British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Despite the spin that the guys on CF are trying to put on this (suggesting this is a reasonable result as the judge has set a trial date), perhaps we should remember what we were told this injunction was about. This was merely to stop BA imposing their working practices on the 16th November. It appears this injunction has been denied.
In that respect, BASSA has failed in the petition it submitted. What interests me now is whether or not, whilst this court case remains on the docket, a strike ballot can now be called and actioned in the intervening period.
Before either side claims victory, it will be worth knowing exactly what will be brought to trial in February and, thus, whether or not this is a result of this injunction hearing or (as I suspect is more likely) part of Unite's plan all along.
MrB
In that respect, BASSA has failed in the petition it submitted. What interests me now is whether or not, whilst this court case remains on the docket, a strike ballot can now be called and actioned in the intervening period.
Before either side claims victory, it will be worth knowing exactly what will be brought to trial in February and, thus, whether or not this is a result of this injunction hearing or (as I suspect is more likely) part of Unite's plan all along.
MrB
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: London
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This seems a more in-depth summary of todays high court events. BA crews to work new rotas until court hearing - News & Advice, Travel - The Independent The judge dismissed the application for an interim injunction, commenting: "The parties have come to a compromise which I may very well have reached if I had been left to determine the matter in any event."
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that both sides reached this agreement "out of court".
I wonder were this leaves legal strike action... anyone with legal knowledge care to comment?
The fact that the reduced crewing levels will be implemented in 11 days time, means that the VRs can leave and the Part timers can go part time, and BA starts saving money.
Round 1 to BA.
If the trail goes agaisnt BA in Feb then I'm guessing new crew will have to be recruited to fill the gaps... New Fleet?
CB
I wonder were this leaves legal strike action... anyone with legal knowledge care to comment?
The fact that the reduced crewing levels will be implemented in 11 days time, means that the VRs can leave and the Part timers can go part time, and BA starts saving money.
Round 1 to BA.
If the trail goes agaisnt BA in Feb then I'm guessing new crew will have to be recruited to fill the gaps... New Fleet?
CB
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would suspect that this may influence the situation regarding the strike ballot?
Watersidewonker's champagne (ding ding) will be very chilled in his/her fridge by then
Presumably now those volunteers can take their redundancy, the part-timers can get on with it and BASSA's army will be greatly reduced in numbers. Once the crew get used to the new service and see that it is perfectly workable, appetite for strike action will fade away before you can say 'Steve Turner'...
(edited: typed at the same time as C&B above, same thoughts as me)
Watersidewonker's champagne (ding ding) will be very chilled in his/her fridge by then
Presumably now those volunteers can take their redundancy, the part-timers can get on with it and BASSA's army will be greatly reduced in numbers. Once the crew get used to the new service and see that it is perfectly workable, appetite for strike action will fade away before you can say 'Steve Turner'...
(edited: typed at the same time as C&B above, same thoughts as me)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA says that it is entitled unilaterally to reduce cabin crew complements on board their Worldwide and Eurofleet flights as these are not terms of individual cabin crew members' contracts. But Unite has said BA would be in breach of contract by imposing the changes as the existing crew complements were fixed by collective agreements with the unions and were "expressly incorporated" into their individual contracts of employment.
Its QC, John Hendy, told Mr Justice Butterfield at London's High Court that the changes would "materially and detrimentally affect the health and well-being of staff and passengers on board the flights".
BA's stance was that, while there would be a "modest increase in work output" for cabin crew, there were no health and safety concerns and the granting of an injunction would be a "commercial catastrophe".
Its QC, John Hendy, told Mr Justice Butterfield at London's High Court that the changes would "materially and detrimentally affect the health and well-being of staff and passengers on board the flights".
BA's stance was that, while there would be a "modest increase in work output" for cabin crew, there were no health and safety concerns and the granting of an injunction would be a "commercial catastrophe".
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thank you Mr Bunker, I knew your comments weren't directed at me.
Watersidewonker,
A BIG NO from me.
I'm not prepared to throw my job and Pension away after 25 plus years in BA and ruin everyone else's Christmas including mine. Unless Unite get back to the table to negotiate, the first few 100 to strike will get the sack and be signed on to New Fleet on new T's and C's. That's a guarantee.
Watersidewonker,
A BIG NO from me.
I'm not prepared to throw my job and Pension away after 25 plus years in BA and ruin everyone else's Christmas including mine. Unless Unite get back to the table to negotiate, the first few 100 to strike will get the sack and be signed on to New Fleet on new T's and C's. That's a guarantee.
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Looks like a complete triumph then! Not for BASSA or BA but for that well known legal outfit Messrs Bodgget & Scarper! Not only did they succeed in providing BALPA less than worthy legal advice but they then persuaded BASSA to part with members hard earned subscriptions to fund equally misguided court cases.
Trebles all round!
Trebles all round!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: glos
Posts: 96
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I suspect that the legal intricacies of mandating a strike against something that an employer may well be within their rights to impose will be a step too far for the legal beagles in UNITE.
If the ballot is held and the dates agreed then they will be laying themselves open to a massive damages claim if the trial in Feb goes BA's way. And given the unwillingness of today's judge to grant a temporary injunction, I wouldn't get my hopes up of any other outcome.
Come February the new crewing levels will be old hat, a few disciplinaries will have ensured that everyone abides by the new service levels, the PTWs will be settled in, the "working up" Psrs will be enjoying their new pay and the VRs will be enjoying retirement. Not very fertile ground for a call to arms I think!
This will go down in Industrial Relations history as a classic example of how NOT to represent your membership to an employer.
If the ballot is held and the dates agreed then they will be laying themselves open to a massive damages claim if the trial in Feb goes BA's way. And given the unwillingness of today's judge to grant a temporary injunction, I wouldn't get my hopes up of any other outcome.
Come February the new crewing levels will be old hat, a few disciplinaries will have ensured that everyone abides by the new service levels, the PTWs will be settled in, the "working up" Psrs will be enjoying their new pay and the VRs will be enjoying retirement. Not very fertile ground for a call to arms I think!
This will go down in Industrial Relations history as a classic example of how NOT to represent your membership to an employer.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: UK
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
By my reading of this quote from the Independent...
Surely this means that in a court of law BASSA's QC has said that they will work to the end of the trial with the new compliments. That surely makes the strike ballot null and void as the result on 14th December means a strike has to take place within 28 days, therefore on or before 11th January 2010 - but BASSA have said they will work to the end of the trial which if 5 days will be 5th February.
Interestingly the court was not "Unite vs BA" or "BASSA vs BA" but what appeared to be an individual - is there any significance in that - are BASSA therefore not implicated by this decision?
BTW - I am neither crew nor flight deck - just an interested passenger who has been watching from the sidelines for my upcoming trip to BOM and SIN.
NMS
After the trial date was agreed, Mr Hendy told the judge: "In the light of that fixture, my clients are prepared unwillingly to work the new schedules for the period of time up to the end of that trial."
Interestingly the court was not "Unite vs BA" or "BASSA vs BA" but what appeared to be an individual - is there any significance in that - are BASSA therefore not implicated by this decision?
BTW - I am neither crew nor flight deck - just an interested passenger who has been watching from the sidelines for my upcoming trip to BOM and SIN.
NMS
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting that "health and well-being" goes completely out of the window if the company comes up with extra cash (i.e. one-down payment.)
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Anyone know how much savings £/per year reducing CC numbers on board ?
Same as above if two local nights becomes one in the future ? all those hotel rooms and allowances, must be hugh !
Same as above if two local nights becomes one in the future ? all those hotel rooms and allowances, must be hugh !
PPRuNe Person
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joetom: savings somewhere near the budget that BA set earlier this year?
(Cost of disruption would be added to the required savings IMHO)
Would expect BA to clamp down very quickly on any instances of 'intransigence' on-board with the new arrangements.
(Cost of disruption would be added to the required savings IMHO)
Would expect BA to clamp down very quickly on any instances of 'intransigence' on-board with the new arrangements.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Age: 59
Posts: 72
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mandycom - Will you be working one down etc on the 16th November? - Answer YES - therefore you lost ....... awaiting your spin.
Nothing from 'Watersidewonker' either - Licking wounds???
Nothing from 'Watersidewonker' either - Licking wounds???
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: LHR
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mandy,
1-0 to BA.
VRs can leave, part timers can go part time = BA starts saving money.
BASSA crew start working to new crewing levels in 11 days time - "Under Protest"
How can it be anything but 1-0?
How would you score it bearing in mind the above?
CB
1-0 to BA.
VRs can leave, part timers can go part time = BA starts saving money.
BASSA crew start working to new crewing levels in 11 days time - "Under Protest"
How can it be anything but 1-0?
How would you score it bearing in mind the above?
CB
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: southampton
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"New Balls Please...."
Tiramisu,
I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Bunker, you are a credit to the company and a breath of fresh air in a debate that can sometimes (for understandable reasons) get a little heated.
I don't expect you to sign away your terms & conditions and welcome your willingness to work a little harder/more efficiently to keep BA afloat. I think you understand you would have at least SOME control over any potential changes through meaningful discussion, negotiation and ultimately agreement.
No one likes uncertainty, but sensible negotiation (a 2-way street) would surely go some way to offsetting that uncertainty and handing the CC some say in their future.
It is my firm belief that the CC union could have easily made 100% of the cost savings target through updating SOME (not all) working practices, working a bit harder, signing a FAIR disruption agreement and NOT taking home a penny less next year.
In fact, a canny negotiator could probably work out how much the Company averagely spends each year on CC related disruption, in millions, and argue to have it taken off the cost savings target by signing a sensible disruption agreement.
Every day I come into work and fly my standard 3 sector day, sometimes 2, sometimes 4, at least one entire crew we fly with are only doing 1 sector then going home/to hotel. If you agreed to work a more efficient roster the savings would be ENORMOUS. You could actually agree to be more efficient when at work and negotiate more days off as a result with no loss of pay.
Why not start a new union?
You seem very sensible, pragmatic, logical, you clearly love your job and are intelligent enough to investigate/research the whole picture - I know you're not alone, in fact I believe there a MASSES of like-minded, ably-gifted CC members who would join you and a valid, free-thinking, free-speaking union. Transparency & honesty is the name of the game.
CC can not honestly hand-on-heart think their union have done them any favours, and it's obvious that they've done no favours to the company, British Airways, who pays all our wages and decides our futures and pensions, whose failures are ultimately carried by the staff.
What BASSA have done:
-refusing to look at the financial books
-denying the recession
-not consulting the electorate on proposed changes
-not admitting the need for change
-refusing to negotiate with the company
-disseminated clearly false information to its members
-negligently allowing crew to believe they will STILL get paid in a strike
-GROSSLY negligently assuring them they CANNOT get fired during a strike
-not educating the members about S.O.S.R....the thing that allows BA, (from any point now on) to send any crew members (i.e. all CSDs if they like) a '90 day letter of termination' whenever it feels like it. Look it up. The only reason it hasn't is because it hasn't been provoked enough yet to justify such draconian measures...something tells me the ogre is starting to get riled (court, strike etc)
-lying to the members about the pilot's paydeal, pilots vr party, WW trying to position BA as a lowcost carrier (?!) etc, etc,
-withholding clearly true/valid information that would allow crew to formulate a rounded and informed opinion on matters
-offering a pay-cut that was not voted for or wanted by cabin crew (or BA!)
the list goes on, I mean, how they expect not to be sued by the members for gross misconduct I don't know.
I'm sorry to go on but the list does.....go on...and on....and on
("finally! ....a point!")
Tiramisu
.....can you not lead your colleagues and comrades to a better, more secure future, or do you, as so many others clearly do, fear for what I imagine is the very real threat of verbal/physical/social intimidation/abuse for questioning the unquestionable? Or are things just fine the way they are? I mean, doesn't the 100% show of agreeing, unquestioning, unwavering hands to ANYTHING ever voted for at Sanddowne/wherever not ring any alarm bells? Please...?
I wholeheartedly agree with Mr. Bunker, you are a credit to the company and a breath of fresh air in a debate that can sometimes (for understandable reasons) get a little heated.
I don't expect you to sign away your terms & conditions and welcome your willingness to work a little harder/more efficiently to keep BA afloat. I think you understand you would have at least SOME control over any potential changes through meaningful discussion, negotiation and ultimately agreement.
No one likes uncertainty, but sensible negotiation (a 2-way street) would surely go some way to offsetting that uncertainty and handing the CC some say in their future.
It is my firm belief that the CC union could have easily made 100% of the cost savings target through updating SOME (not all) working practices, working a bit harder, signing a FAIR disruption agreement and NOT taking home a penny less next year.
In fact, a canny negotiator could probably work out how much the Company averagely spends each year on CC related disruption, in millions, and argue to have it taken off the cost savings target by signing a sensible disruption agreement.
Every day I come into work and fly my standard 3 sector day, sometimes 2, sometimes 4, at least one entire crew we fly with are only doing 1 sector then going home/to hotel. If you agreed to work a more efficient roster the savings would be ENORMOUS. You could actually agree to be more efficient when at work and negotiate more days off as a result with no loss of pay.
Why not start a new union?
You seem very sensible, pragmatic, logical, you clearly love your job and are intelligent enough to investigate/research the whole picture - I know you're not alone, in fact I believe there a MASSES of like-minded, ably-gifted CC members who would join you and a valid, free-thinking, free-speaking union. Transparency & honesty is the name of the game.
CC can not honestly hand-on-heart think their union have done them any favours, and it's obvious that they've done no favours to the company, British Airways, who pays all our wages and decides our futures and pensions, whose failures are ultimately carried by the staff.
What BASSA have done:
-refusing to look at the financial books
-denying the recession
-not consulting the electorate on proposed changes
-not admitting the need for change
-refusing to negotiate with the company
-disseminated clearly false information to its members
-negligently allowing crew to believe they will STILL get paid in a strike
-GROSSLY negligently assuring them they CANNOT get fired during a strike
-not educating the members about S.O.S.R....the thing that allows BA, (from any point now on) to send any crew members (i.e. all CSDs if they like) a '90 day letter of termination' whenever it feels like it. Look it up. The only reason it hasn't is because it hasn't been provoked enough yet to justify such draconian measures...something tells me the ogre is starting to get riled (court, strike etc)
-lying to the members about the pilot's paydeal, pilots vr party, WW trying to position BA as a lowcost carrier (?!) etc, etc,
-withholding clearly true/valid information that would allow crew to formulate a rounded and informed opinion on matters
-offering a pay-cut that was not voted for or wanted by cabin crew (or BA!)
the list goes on, I mean, how they expect not to be sued by the members for gross misconduct I don't know.
I'm sorry to go on but the list does.....go on...and on....and on
("finally! ....a point!")
Tiramisu
.....can you not lead your colleagues and comrades to a better, more secure future, or do you, as so many others clearly do, fear for what I imagine is the very real threat of verbal/physical/social intimidation/abuse for questioning the unquestionable? Or are things just fine the way they are? I mean, doesn't the 100% show of agreeing, unquestioning, unwavering hands to ANYTHING ever voted for at Sanddowne/wherever not ring any alarm bells? Please...?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would guess, once CC numbers are reduced, they will only ever return if the company wants them to, think they gone forever.
Can anyone tell me, as aircraft get a higher or lower prem/econ ratio mix, do you need more/less CC to provide a reasonable service, I think on shorthaul, when prem goes over a certain number, extra CC are used, my thinking is that as some aircraft are now having less prem seats on longhaul, does this mean less CC required, or more ? Tks in adv.
Can anyone tell me, as aircraft get a higher or lower prem/econ ratio mix, do you need more/less CC to provide a reasonable service, I think on shorthaul, when prem goes over a certain number, extra CC are used, my thinking is that as some aircraft are now having less prem seats on longhaul, does this mean less CC required, or more ? Tks in adv.