on at the moment.
BA's problem is its unmanageable pay structure and the associated rising pay bill (drift pay) that goes with it.
A percentage pay cut from top to bottom (reversible when profits come back)
would have been accepted by all without all the nonsense that is going on at the moment.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LGW - Hub of the Universe!
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Please BEELINE, if you're going to start pontificating on airline economics then at least do some basic reading!
Now, about reading matter, some of which are au contraire to the doom and gloom that aviation management would like us to believe:
(2005). Heathrow Airport Master Plan. June
(2005). The Best Way To Board An A-380. Available: TEAM, the Company. Last accessed 13 Oct 2009.
Air Safety Information. Available: Plane Crash News and Airline Safety and Airline Security Insights. Last accessed 02 Mar 2009.
Arnoult, Sandra. Airport Equipment and Technology.
Bonnie L. Yegidis and Robert W. Weinbach (1996). Research Methods for Social Workers. 6th ed. USA: Alleyn and Bacon. 115.
Clark, Paul (2007). Buying The Big Jets: Planning for Airiines 2. 2nd ed. Ashgate Publications.
Cohen-Nir, Dan. (2005). A380 Designed For Airports. The Environmental Benefits of the New Larger Aircraft.
Competition Commission (2009). BAA Airports Market Invesigation: A report on the supply of airport services by BAA in the UK.
Control #1724. (2007). A Practical Approach To Boarding / Deboarding an A380.
Darling, Alistair, Rt.Hon. (2003). The Future of Air Transport. UK Government White Paper.
Dinsdale, Stephen. (2006). ACI-NA Infrastructure Issues. Available: http://aci-na.org/static/entransit/stephen_dinsdale.pdf. Last accessed 02 October 2009.
Doganis, Rigas. (2006). The Airline Business in the 21st Century. 2nd ed. Routledge Ltd.
Doherty, Sharon (2008). Heathrow's Terminal 5. Chichester UK: John Wiley and Sons Limited.
Euro Control. (June 2005). EU CAA. Airline Business
Elliot, James (1997). Tourism Policies and Public Sector Management. Routledge Ltd.
Flouris, Triant, G, Oswald, Sharon, L (2006). Designing and Executing Strategy in Aviation Management. UK: Ashgate Publications.
Genottin, Jean-Paul. (2006). A380 Operations Ready for Take-off. Available: A380 Operations Ready for Take-off - - Airport Technology. Last accessed 02 October 2009.
Golafshani, Nahid . (2003). The Qualitative Report. Understanding Reliability and Validity in Qualitative Research. 8 (4), 601.
Graham, Anne (2003). Managing Airports. 3rd ed. London: Heinemann.
Hall, Michael, C Tourism Policy: Policy Processes and Relationships. 2nd ed.
Hanlon, Pat. Global Airlines: Compettion in a Transnational Industry. 3rd ed.
Holloway, Christopher, J, Taylor, Neil (2006). The Business of Tourism. Pearson.
Holloway, Stephen (2008). Straight and Level: Practical Airlines and Economics. 3rd ed. UK: Ashgate Publications.
Horstmeier,Theo,De Haan, Floris. Influence of Ground Handling on turnaround Time of New Large Aircraft Non revenue on the Ground costing $15000 per hour.
I C A O. Annexes 1 - 18. Setting Standards For International Aviation Participants
Kazda, Antonin, Caves, Robert (2004). Airport Design and Operations. 2nd ed.
Kostas Iatrou, Mauro Oretti. (2007). From Alliances to Mergers. In Airline Choices For The Future
Mowforth, Martin, Munt, Ian (2008). Toursim and Sustainability: development globalization in new tourism in the Third World. 3rd ed. Routledge Ltd.
Norris, Guy, Wagner, Mark (2005). Airbus A380: Super jumbo of the 21st Century. St Paul MN USA: Zenith.
Patterson, James, W. Galaxy Scientific Corporation. Report No DOT/FAA/AR-97/26 For US Department of Transportation.
Peterson, Ivar. (2006). Math Trek. Aircraft Boarding By The Numbers.
Pickup, Simon. (2008). Commercial Update to the PNAA Conference. 21.
Roberts, Russell. (2005). All Aboard. Available: http://cafehayek.typepad.com/hayek/2...ll_aboard.html. Last accessed 20 Mar 2009.
Rugman, Alan, M, Collinson, Simon, Hodgetts Richard, M (2005). International Business. Pearson.
Sotirios Sarantakos (1998). SOCIAL RESEARCH. Australia: Palgrave Macmillan. 139.
Stilp, Thilo,Dr. Bozin, William,G. (2006). A380 Ground Handling. A Review of Past Milestones.
Sykes, Wendy. Desai, Philly. (2009). Understanding Airport Passenger Experience. Department for Transport.
Van Den Briel,Menkes,H,L. Loading Patterns by Research Team Arkansas State University
Wahab, Saleh, Pigram, John, J (1997). Tourism Development and Growth: The Challenge of Sustainability. Routledge Ltd.
Wells, Alexander, T, Wensveen, J, G (2003). Airlines Transportation: A Management Perspective. 6th ed. Ashgate Publications.
UK Civil Aviation Authority. Requirements For Code 5 Facilities and the Introduction of A380 Aircraft Operations.
By the way, QANTAS ticket prices are higher for the A380 service - they are charging higher and the passengers are accepting the higher prices for the extra comfort, just as Airbus Industrie promised!
The Recession provided a very convenient way to drive hard-bargains. The interest rates have never been lower meaning that for companies of high-credibility, cheap finance is actually easier to obtain than ever before. In the short-term, I could understand BA wishing to get its hands on some cash reserves pretty quickly in order to establish credibility with the lending institutions - but this is all temporary stuff.
I don't hold the view at all that the aviation industry is suffering a permanent downturn - if it is, then that's due to mis-management. Convince me.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: somewhere between Miami and Havana
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
cheap finance is actually easier to obtain than ever before.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Or BA, who's re-financing wasn't granted to allow them to borrow more money at a cheaper rate. Indeed, it was granted contingent on BA making the major structural changes that BASSA et al are now raging against so very strongly.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bealine - most of the reading matter in your list predates the collapse of Lehmans and the subsequent economic downturn. Only the report on the supply of airport services in the UK and the report on understanding airport passenger experience were published this year, neither of which seem to bear any major relevance to the running of an airline.
The recession may be a convenient way to drive hard bargains if you're buying a car, it's not if you're buying a billion pounds worth of aircraft. Interest rates are punitive for that sort of cash - if you can find someone to lend it to you. Most can't as the banks are still hoarding cash to shore up their liquidity. Remember what I said about Private Equity? The days of cheap cash are gone. Have you noticed the Bank of England talking about negative interest rates to force banks to lend money? Have you noticed all those rights issues that are taking place at the moment? They're taking place because these big blue chip companies can't raise money from the banks. BA are committed to taking on a load of new 777s this year that they don't want simply because if they don't the financing deal arranged pre-downturn will lapse and they can't get a new one. Cathay had to pay for two 777s this year in cash because they couldn't get finance. One of the major problems in this downturn is the absolute, steadfast, head-in-sand refusal of BA's staff to recognise there is a problem. They're trying to apply High Street finance ideas to big business ("Interest rates are low, cash must be cheap"; "BA have a billion pounds in the bank, they're loaded") and they do not apply. The aviation industry probably isn't suffering a permanent downturn, but nobody has any idea how long the temporary downturn is going to last, and many BA employees don't seem to understand that BA have no god given right to BA exist in the industry. Think about what happened to Pan Am.
The recession may be a convenient way to drive hard bargains if you're buying a car, it's not if you're buying a billion pounds worth of aircraft. Interest rates are punitive for that sort of cash - if you can find someone to lend it to you. Most can't as the banks are still hoarding cash to shore up their liquidity. Remember what I said about Private Equity? The days of cheap cash are gone. Have you noticed the Bank of England talking about negative interest rates to force banks to lend money? Have you noticed all those rights issues that are taking place at the moment? They're taking place because these big blue chip companies can't raise money from the banks. BA are committed to taking on a load of new 777s this year that they don't want simply because if they don't the financing deal arranged pre-downturn will lapse and they can't get a new one. Cathay had to pay for two 777s this year in cash because they couldn't get finance. One of the major problems in this downturn is the absolute, steadfast, head-in-sand refusal of BA's staff to recognise there is a problem. They're trying to apply High Street finance ideas to big business ("Interest rates are low, cash must be cheap"; "BA have a billion pounds in the bank, they're loaded") and they do not apply. The aviation industry probably isn't suffering a permanent downturn, but nobody has any idea how long the temporary downturn is going to last, and many BA employees don't seem to understand that BA have no god given right to BA exist in the industry. Think about what happened to Pan Am.
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
bealine you are confusing 'downturn' with 'change'. Look back at what I said
When the recovery comes, those who will reap the benefit of the 'shining sun' (as you put it) will be those airlines who
- have a modern, fuel efficient fleet to cope with $100 oil (which BA won't have)
- have a lean, flexible, efficient workforce (which BA won't have)
- has a competitive onboard product (which BA won't have)
- can offer the most competitive fares (which BA won't be able to due to 1+2)
You fail to recognise that BA must change. Sticking your head in the sand and hoping for a return to the glory days of the late 1990s and 2006/7 will see you end up as Pan Am.
The airline industry, as far as BA is concerned, is going through a permanent change.
- have a modern, fuel efficient fleet to cope with $100 oil (which BA won't have)
- have a lean, flexible, efficient workforce (which BA won't have)
- has a competitive onboard product (which BA won't have)
- can offer the most competitive fares (which BA won't be able to due to 1+2)
You fail to recognise that BA must change. Sticking your head in the sand and hoping for a return to the glory days of the late 1990s and 2006/7 will see you end up as Pan Am.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
That the structural nature of air travel and the price people are willing to pay (adjusted for inflation) has changed fundamentally and that if we wish to be more than a footnote in a wikipedia article some few years from now, we all have to change fundamentally also. 70's union politicking and tantrums, demanding to be left alone and screaming "do it to the pilots" to paraphrase Winston in 1984 just aren't tactics that are up to scrutiny anymore.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LGW - Hub of the Universe!
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Okay, I acknowledge the point you're both making (Carnage Matey and Lord Bracken) and whilst I can see what you're driving at, if these changes are necessary, and permanent, then I am going to have to look for another job. It's sad really, you can probably tell by the bibliography with which I quickly responded that I love my career and I have a real interest in aviation - enough to want to study the subject matter in great detail.
However, 6 months from now, when my shift pay is reduced by £60 a month, I will become technically insolvent unless BA has opportunities for overtime. (At the moment, I only have £62 a month "disposable" income and I'm sure prices will rise higher than £2 a month between now and April 2010!) In October 2010, when I lose a further £60 per month, I will be sinking fast!
The canteen subsidy has been reduced. The unions have called for a boycott, but that's academic - no one but a very few can afford to eat there! I have brought my own food in ever since we moved to T5.
Now, I am an ordinary guy with a stable marriage of almost 30 years and small £30,000 mortgage. I have no children from previous relationships to support. So, if I am struggling, then there are a couple of thousand others in the same boat - that's the reason behind all this industrial unrest! It is only the young, free and single living with mum and dad or those married to breadwinners outside of the industry that can survive any cutbacks!
It is at that dangerous point that very few of us care whether BA survives or not. Much as I love the company and the job, (and I share the shame of "Dirty Tricks" and "Collusion" and the bad stuff we've got ourselves into), if it can't pay me a decent living wage, but it can pay the Board grossly inflated salaries and publicluy admits the average salary is £53,000 pa (mine is under £20,000) then there's something very far wrong!
However, 6 months from now, when my shift pay is reduced by £60 a month, I will become technically insolvent unless BA has opportunities for overtime. (At the moment, I only have £62 a month "disposable" income and I'm sure prices will rise higher than £2 a month between now and April 2010!) In October 2010, when I lose a further £60 per month, I will be sinking fast!
The canteen subsidy has been reduced. The unions have called for a boycott, but that's academic - no one but a very few can afford to eat there! I have brought my own food in ever since we moved to T5.
Now, I am an ordinary guy with a stable marriage of almost 30 years and small £30,000 mortgage. I have no children from previous relationships to support. So, if I am struggling, then there are a couple of thousand others in the same boat - that's the reason behind all this industrial unrest! It is only the young, free and single living with mum and dad or those married to breadwinners outside of the industry that can survive any cutbacks!
It is at that dangerous point that very few of us care whether BA survives or not. Much as I love the company and the job, (and I share the shame of "Dirty Tricks" and "Collusion" and the bad stuff we've got ourselves into), if it can't pay me a decent living wage, but it can pay the Board grossly inflated salaries and publicluy admits the average salary is £53,000 pa (mine is under £20,000) then there's something very far wrong!
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LGW - Hub of the Universe!
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Apologies if I'm wrong but I don't think Bealine is cabin crew.
Join Date: May 2002
Location: LGW - Hub of the Universe!
Posts: 978
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It seems to be a sign of the times, this socialist idea that we are all worth the same and that if the pilots get paid a lot then the CC and ancillary workers should get the same, or that the gap should be narrowed at the cost of the higher paid. Good old envy politics of your average union, but of course doesn’t apply to the union officials. If you want to earn pilot money then become one, it’s not easy, stressful and expensive.
......and in a modern, civilised Britain, who can afford to give away benefits to the work-shy, why should anyone be working for less than a living wage?
Not everyone hs the ability to become a pilot. I might have done, had I considered it at the right age but as a person recently invited to join SAGA, it's a little too late now!
Thatcher's Britain produced some very undesireable, hard-nosed characters and fuelled this culture of greed. The sad fact is that celebrities and the fat cats of the banking industry actually believe they are worth what they are receiving!
I always do my bit to help where I can - the homeless guy who used to sit outside Guys Hospital when I was going up every few weeks for treatment last winter always got a pasty and a hot chocolate bought for him at London Bridge when I came out. I have been touched by the wonderful people I have come across in Kenya and will do what I can to make their lives less of a hardship.
Funny old world isn't it - those that earn the least help the most!
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was just trying out my conciliatory style of typing - I'd nb'd that!
Whilst this thread debates the CC negotiations, I must say your previous post outlining your situation was genuinely saddening. I find it very depressing that the world works so as to leave someone with the service you have had and the life you've supported with it in the position you find yourself when working for a "blue-chip".
However, your understandable concern about how close you are to insolvency on a monthly basis is not one that really reflects on the crew scenario. Those that are moaning the loudest are generally the WW crew who are taking home comfortably more than you are, from your description and are unjustifiably positioned against the rest of the market. The company has offered to allow them to make their savings (and thus protect their earnings) via productivity changes, a place where ample room exists for such things to be done. The fact that the finger always points to the front of the aeroplane in their case is an irrelevance as the pilot body (as have the ground staff) have made numerous changes to productivity and pay over the years so haven't anywhere near as much to give as the crew community.
Kudos, in a perverse way, to BASSA for protecting what they've had for so long but let's not forget that it's been achieved by setting up new contract after new group after new base, thus leaving their esteemed reps and conveners on the old contract and immunised from change in an ever decreasingly numbered clique.
To try and claim that this is some kind of fight over morals and what's right is disingenuous. You'll note that it's only BASSA and the anonymous warriors of CrewForum that feel the need to make less than oblique references to the head of IFCE as a murderous character of fiction, or feel that it's acceptable to impugn the personal reputation of that individual or the CEO. The traffic isn't two way in this respect.
It's not personal for the CEO, he's not driven by malice, hatred or, as so many suggest, greed. He's been given a mandate by the corporate shareholders and the board and, as it happens, is regarded as quite suited to the task at hand. To bring BA into the 21st century and make it continually fit for purpose. The cherished dream of so many angry CC that if he and the head of IFCE were to disappear then all this would magically go away is no more than that. The board will appoint the next man or woman to do the same and so on until it's achieved or it's disappeared into dust.
Sorry to repeat one of the heresies that drive so many CC in to a frenzy but you're not the only reason passengers choose BA to fly. You're amongst one of many and if they don't all mesh together, barring certain exclusive routes, they'll go elsewhere.
There's a degree of superiority and self-righteousness that I've never encountered anywhere else about this issue (some from the opposing points of view too). To think that you, we, us or any individual staff group is so pivotally important and, individually, irreplaceable is arrogance on a profoundly dysfunctional level.
Like it or not, LGW make it work, and well. The GPM scores are so close to those of LHR WW as to be statistically insignificant (although I've seen posters on CF suggest that these are being altered to suit BA's case). To use specious argument to say that, that's because it's a 777 only down there or that the time zones crossed mean it won't work really demonstrates that you've no good counter argument to the proposition and that there is a majority held mass-delusion that LHR (WW crew especially) can do what no other base/airline can do.
You may well succeed in seeing the airline go under if you can afford to strike for as long as you think it might be necessary. But, when your salary's stopped, you're endeavouring to subsist on hardship payments from the union, the company's sacking the first 2000 crew who won't cross a picket line (regardless of legality - after all it's a lot cheaper to tie it up in a damages-limited tribunal that might take years to conclude and have no requirement for BA to take you back on), and the comms to your house are stark, to the point and troubling, what will you do? Do you honestly think that you'll all be stood around Waterside waving off the guys at the top as they leave the building? How long can you stay out for? Do you know how long BA can stay without you for, given that not all of you will strike, some of you will sick-out through fear, some think a ballot may be enough (who knows, it may...) and some will cross the line out of fear in the end. Who's got bigger pockets when the bank comes asking for your mortgage payments? Might not be comfortable thoughts but they have to be considered when thinking about partaking in a strike.
Apart from the minority (and it is) of CC who are highly qualified in other arenas, other than the rather vulgar satisfaction of having achieved your aims, where do you honestly think your next job is going to come from, let alone one that pays as it does right now? Notwithstanding the general flooding of the job market with 40,000 or so ex-BA employees?
Or are the high unemployment figures just BA spin put out there by Willie's mates in the government too? Where is it acceptable to draw the line in the conspiracy theory?
Whilst this thread debates the CC negotiations, I must say your previous post outlining your situation was genuinely saddening. I find it very depressing that the world works so as to leave someone with the service you have had and the life you've supported with it in the position you find yourself when working for a "blue-chip".
However, your understandable concern about how close you are to insolvency on a monthly basis is not one that really reflects on the crew scenario. Those that are moaning the loudest are generally the WW crew who are taking home comfortably more than you are, from your description and are unjustifiably positioned against the rest of the market. The company has offered to allow them to make their savings (and thus protect their earnings) via productivity changes, a place where ample room exists for such things to be done. The fact that the finger always points to the front of the aeroplane in their case is an irrelevance as the pilot body (as have the ground staff) have made numerous changes to productivity and pay over the years so haven't anywhere near as much to give as the crew community.
Kudos, in a perverse way, to BASSA for protecting what they've had for so long but let's not forget that it's been achieved by setting up new contract after new group after new base, thus leaving their esteemed reps and conveners on the old contract and immunised from change in an ever decreasingly numbered clique.
To try and claim that this is some kind of fight over morals and what's right is disingenuous. You'll note that it's only BASSA and the anonymous warriors of CrewForum that feel the need to make less than oblique references to the head of IFCE as a murderous character of fiction, or feel that it's acceptable to impugn the personal reputation of that individual or the CEO. The traffic isn't two way in this respect.
It's not personal for the CEO, he's not driven by malice, hatred or, as so many suggest, greed. He's been given a mandate by the corporate shareholders and the board and, as it happens, is regarded as quite suited to the task at hand. To bring BA into the 21st century and make it continually fit for purpose. The cherished dream of so many angry CC that if he and the head of IFCE were to disappear then all this would magically go away is no more than that. The board will appoint the next man or woman to do the same and so on until it's achieved or it's disappeared into dust.
Sorry to repeat one of the heresies that drive so many CC in to a frenzy but you're not the only reason passengers choose BA to fly. You're amongst one of many and if they don't all mesh together, barring certain exclusive routes, they'll go elsewhere.
There's a degree of superiority and self-righteousness that I've never encountered anywhere else about this issue (some from the opposing points of view too). To think that you, we, us or any individual staff group is so pivotally important and, individually, irreplaceable is arrogance on a profoundly dysfunctional level.
Like it or not, LGW make it work, and well. The GPM scores are so close to those of LHR WW as to be statistically insignificant (although I've seen posters on CF suggest that these are being altered to suit BA's case). To use specious argument to say that, that's because it's a 777 only down there or that the time zones crossed mean it won't work really demonstrates that you've no good counter argument to the proposition and that there is a majority held mass-delusion that LHR (WW crew especially) can do what no other base/airline can do.
You may well succeed in seeing the airline go under if you can afford to strike for as long as you think it might be necessary. But, when your salary's stopped, you're endeavouring to subsist on hardship payments from the union, the company's sacking the first 2000 crew who won't cross a picket line (regardless of legality - after all it's a lot cheaper to tie it up in a damages-limited tribunal that might take years to conclude and have no requirement for BA to take you back on), and the comms to your house are stark, to the point and troubling, what will you do? Do you honestly think that you'll all be stood around Waterside waving off the guys at the top as they leave the building? How long can you stay out for? Do you know how long BA can stay without you for, given that not all of you will strike, some of you will sick-out through fear, some think a ballot may be enough (who knows, it may...) and some will cross the line out of fear in the end. Who's got bigger pockets when the bank comes asking for your mortgage payments? Might not be comfortable thoughts but they have to be considered when thinking about partaking in a strike.
Apart from the minority (and it is) of CC who are highly qualified in other arenas, other than the rather vulgar satisfaction of having achieved your aims, where do you honestly think your next job is going to come from, let alone one that pays as it does right now? Notwithstanding the general flooding of the job market with 40,000 or so ex-BA employees?
Or are the high unemployment figures just BA spin put out there by Willie's mates in the government too? Where is it acceptable to draw the line in the conspiracy theory?
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Out and About
Posts: 268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Kudos, in a perverse way, to BASSA for protecting what they've had for so long but let's not forget that it's been achieved by setting up new contract after new group after new base, thus leaving their esteemed reps and conveners on the old contract and immunised from change in an ever decreasingly numbered clique.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
From the Telegraph
Willie Walsh's plans for British Airways - Telegraph
My Bold!
Willie Walsh's plans for British Airways - Telegraph
Christmas strikes
Walsh's five-year tenure at BA has been marked by regular clashes with the trade unions. Strikes are again looming large this Christmas following the decision by Unite, which represents 14,000 BA cabin staff, to ballot for industrial action over Walsh's decision to impose a two-year pay freeze, cut 1,700 jobs, move 3,000 staff to part-time roles, introduce new contracts (with inferior pay and conditions) for new staff, change the make-up of flight crews and reduce overseas travel allowances.
Walsh said that with losses of £400 million last year, the changes will happen regardless of any action. "Unite has failed to grasp the need to make significant changes," he said. "They will not impact on the pay or conditions of existing cabin crew and the new pay levels are still above market rates."
Lost bags, punctuality issues, route cuts and the farcical opening of T5, have contributed to a fall in BA passenger numbers (40 million in 2001/2002 to 32 million in 2008/2009). Many of these problems have been resolved but passengers’ loyalty towards BA may again be tested if this proves to be a winter of discontent.
Walsh's five-year tenure at BA has been marked by regular clashes with the trade unions. Strikes are again looming large this Christmas following the decision by Unite, which represents 14,000 BA cabin staff, to ballot for industrial action over Walsh's decision to impose a two-year pay freeze, cut 1,700 jobs, move 3,000 staff to part-time roles, introduce new contracts (with inferior pay and conditions) for new staff, change the make-up of flight crews and reduce overseas travel allowances.
Walsh said that with losses of £400 million last year, the changes will happen regardless of any action. "Unite has failed to grasp the need to make significant changes," he said. "They will not impact on the pay or conditions of existing cabin crew and the new pay levels are still above market rates."
Lost bags, punctuality issues, route cuts and the farcical opening of T5, have contributed to a fall in BA passenger numbers (40 million in 2001/2002 to 32 million in 2008/2009). Many of these problems have been resolved but passengers’ loyalty towards BA may again be tested if this proves to be a winter of discontent.
I'm probably posting in the wrong section but no one has mentioned pensions - apart from the huge NAPS deficit. As a Naps pensioner I have heard that if BA goes the NAPS pension goes with it. I would imagine that some of the CC hierarchy are in APS which is I believe, totally safe. There must be many senior BA cabin crew who are in NAPS so they have much to lose. Without commenting on the current dispute - do these cabin crew realise they risk losing their pensions as well if BA goes bust. Can someone who is knowledgable about pensions enlighten us or me. As for the proposed strike - assuming there is a YES vote - It's madness. I am still trying to fathom out what the postal strike is all about but on the picket line, I see UNITE banners. Frightening.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am aware of a certain body of opinion within the cabin crew that the pension fund going under would be a good thing because the Pension Protection Fund will obviously cover all their pension requirements whilst the overpaid Nigels will see their excessive pensions slashed. I've yet to see anyone who espouses this opinion demonstrate any knowledge of how small the PPF is in comparison to the NAPS deficit, or what they could realistically expect to receive from the fund. APS is in deficit also at the moment I believe.