British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: House
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I will be voting yes on my ballot paper as i have seen the way people are treated in BA and the imposition is just another example and i don't need to look anything up as my little cabin crew brain can still think for itself.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Neither can it cope with long word in excess of one syllable!
BASSA vs Everyone else in the company who can grasp the simple premise that the whole company is up $hit creek without a paddle.
BASSA want to tell the company how big the paddle should be, what colour, BASSA should only paddle part time and have a BASSA inspector supervising all other paddlers at any other time with a 4 hour CAT turnaround rest every 2 hours. All other paddlers should be paid the same as BASSA or less and they want the paddle back when we reach calmer waters.
BASSA vs Everyone else in the company who can grasp the simple premise that the whole company is up $hit creek without a paddle.
BASSA want to tell the company how big the paddle should be, what colour, BASSA should only paddle part time and have a BASSA inspector supervising all other paddlers at any other time with a 4 hour CAT turnaround rest every 2 hours. All other paddlers should be paid the same as BASSA or less and they want the paddle back when we reach calmer waters.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well Wobble, BA is not up $*1T creek as badly as most of our competitors, but it will be after Walsh has finished with it. ALITALIA have just opened a new terminal. They are still here and apparently their inauguration of the new building was not a disaster on the scale of T5. Seems to be a much better run company than BA.
Don't forget Carnage, this is not just BASSA anymore. CC89/Amicus have joined with us. The first time in over 20 years the two unions have been united. The old divide and rule days are over. This has probably been Walsh's greatest success as a CEO.
Don't forget Carnage, this is not just BASSA anymore. CC89/Amicus have joined with us. The first time in over 20 years the two unions have been united. The old divide and rule days are over. This has probably been Walsh's greatest success as a CEO.
WWW,
your "little cabin crew brain" may be able to think for itself but it's inability to grasp the basics of spelling, punctuation and grammar is getting right on my nerves.
People might listen to you with more respect if you put even the smallest of efforts into making your posts coherent.
I might have slipped an error into this just to keep the pedants on their toes!!
your "little cabin crew brain" may be able to think for itself but it's inability to grasp the basics of spelling, punctuation and grammar is getting right on my nerves.
People might listen to you with more respect if you put even the smallest of efforts into making your posts coherent.
I might have slipped an error into this just to keep the pedants on their toes!!
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: House
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flap62 i can't grasp english very well as i didn't attend a grammar school i woz at a comprehensive enit. Although i may not be able to fly a plane im still smart enough to be able to go on nightstops and talk about things other than the good old RAF. Getting back to the point once again i don't understand why the pilots are so interested in our dispute with the company, after all we are the ones to lose if it all goes pear shape or am i wrong being on my basic salary of £12,000 unlike £50,000-£135,000 plus benefits.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WWW,
Non cabin crew are interested becasue if you win, then we are all F**ked. We want BASSA to be destroyed so a market rate (+10%) cabin crew can provide value for money.
If you get your way and contribute nothing then in a few years we'll all be unemployed, you included.
We work here too, you don't live in isolation on Planet BASSA.
CB
"Opinions are like A$$holes, everyone has one"
Non cabin crew are interested becasue if you win, then we are all F**ked. We want BASSA to be destroyed so a market rate (+10%) cabin crew can provide value for money.
If you get your way and contribute nothing then in a few years we'll all be unemployed, you included.
We work here too, you don't live in isolation on Planet BASSA.
CB
"Opinions are like A$$holes, everyone has one"
Hmmmm,
The reason the pilot force are intersted is because many of your CC colleagues have stated that they would be willing to bring down the company so that they can continue to earn way above the industry average. If the company were to fail, that might just affect the pilot community. They have a right to be interested.
The reason the pilot force are intersted is because many of your CC colleagues have stated that they would be willing to bring down the company so that they can continue to earn way above the industry average. If the company were to fail, that might just affect the pilot community. They have a right to be interested.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Fume Event
Well Wobble, BA is not up $*1T creek as badly as most of our competitors, but it will be after Walsh has finished with it.
ALITALIA have just opened a new terminal. They are still here and apparently their inauguration of the new building was not a disaster on the scale of T5. Seems to be a much better run company than BA.
this is not just BASSA anymore. CC89/Amicus have joined with us. The first time in over 20 years the two unions have been united. The old divide and rule days are over. This has probably been Walsh's greatest success as a CEO.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Welcome back PiB/Stall Pusher/Mr Perfect whoever you've decided to call yourself this time.
I was missing your ill-advised, acerbic injections to this thread.
Oh well.
BA is not up $hit creek is it? Continuously loosing money hand over fist, an intransigent Government hell bent on taxing UK aviation out of business, operating out of one of the most expensive airports in the world run by an almost bankrupt Spanish property developer. That doesn't even include all the internal problems BA faces.
I love your comparison to Alitalia as it sums up perfectly what could happen to BA albeit on a smaller scale. Alitalia was 'bunged' in excess of 1 billion euros in illegal state subsidy by Berlusconi. He then pronounced during his election campaign that Alitalia would NEVER cease to exist. Then Alitalia collapsed. All crew, pilots, ground staff, handlers, check in staff etc were dismissed with contracts canceled. CAI then, with the help of Berlusconi by dropping the mysterious 1 billion euro load onto the tax payer, re-employed only those that they wanted back i.e. good disciplinary record, good attendance record, not a union monkey etc, on totally different contracts resembling, oddly enough, those of Air One. Those contracts are locked down tight, paid at market rate (and yes the pilots STILL earn about the same a BA pilots) and contain stringent disruption clauses.
So, your little spat, if successful will see at worst the loss of the airline, at best the introduction of new contracts for all, far worse for the cabin crew and, to use another comparison, if you look at O'Leary's pay structures you will, again, find that the SH pilots pay for Captains is not wildly dissimilar to that in BA.
Any more nebulous comparisons?
I was missing your ill-advised, acerbic injections to this thread.
Oh well.
Well Wobble, BA is not up $*1T creek as badly as most of our competitors, but it will be after Walsh has finished with it. ALITALIA have just opened a new terminal. They are still here and apparently their inauguration of the new building was not a disaster on the scale of T5. Seems to be a much better run company than BA.
I love your comparison to Alitalia as it sums up perfectly what could happen to BA albeit on a smaller scale. Alitalia was 'bunged' in excess of 1 billion euros in illegal state subsidy by Berlusconi. He then pronounced during his election campaign that Alitalia would NEVER cease to exist. Then Alitalia collapsed. All crew, pilots, ground staff, handlers, check in staff etc were dismissed with contracts canceled. CAI then, with the help of Berlusconi by dropping the mysterious 1 billion euro load onto the tax payer, re-employed only those that they wanted back i.e. good disciplinary record, good attendance record, not a union monkey etc, on totally different contracts resembling, oddly enough, those of Air One. Those contracts are locked down tight, paid at market rate (and yes the pilots STILL earn about the same a BA pilots) and contain stringent disruption clauses.
So, your little spat, if successful will see at worst the loss of the airline, at best the introduction of new contracts for all, far worse for the cabin crew and, to use another comparison, if you look at O'Leary's pay structures you will, again, find that the SH pilots pay for Captains is not wildly dissimilar to that in BA.
Any more nebulous comparisons?
The original Alitalia, of course, went bankrupt a few years ago. The Italian government, who were a major shareholder, fixed the sale of their assets to a consortium of 'friendly' businessmen who relaunched the airline. They're still losing money.
Please don't think (as someone suggested a short while ago) that our government will step in and save BA in a similar manner. They won't. If BA go under then you're on your own
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guys,
Fair play for coming on here and fielding your point of view. I think, if I may, what exasperates people is that the argument is never presented in a balanced fashion. It appears to many non-CC people that there is a tendency to pick the part of the argument/world economy to suit you and ignore the information which tends against your chosen viewpoint. The comment about Alitalia is a case in point - they nearly went under repeatedly in the last 18 months, the Italian government were looking at using illegal subsidy at one point to bail them out and, when finally rescued, large tranches of the workforce were either gone or on substantially reduced terms and conditions. So, in that wider context, do you think it's an appropriate comparison?
Similarly, haranguing anyone (and it is, from so many, haranguing) who doesn't see it your way doesn't help advance the argument - if you're as convinced as you seem to be of the rightness of your position then you should be able to convince others, or at least, present a cogent response. Fumes - in that respect I enjoy the discourse with you.
Blaming pilots, WW, BF or anyone else for the collective woes of the airline industry simply isn't helping your cause and when questioned, if the only reply one can give is Bassa 100%, followed by a smilie, or some other epithet leads people to believe that many crew simply don't want to question the situation right now, merely to channel the rather inflammatory comms from BASSA.
As has been mooted on CF, come on over here tomorrow if you get your injunction and crow if it makes you feel that your future is then assured. It would be worthwhile bearing in mind what the injunction actually signifies if granted. It's certainly not the end, in all probability it's the beginning of a messy and damaging end for all sides concerned.
But, just as BASSA seem intent on feeding its' membership only those "facts" that they feel are pertinent rather than trusting the individuals concerned to be able to digest and come to a conclusion, so it doesn't suit the wider membership to seek their own analysis. Witness those of more moderate leaning on CF who are shouted at and told to wake up and smell the coffee because, it's beyond those shouting to debate, merely to rant and tell others to think what they believe.
Never has been answered and, I'd genuinely love to know the cold-headed dispassionate reason, but why did BASSA not take up the opportunity to look at the BA accounts when offered instead of suggesting it's all made up as a raid on crew terms and conditions? And please, to suggest that BA run 2 sets of books just to lie to your esteemed reps is bordering on a paranoid fantasy that, if true, would lead to many many people facing criminal charges.
MrB
Fair play for coming on here and fielding your point of view. I think, if I may, what exasperates people is that the argument is never presented in a balanced fashion. It appears to many non-CC people that there is a tendency to pick the part of the argument/world economy to suit you and ignore the information which tends against your chosen viewpoint. The comment about Alitalia is a case in point - they nearly went under repeatedly in the last 18 months, the Italian government were looking at using illegal subsidy at one point to bail them out and, when finally rescued, large tranches of the workforce were either gone or on substantially reduced terms and conditions. So, in that wider context, do you think it's an appropriate comparison?
Similarly, haranguing anyone (and it is, from so many, haranguing) who doesn't see it your way doesn't help advance the argument - if you're as convinced as you seem to be of the rightness of your position then you should be able to convince others, or at least, present a cogent response. Fumes - in that respect I enjoy the discourse with you.
Blaming pilots, WW, BF or anyone else for the collective woes of the airline industry simply isn't helping your cause and when questioned, if the only reply one can give is Bassa 100%, followed by a smilie, or some other epithet leads people to believe that many crew simply don't want to question the situation right now, merely to channel the rather inflammatory comms from BASSA.
As has been mooted on CF, come on over here tomorrow if you get your injunction and crow if it makes you feel that your future is then assured. It would be worthwhile bearing in mind what the injunction actually signifies if granted. It's certainly not the end, in all probability it's the beginning of a messy and damaging end for all sides concerned.
But, just as BASSA seem intent on feeding its' membership only those "facts" that they feel are pertinent rather than trusting the individuals concerned to be able to digest and come to a conclusion, so it doesn't suit the wider membership to seek their own analysis. Witness those of more moderate leaning on CF who are shouted at and told to wake up and smell the coffee because, it's beyond those shouting to debate, merely to rant and tell others to think what they believe.
Never has been answered and, I'd genuinely love to know the cold-headed dispassionate reason, but why did BASSA not take up the opportunity to look at the BA accounts when offered instead of suggesting it's all made up as a raid on crew terms and conditions? And please, to suggest that BA run 2 sets of books just to lie to your esteemed reps is bordering on a paranoid fantasy that, if true, would lead to many many people facing criminal charges.
MrB
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: SALISBURY
Age: 76
Posts: 706
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Response to WWW
What are your feelings towards myself & my wife who have paid in excess of £4,000 to fly to Cape Town for Christmas & New Year to celebrate our silver wedding anniversary. Presumably some of my hard earned cash will be going to pay your salary. Then again, if you & your colleagues are on strike so that my flight is cancelled then I will receive a refund. Where will then be the origin of the money with which to pay you?
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: House
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GMB officials said low-paid workers were being asked to 'subsidise' the 3,000 BA employees who were paid between £115,000 and £740,000 a year.
They were also being asked to subsidise the 1,000 staff paid between £80,000 and £115,000 who the GMB said had not been asked to make permanent change and cuts to their pay and share options plans.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1199454/Pilots-accept-paycut-save-British-Airways.html#ixzz0VtnvTJKm
They were also being asked to subsidise the 1,000 staff paid between £80,000 and £115,000 who the GMB said had not been asked to make permanent change and cuts to their pay and share options plans.
Read more: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1199454/Pilots-accept-paycut-save-British-Airways.html#ixzz0VtnvTJKm
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: House
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In response to Fincastle
Who is going to pay my Mortgage now and the next 10 years i don't think its going to be an airline that will be paying below the market rate thats if wee willie gets his way.
P.S £4,000 sounds quite alot you should have gone to comparethemarket.com
Who is going to pay my Mortgage now and the next 10 years i don't think its going to be an airline that will be paying below the market rate thats if wee willie gets his way.
P.S £4,000 sounds quite alot you should have gone to comparethemarket.com
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Wonker,
That news was from 14th July 2009.
It has been discussed to death, the permanent changes to pilots pay amount, on average, to between £4-5000 a year for the rest of each pilots career. The 'share' option was one that was suggested for the CC but BASSA wouldn't even talk about it as it involves so many 'milestones' to be hit correctly coupled with the pay out being minuscule in comparison with the annual loss.
Look back in your history of the past 10 years and see how many times the GMB Union and BASSA have re-structured their pay. I can save you the effort, none. Managers are on constantly renewed and renegotiated contracts and BALPA have re worked the pilots contracts over the past 10 years to accurately reflect the current environment.
If you want better pay then do the job that earns it.
That news was from 14th July 2009.
It has been discussed to death, the permanent changes to pilots pay amount, on average, to between £4-5000 a year for the rest of each pilots career. The 'share' option was one that was suggested for the CC but BASSA wouldn't even talk about it as it involves so many 'milestones' to be hit correctly coupled with the pay out being minuscule in comparison with the annual loss.
Look back in your history of the past 10 years and see how many times the GMB Union and BASSA have re-structured their pay. I can save you the effort, none. Managers are on constantly renewed and renegotiated contracts and BALPA have re worked the pilots contracts over the past 10 years to accurately reflect the current environment.
If you want better pay then do the job that earns it.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin
Age: 65
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ALITALIA...[s]eems to be a much better run company than BA.
The Italian government looked to sell the airline, Alitalia staff all went on strike when job cuts and changes to working practices were conditions of sale, and the purchase consortium walked away. It was only when everyone realised that the airline really would go under that the cuts/T&C changes were accepted, and Alitalia rescued.
So I'm now very confused about what it is you want to see happen at BA. You don't like Walsh, but do like the management of an airline that has made much deeper cuts to staff levels and services. You oppose the changes Walsh wants to make, and criticise him for imposing rather than negotiating them, yet BA's proposals are far less onerous than what happened at Alitalia. And the Alitalia changes were imposed on pain of the airline folding.
If your desire to resist change to BA T&C is pre-eminent, then I don't think the current Alitalia management is who you should be favouring over Walsh.
The reason I asked you in an earlier post who you would prefer to see as CEO in preference to Walsh is that I don't think those of you resisting BA have really thought through the end-game of what happens if you get your frequently-stated wish that he resigns or loses shareholder confidence. I genuinely do not see anybody out there who is credible CEO material that is going to adopt a cost cutting strategy that you'd find more acceptable. So far, the only management you've expressed admiration for is definitely less likely to be sympathetic to you. Unless you can come up with credible names to replace Walsh, and a strategy to lobby shareholders to make the change, then you need to start working on the assumption that Walsh is the guy you have to deal with. More to the point, you need to think the unthinkable, namely that maybe Walsh is your least bad alternative anyway.
To put this into context. BA made a headline loss last year of £401m. Strip out the one-offs, and BA still had an operating loss of about £200m. The consensus forecast is that BA will lose closer to £450m (on an operating basis) to March 2010, and will still be losing money at the operating level (over £50m) in the year to March 2011. Given these numbers, you will not find any support for the "this is just a blip" theory, and "temporary solutions for a temporary problem" argument. Even if Walsh goes, you will not have a replacement CEO who shares your Union's view.