British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Skylion,
There has been no proposed change to the current contract apart from a 2 year freeze on pay.
The changes to the 'agreements' are to allow aircraft crewing levels to reflect those that have been used successfully at Gatwick. Also removal of one crew member on Long Haul fleets and write in to the CSD role that they take an active part in the service. Currently the CSD role is supervisory but, to give them their due, most CSD's take part anyway.
The fly in the ointment is that, due to BASSA's innate inability to negotiate, the company will be seeking to make all savings through the introduction of 'New Fleet'. This will only affect new joiners or those who wish to transfer across. Worthy of note is that any transfer from SH to LH will only be done with a transfer to New Fleet.
New Fleet will have a totally different payment structure based upon hourly rate and fixed payments irrespective of destination. It will have a different disruption clause and shorter turnarounds. Oddly enough just like the Pilot deal that was brokered about 5 years ago.
What the dispute revolves around is that New Fleet will take away, in its first sweep, a large proportion of those lucrative, high bonus paying trips making bidding for them irrelevant.
Old fleet will be left with only those low paying trips that, normally, only junior crew get to go to as none of the 'senior' crew would ever lower themselves to bid for.
Ironically, New Fleet will result in not dissimilar pay, less time in Uniform, less disruption, better route structure and less 4 hour turnarounds in the CRC.
It works at Gatwick.
There has been no proposed change to the current contract apart from a 2 year freeze on pay.
The changes to the 'agreements' are to allow aircraft crewing levels to reflect those that have been used successfully at Gatwick. Also removal of one crew member on Long Haul fleets and write in to the CSD role that they take an active part in the service. Currently the CSD role is supervisory but, to give them their due, most CSD's take part anyway.
The fly in the ointment is that, due to BASSA's innate inability to negotiate, the company will be seeking to make all savings through the introduction of 'New Fleet'. This will only affect new joiners or those who wish to transfer across. Worthy of note is that any transfer from SH to LH will only be done with a transfer to New Fleet.
New Fleet will have a totally different payment structure based upon hourly rate and fixed payments irrespective of destination. It will have a different disruption clause and shorter turnarounds. Oddly enough just like the Pilot deal that was brokered about 5 years ago.
What the dispute revolves around is that New Fleet will take away, in its first sweep, a large proportion of those lucrative, high bonus paying trips making bidding for them irrelevant.
Old fleet will be left with only those low paying trips that, normally, only junior crew get to go to as none of the 'senior' crew would ever lower themselves to bid for.
Ironically, New Fleet will result in not dissimilar pay, less time in Uniform, less disruption, better route structure and less 4 hour turnarounds in the CRC.
It works at Gatwick.
Junior trash
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What the dispute revolves around is that New Fleet will take away, in its first sweep, a large proportion of those lucrative, high bonus paying trips making bidding for them irrelevant.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Island of Aphrodite
Age: 75
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unite Meeting Report
I am not a member of Unite, but was forwarded, by a friend, the following report which was emailed out by Bassa.
"Subject: BASSA: REPORT BACK FROM THE BRANCH TODAY
>
>
> > Sandown 2nd November 2009
> >
> > What a shame Willy Walsh and Bill Francis couldn't be at Sandown this
> > morning, but probably it was just as well for if they had they would have
> > had a nasty shock. They had previously told the UNITE leadership that
> > BASSA/AMICUS did not have an "army". They said the crews would not follow
> > their unions. They said they felt relaxed about any ballot.
> >
> > Perhaps Willy should make a call to the constable in charge of the traffic
> > flow through Esher this morning. Quite simply the High St came to a
> > standstill as thousands (yes thousands*) of stewards and stewardesses made
> > their way to a historic gathering of cabin crew united by one cause - a
> > determination to prove Walsh wrong. If he or Bill Francis still don't get
> > the message they never will and God help BA!
> >
> > The meeting - which was delayed by 45 minutes because of the congestion -
> > was opened up by the WW convenors who spoke on the background to the
> > dispute and how BA had never taken the negotiations with real intent. Asst
> > General Secretary Len McClusky then addressed the audience. He introduced
> > Steve Harris, once of WW scheduling, but more recently unfairly sacked by
> > BA. Len informed the gathering that he had a courier job for Steve. He
> > then handed Steve a letter to BA, a letter which contains 7 days notice of
> > "intent to ballot". Steve was then clapped and cheered as he left the
> > racecourse en route for Waterside.
> >
> > There then followed a Q and A session.
> >
> > The first question surrounded the grievance that had been taken out
> > against the BASSA reps and the Amicus convenor was invited to offer his
> > support to the reps, which was duly given. It was felt that any old
> > animosity between the 2 unions must now be put to one side for the greater
> > good.
> >
> > Len McClusky then re-iterated the full backing of UNITE over this
> > particular matter.
> >
> > Steve Cottingham from OH Parsons solicitors then answered some questions
> > surrounding industrial action confirming that BA cannot sack anyone for
> > taking lawful industrial action. He confirmed that every possible legal
> > step had been taken to ensure the law surrounding industrial disputes had
> > been complied with. A court is hearing the injunction, on whether BA are
> > acting illegally in their planned impositions of November 16th , later
> > this week but the ballot will still take place regardless.
> >
> > All crew were advised to work to what their roster says on the 16th
> > November and there on afterwards. If crew refuse to operate or take any
> > unusual steps it could play into BA's hands, giving them cause to injunct
> > and hinder our later attempts to take lawful action. The message was
> > reiterated again.
> >
> > Crew must work as normal ater the 16th November despite BA's imposition.
> >
> > A question from the floor then asked Ed Sabisky to confirm that there
> > would be UNITE funds made available to pay for a page advert in the
> > national press prior to industrial action and Ed confirmed that it would
> > happen if the negotiating team thought it appropriate, he also confirmed
> > that UNITE would pay GBP30 a day strike pay.
> >
> > After another question it was revealed that the ballot would close on the
> > 14th December and a meeting would be held (probably at Sandown) later that
> > day to announce the result.
> >
> > It was then asked how soon afterwards could action be taken. The
> > membership were told that a minimum 7 days notice would have to be given
> > from that date of the intention to strike.
> >
> > There was a large presence from LGW and they were told that although LGW
> > is very much seen by BA as an "experiment zone" that they too would suffer
> > even more should BA get their way and BASSA and AMICUS both reaffirmed
> > their loyalty to Gatwick crews' continued welfare. Now was not the time
> > for an US and THEM debate - we are all in this together, speaking with one
> > voice.
> >
> > The meeting closed at 13:30
> >
> > Both BASSA and AMICUS would like to thanks all crew who turned out today
> > to show their total support to the Union stance. It was the biggest ever
> > gathering of cabin crew in one place and the first time ever there has
> > been a meeting attended by all BA crew, ie BASSA and AMICUS, LHR and LGW
> > and WW and EF.
> >
> > * Should Willy or Bill wish to check the size of the cabin crew army,
> > the BASSA branch secretary has the list of today's attendees, with
> > signatures and staff nos and they are most welcome to count the names -
> > but it would take the best part of an afternoon. It might, however well be
> > time well spent although it might shatter a few cosy myths!
> >
> > Regards to all from your reps.
"Subject: BASSA: REPORT BACK FROM THE BRANCH TODAY
>
>
> > Sandown 2nd November 2009
> >
> > What a shame Willy Walsh and Bill Francis couldn't be at Sandown this
> > morning, but probably it was just as well for if they had they would have
> > had a nasty shock. They had previously told the UNITE leadership that
> > BASSA/AMICUS did not have an "army". They said the crews would not follow
> > their unions. They said they felt relaxed about any ballot.
> >
> > Perhaps Willy should make a call to the constable in charge of the traffic
> > flow through Esher this morning. Quite simply the High St came to a
> > standstill as thousands (yes thousands*) of stewards and stewardesses made
> > their way to a historic gathering of cabin crew united by one cause - a
> > determination to prove Walsh wrong. If he or Bill Francis still don't get
> > the message they never will and God help BA!
> >
> > The meeting - which was delayed by 45 minutes because of the congestion -
> > was opened up by the WW convenors who spoke on the background to the
> > dispute and how BA had never taken the negotiations with real intent. Asst
> > General Secretary Len McClusky then addressed the audience. He introduced
> > Steve Harris, once of WW scheduling, but more recently unfairly sacked by
> > BA. Len informed the gathering that he had a courier job for Steve. He
> > then handed Steve a letter to BA, a letter which contains 7 days notice of
> > "intent to ballot". Steve was then clapped and cheered as he left the
> > racecourse en route for Waterside.
> >
> > There then followed a Q and A session.
> >
> > The first question surrounded the grievance that had been taken out
> > against the BASSA reps and the Amicus convenor was invited to offer his
> > support to the reps, which was duly given. It was felt that any old
> > animosity between the 2 unions must now be put to one side for the greater
> > good.
> >
> > Len McClusky then re-iterated the full backing of UNITE over this
> > particular matter.
> >
> > Steve Cottingham from OH Parsons solicitors then answered some questions
> > surrounding industrial action confirming that BA cannot sack anyone for
> > taking lawful industrial action. He confirmed that every possible legal
> > step had been taken to ensure the law surrounding industrial disputes had
> > been complied with. A court is hearing the injunction, on whether BA are
> > acting illegally in their planned impositions of November 16th , later
> > this week but the ballot will still take place regardless.
> >
> > All crew were advised to work to what their roster says on the 16th
> > November and there on afterwards. If crew refuse to operate or take any
> > unusual steps it could play into BA's hands, giving them cause to injunct
> > and hinder our later attempts to take lawful action. The message was
> > reiterated again.
> >
> > Crew must work as normal ater the 16th November despite BA's imposition.
> >
> > A question from the floor then asked Ed Sabisky to confirm that there
> > would be UNITE funds made available to pay for a page advert in the
> > national press prior to industrial action and Ed confirmed that it would
> > happen if the negotiating team thought it appropriate, he also confirmed
> > that UNITE would pay GBP30 a day strike pay.
> >
> > After another question it was revealed that the ballot would close on the
> > 14th December and a meeting would be held (probably at Sandown) later that
> > day to announce the result.
> >
> > It was then asked how soon afterwards could action be taken. The
> > membership were told that a minimum 7 days notice would have to be given
> > from that date of the intention to strike.
> >
> > There was a large presence from LGW and they were told that although LGW
> > is very much seen by BA as an "experiment zone" that they too would suffer
> > even more should BA get their way and BASSA and AMICUS both reaffirmed
> > their loyalty to Gatwick crews' continued welfare. Now was not the time
> > for an US and THEM debate - we are all in this together, speaking with one
> > voice.
> >
> > The meeting closed at 13:30
> >
> > Both BASSA and AMICUS would like to thanks all crew who turned out today
> > to show their total support to the Union stance. It was the biggest ever
> > gathering of cabin crew in one place and the first time ever there has
> > been a meeting attended by all BA crew, ie BASSA and AMICUS, LHR and LGW
> > and WW and EF.
> >
> > * Should Willy or Bill wish to check the size of the cabin crew army,
> > the BASSA branch secretary has the list of today's attendees, with
> > signatures and staff nos and they are most welcome to count the names -
> > but it would take the best part of an afternoon. It might, however well be
> > time well spent although it might shatter a few cosy myths!
> >
> > Regards to all from your reps.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There was a large presence from LGW and they were told that although LGW is very much seen by BA as an "experiment zone" that they too would suffer even more should BA get their way and BASSA and AMICUS both reaffirmed their loyalty to Gatwick crews' continued welfare. Now was not the time for an US and THEM debate - we are all in this together, speaking with one voice.
Gatwick, we couldn't give a to$$ when BA introduced this working scheme onto you but, now that they are trying to do the same to us at Heathrow, we need your support old best buddies and pals of ours!
Nice of Unite to acknowledge that LGW would
suffer even more
It would seem that the 3250+ wasn't made up of 100% strike voters but possibly those who wish to make up their own minds prior to getting themselves tossed out on their ear by BA at Christmas. Better not say anything on CF though!
Steve Cottingham from OH Parsons solicitors then answered some questions surrounding industrial action confirming that BA cannot sack anyone for taking lawful industrial action.
Can you survive on £30 a day for the length of the tribunal?
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To repeat my previous post for the avoidance of doubt:
As a note of correction to BASSA's solicitor, you most definitely can be sacked for taking part in a legal strike. It is correct to say that any dismissal would be illegal but there is no right to reinstatement and the level of compensation is limited.
Ask yourselves two questions and think carefully about the answers.
If BASSA's solicitors know that you can be sacked, why are they not telling you of this risk?
If BASSA's solicitors do not know that you can be sacked, how can you rely that any other legal advice they may give is accurate?
Ask yourselves two questions and think carefully about the answers.
If BASSA's solicitors know that you can be sacked, why are they not telling you of this risk?
If BASSA's solicitors do not know that you can be sacked, how can you rely that any other legal advice they may give is accurate?
Impact on bookings?
Anyone know the impact on BA bookings and the resultant price decreases caused by the strike threat??
One website uses the phrase "ABBA" - Anyone but BA - to describe what's going on, in the travel trade, but the real threat to CC et al must be that if bookings go down, then the required savings will increase.
Anyone have the data?
As to replacement crew, I've recently flown with Ezy, and their standards of CC behaviour were much higher than my most recent BA flight.
My "big" flight money went to Virgin for 2 Aus flights this Jan. I'm glad I read all this thread before I booked!
One website uses the phrase "ABBA" - Anyone but BA - to describe what's going on, in the travel trade, but the real threat to CC et al must be that if bookings go down, then the required savings will increase.
Anyone have the data?
As to replacement crew, I've recently flown with Ezy, and their standards of CC behaviour were much higher than my most recent BA flight.
My "big" flight money went to Virgin for 2 Aus flights this Jan. I'm glad I read all this thread before I booked!
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
HighFlyer14 said -"LGW - obviously New Fleet is not an ideal option. However, the company HAVE to change, and we have to choose which is the lesser of two evils. The way I see it we have two choices:
1.NEGOTIATE NEGOTIATE NEGOTIATE hard on the monthly payment and give current crew some security so that routes won't be wittled away from us.
or (the UNITE option)
2. Dig your heels in, say no and strike. If you think that WW won't sack people who strike, or that this company is immune to bankruptcy then you are gravely mistaken. Pan Am, Woolworths, Lehman Bros, Northern Rock, to name but a few.
Either option is not great. But no.1 gives a fighting chance to hang on to our jobs, and the lifestyle that it affords us (time off, above average salary, cheap holidays, etc.) No.2 will send us to the dole queue, do not think it won't.
Now I'd like to ask you why you think striking would be a good career move for us and exactly what you hope to achieve?"
I agree that an hourly rate would be acceptable if was a rate that didn't effect our take home pay.I.E putting all the costs of B2B payments,destination,ETP,boxes etc. into a pot,then divided it up so it works out at an hourly rate.That would be fine.
However if there was an an argeement for this negotiated rate,then who's to say that in a years time that the company lower the hourly rate closer to their suiting.Do we hacve to then get back round the table for more talks ? And a from a year from then,the company want to lower the rate again ?
Same with the negotiate secured route.Slowly these secured routes do get wittled away.Is that when we take a stand ? Or do we take a stand,say,if the company wants us to pay for our meals,or uniforms,new entrants paying for their training,taking away our annual consession etc ?
When do we take our stand ? Or do we roll over and accept it until the next time !
I understand you concerns with regards to IA.I don't want to strike and I'm sure the vast majority of crew don't want to either,but at some point we'll be forced into it !
1.NEGOTIATE NEGOTIATE NEGOTIATE hard on the monthly payment and give current crew some security so that routes won't be wittled away from us.
or (the UNITE option)
2. Dig your heels in, say no and strike. If you think that WW won't sack people who strike, or that this company is immune to bankruptcy then you are gravely mistaken. Pan Am, Woolworths, Lehman Bros, Northern Rock, to name but a few.
Either option is not great. But no.1 gives a fighting chance to hang on to our jobs, and the lifestyle that it affords us (time off, above average salary, cheap holidays, etc.) No.2 will send us to the dole queue, do not think it won't.
Now I'd like to ask you why you think striking would be a good career move for us and exactly what you hope to achieve?"
I agree that an hourly rate would be acceptable if was a rate that didn't effect our take home pay.I.E putting all the costs of B2B payments,destination,ETP,boxes etc. into a pot,then divided it up so it works out at an hourly rate.That would be fine.
However if there was an an argeement for this negotiated rate,then who's to say that in a years time that the company lower the hourly rate closer to their suiting.Do we hacve to then get back round the table for more talks ? And a from a year from then,the company want to lower the rate again ?
Same with the negotiate secured route.Slowly these secured routes do get wittled away.Is that when we take a stand ? Or do we take a stand,say,if the company wants us to pay for our meals,or uniforms,new entrants paying for their training,taking away our annual consession etc ?
When do we take our stand ? Or do we roll over and accept it until the next time !
I understand you concerns with regards to IA.I don't want to strike and I'm sure the vast majority of crew don't want to either,but at some point we'll be forced into it !
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Overseas
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, a strike at a time when BA are losing money on just about every flight we operate (takes quite a downturn to lose £1.5m a day during the busiest time for the airline). And at a time best judged to really naff off the public.
Genius.
Not sure WW & Co will be losing much sleep over canceling loss making services for a couple of days....
Genius.
Not sure WW & Co will be losing much sleep over canceling loss making services for a couple of days....
Junior trash
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that an hourly rate would be acceptable if was a rate that didn't effect our take home pay.I.E putting all the costs of B2B payments,destination,ETP,boxes etc. into a pot,then divided it up so it works out at an hourly rate.That would be fine.
However if there was an an argeement for this negotiated rate,then who's to say that in a years time that the company lower the hourly rate closer to their suiting.
However if there was an an argeement for this negotiated rate,then who's to say that in a years time that the company lower the hourly rate closer to their suiting.
Didnt BA agree to do exactly that with the payment? Genuine question. It doesnt get much discussed elsewhere as it is percieved as against the party line on CF etc. Then with a fixed payment it doesnt really matter what routes go to new fleet any more than route transfers between LHR and LGW are an issue now?
If BA then decided to reduce it surely it would be an industrial matter for negotiation just like any other pay deal. You cant ballot now on ifs and maybes from the future only on what BA are offering now. Essentially 1 off the aircraft and no doubt a new disruption agreement.
Last edited by Hotel Mode; 3rd Nov 2009 at 13:52.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nice
Age: 74
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looking at the pictures of the people who attended the Bassa meeting, seeing that approximately 70% of the cabin crew are female, there were not that many females in the photo's. It appeared the vast majority of those at the meeting were male. Perhaps the girls were at the back or somewhere out of camera shot?
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree that an hourly rate would be acceptable if was a rate that didn't effect our take home pay.I.E putting all the costs of B2B payments,destination,ETP,boxes etc. into a pot,then divided it up so it works out at an hourly rate.That would be fine.
However if there was an an argeement for this negotiated rate,then who's to say that in a years time that the company lower the hourly rate closer to their suiting.Do we hacve to then get back round the table for more talks ? And a from a year from then,the company want to lower the rate again ?
However if there was an an argeement for this negotiated rate,then who's to say that in a years time that the company lower the hourly rate closer to their suiting.Do we hacve to then get back round the table for more talks ? And a from a year from then,the company want to lower the rate again ?
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 16
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry HighFlyer14.To answer you question on what is hoped to be acheived by IA.Firstly to withdraw the imposition and secondly,scrap the current plans for new fleet.The we can get back round the table to negotiate ! These are just my views !
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A little light entertainment in the midst....
The Daily Mash - BA STAFF CONDEMN CUSTOMERS TO CHRISTMAS WITH THEIR FAMILIES
The Daily Mash - BA STAFF CONDEMN CUSTOMERS TO CHRISTMAS WITH THEIR FAMILIES
Lets Get Wasted,
Your views? Or BASSA's views? If either, or both, then you obviously haven't done any homework have you?
BA can't afford it - an awful lot of you are overpaid and underworked. And BASSA haven't done any negotiation so far, so why should threats of strikes encourage BA to "get back round the table"? It would only result in more flouncing, hissy fits, foot-stomping and teddy throwing by BASSA - I think BA have had enough of that. Get off your precious little high-horse and get a life in the real world - its a requirement to survive in the real world.
Firstly to withdraw the imposition and secondly,scrap the current plans for new fleet.The we can get back round the table to negotiate ! These are just my views !
BA can't afford it - an awful lot of you are overpaid and underworked. And BASSA haven't done any negotiation so far, so why should threats of strikes encourage BA to "get back round the table"? It would only result in more flouncing, hissy fits, foot-stomping and teddy throwing by BASSA - I think BA have had enough of that. Get off your precious little high-horse and get a life in the real world - its a requirement to survive in the real world.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mr Bunker: Why is it a bad thing for people to spend Christmas with their families?
The only people not spending Christmas with their families will be a;ll thoise BA managers who clapped when Walsh anounced the imposition at Waterside last month. No doubt their Christmas leave will shortly be cancelled...unless of course Mr Walsh backs off.
The only people not spending Christmas with their families will be a;ll thoise BA managers who clapped when Walsh anounced the imposition at Waterside last month. No doubt their Christmas leave will shortly be cancelled...unless of course Mr Walsh backs off.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
At the first Kempton mass meeting a few months ago, after Bassa had insisted on BA's problems being a temporary blip, Bassa members voted (on its leadership's proposals) that:
1. BA's requirement for £84 million be rejected.
2. New Fleet be rejected.
3. There would be NO NEGOTIATION on these issues.
(4. A pointless vote of no confidence in Walsh)
Bassa then said they had their members mandate not to negotiate. And they didn't.
If cabin crew are now saying that the reason they are striking is to get back round the table to where they were several months ago, why have we had all these months of wasted time, and why should BA believe Bassa would negotiate?
Join Date: Nov 2000
Location: Dre's mum's house
Posts: 1,432
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The World's Favourite
What on earth are you guys doing?
Once upon a day BA was, indeed, The World's Favourite.
The service was the best...even in economy.
WTF happened that it has come to this?
Once upon a day BA was, indeed, The World's Favourite.
The service was the best...even in economy.
WTF happened that it has come to this?
Join Date: May 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are dismissed for taking industrial action for 12 weeks or less (including a period of just a few hours or days), you will be able to make a claim for unfair dismissal and your dismissal will be unfair.
It is automatically unfair for your employer to dismiss you for taking part in legal industrial action that lasts 12 weeks or less.
If an Employment Tribunal finds in your favour, you will usually be awarded compensation. Sometimes you will be given the opportunity to return to your job. You needn't take your job back, but your compensation may be lower if you don't.
Compensation is intended to put you where you would have been financially if you hadn't been sacked - there's no compensation for hurt feelings . You will be expected to minimise any financial loss by signing on, or looking for new work.
The cap is currently £66,200
So, the question is:
Will Willie sack the striking crew?
It is automatically unfair for your employer to dismiss you for taking part in legal industrial action that lasts 12 weeks or less.
If an Employment Tribunal finds in your favour, you will usually be awarded compensation. Sometimes you will be given the opportunity to return to your job. You needn't take your job back, but your compensation may be lower if you don't.
Compensation is intended to put you where you would have been financially if you hadn't been sacked - there's no compensation for hurt feelings . You will be expected to minimise any financial loss by signing on, or looking for new work.
The cap is currently £66,200
So, the question is:
Will Willie sack the striking crew?
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: uk
Age: 46
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think this is the only place ever where people go on about getting the sack if you go on a strike. You CAN ONLY GET THE SACK IF IT IS DONE ILLEGALLY!!!! Legal industrial action is JUST THAT LEGAL!! The laws are made so it is very very hard to go on strike, that much is very true, and that is why there is a long procedure in place so done correctly and to the book it is perfectly legal. Quoted by my lodger who has a 1st class degree in Employment law. 
I can only assume more of the posters on here the minority few are just jealous that they come here to vent and belittle BA cabin crew to the point one must wonder 'what do you guys really do for a living?
Also, someone said I was in the 1%
how exactly? Presuming to know me and that I don't give consistent service?? how in the world do they know that out of 14,000 cabin crew? I can assure you I am in the majority. 
I can only assume more of the posters on here the minority few are just jealous that they come here to vent and belittle BA cabin crew to the point one must wonder 'what do you guys really do for a living?
Also, someone said I was in the 1%
how exactly? Presuming to know me and that I don't give consistent service?? how in the world do they know that out of 14,000 cabin crew? I can assure you I am in the majority.