British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Finland
Age: 77
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think today was all about Unite regaining control of the BASSA hotheads.
14000 at £30 per day is about £2,000,000 every 5 days.
If I was a fellow union member in Ellesmere Port, about to be made compulsory redundant, I think I would be pretty unhappy about that.
14000 at £30 per day is about £2,000,000 every 5 days.
If I was a fellow union member in Ellesmere Port, about to be made compulsory redundant, I think I would be pretty unhappy about that.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: M3 usually!
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
funny
You could actually agree to be more efficient when at work and negotiate more days off as a result with no loss of pay
As for being more efficient and working more sectors, I have only 5 days work this month (75%) and 8 available so the chance would be a fine thing. At the moment even a one sector day is better than nothing. It suits the company to split the trips so that the work is spread out amongst the crew; I'm sure you will get your wish to see us working harder when things pick up
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nice
Age: 74
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crewing levels.
On short haul aircraft they have more crew if they have a high club load, that is based on the number of club passengers booked. The cabins can be changed to suit the club/tourist bookings.
That does not apply to world wide routes because the club seats are fixed.
On short haul aircraft they have more crew if they have a high club load, that is based on the number of club passengers booked. The cabins can be changed to suit the club/tourist bookings.
That does not apply to world wide routes because the club seats are fixed.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Thanks J L,
My thinking is if the 744s 12F/70J were to become 0F/46J say for example, WTP/Econ seats would take the slack, more passengers on 744, would this change of config increase or decrease CC required to operate a reasonable service.
My thinking is if the 744s 12F/70J were to become 0F/46J say for example, WTP/Econ seats would take the slack, more passengers on 744, would this change of config increase or decrease CC required to operate a reasonable service.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: House
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Unite said it remained "very confident that the new contracts are unlawful, and we will be seeking damages for all of those working on crews which have had their numbers cut from November 16".
It added that it still believed it would be successful when the case returned to the High Court next year.
It added that it still believed it would be successful when the case returned to the High Court next year.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Joetom,
The cabin configuration on long haul is pretty much inflexible - if, however, over a period of time BA decided that customer demand required a particular class to have more seats, then it could change the config, and could change how many crew work the cabin,including increasing the crew complement, if that's what was required to achieve a particular service standard.
But (in addition to cutting costs) that's a major point of this exercise. BA want to regain control of the cabin - the company wants to decide itself the level of service provided to the customer. And BA wants to be able to decide how many crew it needs to achieve that service.
At the moment Bassa can veto any such change - in fact Bassa can make most of the important decisions in the department. Bassa are desperate to keep the balance of power in the department, but are now losing it.
The Bassa reps who personally benefit from the status quo are therefore kicking and screaming to try to fire up their largely indifferent colleagues to protect their own corner of influence.
But they are doing it at the vast cost of their rank and file members' interests.
Bassa need to be challenged from within. Who has the bottle to take on the loudmouths?
The cabin configuration on long haul is pretty much inflexible - if, however, over a period of time BA decided that customer demand required a particular class to have more seats, then it could change the config, and could change how many crew work the cabin,including increasing the crew complement, if that's what was required to achieve a particular service standard.
But (in addition to cutting costs) that's a major point of this exercise. BA want to regain control of the cabin - the company wants to decide itself the level of service provided to the customer. And BA wants to be able to decide how many crew it needs to achieve that service.
At the moment Bassa can veto any such change - in fact Bassa can make most of the important decisions in the department. Bassa are desperate to keep the balance of power in the department, but are now losing it.
The Bassa reps who personally benefit from the status quo are therefore kicking and screaming to try to fire up their largely indifferent colleagues to protect their own corner of influence.
But they are doing it at the vast cost of their rank and file members' interests.
Bassa need to be challenged from within. Who has the bottle to take on the loudmouths?
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nice
Age: 74
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Difficult question to answer.
If there were no F seats and less J seats there would be many more W and M seats. I am unsure if they would need less crew or more crew. Currently the majority of crew on a 747 work in the premium cabins when there is a 70J cabin.
If there were no F seats and less J seats there would be many more W and M seats. I am unsure if they would need less crew or more crew. Currently the majority of crew on a 747 work in the premium cabins when there is a 70J cabin.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Latest statement from Lala Land !
A High Court Judge has today ruled that BA crew have a legitimate claim against British Airways for breach of contract.
The evidence put forward in favour of the cabin crew has won them the right to a have their case heard in full on 1st Feb 2010.
Until then, cabin crew will, without prejudice, work to the imposed changes. Unite has effectively recorded their objection to such changes.
Should a permanent injunction be granted against British Airways at the trial, the cabin crew will return to current working agreements. They will also be entitled to compensation for work carried by them in the interim period of imposition.
The decision is such that British Airways were not awarded any costs today. During the hearing BA conceded that there are significant issues to be answered by them regarding the alleged breach of contract.
British Airways have today issued a statement to suggest that BA crew have lost their case. On the contrary, the court has decided that they would be best placed to pursue a permanent injunction in February.
BASSA and Amicus, both sections of Unite, are delighted with this decision.
The forthcoming ballot for industrial action is an entirely separate issue. The decision does not alter the ability of the unions to resolve matters industrially, and therefore will not detract from Unite’s ability to achieve an overwhelming ’yes’ vote in support.
Steve Turner
The evidence put forward in favour of the cabin crew has won them the right to a have their case heard in full on 1st Feb 2010.
Until then, cabin crew will, without prejudice, work to the imposed changes. Unite has effectively recorded their objection to such changes.
Should a permanent injunction be granted against British Airways at the trial, the cabin crew will return to current working agreements. They will also be entitled to compensation for work carried by them in the interim period of imposition.
The decision is such that British Airways were not awarded any costs today. During the hearing BA conceded that there are significant issues to be answered by them regarding the alleged breach of contract.
British Airways have today issued a statement to suggest that BA crew have lost their case. On the contrary, the court has decided that they would be best placed to pursue a permanent injunction in February.
BASSA and Amicus, both sections of Unite, are delighted with this decision.
The forthcoming ballot for industrial action is an entirely separate issue. The decision does not alter the ability of the unions to resolve matters industrially, and therefore will not detract from Unite’s ability to achieve an overwhelming ’yes’ vote in support.
Steve Turner
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: House
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just read the letter from Steve Turner (BA crew hero) and it seems to be very positive i won't post it as i respect the fact that:This message should not be copied, circulated or published without express prior agreement with BASSA.
So it only leaves me to say here we go the path to Sandown Park has the runners and riders ready for the fight VOTE YES, 3250 at the meeting thanks once again, we are on the march to protect our T&C. time for the Champers bye everyone.
So it only leaves me to say here we go the path to Sandown Park has the runners and riders ready for the fight VOTE YES, 3250 at the meeting thanks once again, we are on the march to protect our T&C. time for the Champers bye everyone.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hello Flybymerchant,
An excellent post, and my sentiments exactly.
I agree with you that our Unions could have negotiated a better deal for us and we would not be in the predicament we are in now. Not looking at BA's accounts, not wanting to look at slides, internal rivalry between Aimcus and BASSA has been a massive waste of time.
On a personal level, I was willing to give up a lot more than Bill Francis is now going to implement. A mentioned in a previous post by Ottergirl, we were at one point expected to finish at 2200 on our last day, work an extra day a month which has all been retracted by BF to the relief of many of my colleagues which I understand. All acceptable to me but understandably not to others.
I agree that the 1 sector days that we do are far from productive, it's nuts really. Why would a Company pay Crew to be in a 5 star hotel in Vienna all day? I often question the rationale behind doing them, though I have to admit I enjoy them!
You must have realised that as CSDs on Eurofleet we have been starved of work since January so I've not had that luxury in recent times. Whilst my basic is higher naturally, being on the old contract my allowances have been as little as £500 a month for someone on a full time contract!
The threat of New Fleet is real and getting worse as as everyone is chanting 'Strike! Strike!'
Willie Walsh is getting his wish of New Fleet quicker than he expects by CC going on strike.
If I was a TU rep, I would approach BA and urge them to negotiate, but I can't see that happening. What BA should do is perhaps trial the new crewing levels and ask crew and passengers for feedback on the service.
I am worried and as mentioned previously, the redeployment arrangements are frightening. But the representation that we have is not going to change and neither are their attitudes. On my part, I will do my best to speak to our reps but being in a minority, it's going to have little or no effect. There are many of us of the opinion that we've wasted our money on poor and lack of good representation.
A new Union would be a great idea but I wouldn't know where to start and how to form one!
Besides, I've always been an on board person giving and influencing great service on the aircraft , not an office type really.
Ps, Flybymerchant, are you a FO on the Airbus and a BALPA rep?
I think we flew together in the Summer.
An excellent post, and my sentiments exactly.
I agree with you that our Unions could have negotiated a better deal for us and we would not be in the predicament we are in now. Not looking at BA's accounts, not wanting to look at slides, internal rivalry between Aimcus and BASSA has been a massive waste of time.
On a personal level, I was willing to give up a lot more than Bill Francis is now going to implement. A mentioned in a previous post by Ottergirl, we were at one point expected to finish at 2200 on our last day, work an extra day a month which has all been retracted by BF to the relief of many of my colleagues which I understand. All acceptable to me but understandably not to others.
I agree that the 1 sector days that we do are far from productive, it's nuts really. Why would a Company pay Crew to be in a 5 star hotel in Vienna all day? I often question the rationale behind doing them, though I have to admit I enjoy them!
You must have realised that as CSDs on Eurofleet we have been starved of work since January so I've not had that luxury in recent times. Whilst my basic is higher naturally, being on the old contract my allowances have been as little as £500 a month for someone on a full time contract!
The threat of New Fleet is real and getting worse as as everyone is chanting 'Strike! Strike!'
Willie Walsh is getting his wish of New Fleet quicker than he expects by CC going on strike.
If I was a TU rep, I would approach BA and urge them to negotiate, but I can't see that happening. What BA should do is perhaps trial the new crewing levels and ask crew and passengers for feedback on the service.
I am worried and as mentioned previously, the redeployment arrangements are frightening. But the representation that we have is not going to change and neither are their attitudes. On my part, I will do my best to speak to our reps but being in a minority, it's going to have little or no effect. There are many of us of the opinion that we've wasted our money on poor and lack of good representation.
A new Union would be a great idea but I wouldn't know where to start and how to form one!
Besides, I've always been an on board person giving and influencing great service on the aircraft , not an office type really.
Ps, Flybymerchant, are you a FO on the Airbus and a BALPA rep?
I think we flew together in the Summer.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
How, may I ask, is not achieving your temporary injunction a victory. It was ever most likely that, having chosen the court route, Unite would be allowed the opportunity of presenting it at full hearing so, surely, trial in February or no, a victory would have been the judge granting the injunction subject to further hearing in February deciding the legalities of the case. The fact he felt no such compunction suggests to me that the case is far from won (by either side). Indeed, I wonder what, if any, precedent might be argued come February from the judge having allowed BA to set new terms and conditions as of Nov 16th.
I feel that, once again, rhetoric comes to Pprune and CrewForum banging the big drum and would be much happier once I've read the transcript of the proceedings if they become available.
MrB
I feel that, once again, rhetoric comes to Pprune and CrewForum banging the big drum and would be much happier once I've read the transcript of the proceedings if they become available.
MrB
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 1
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A High Court Judge has today ruled that BA crew have a legitimate claim against British Airways for breach of contract.
The evidence put forward in favour of the cabin crew has won them the right to a have their case heard in full on 1st Feb 2010.
Until then, cabin crew will, without prejudice, work to the imposed changes. Unite has effectively recorded their objection to such changes.
Should a permanent injunction be granted against British Airways at the trial, the cabin crew will return to current working agreements. They will also be entitled to compensation for work carried by them in the interim period of imposition.
The decision is such that British Airways were not awarded any costs today. During the hearing BA conceded that there are significant issues to be answered by them regarding the alleged breach of contract.
British Airways have today issued a statement to suggest that BA crew have lost their case. On the contrary, the court has decided that they would be best placed to pursue a permanent injunction in February.
BASSA and Amicus, both sections of Unite, are delighted with this decision.
The forthcoming ballot for industrial action is an entirely separate issue. The decision does not alter the ability of the unions to resolve matters industrially, and therefore will not detract from Unite’s ability to achieve an overwhelming ’yes’ vote in support.
Steve Turner
The evidence put forward in favour of the cabin crew has won them the right to a have their case heard in full on 1st Feb 2010.
Until then, cabin crew will, without prejudice, work to the imposed changes. Unite has effectively recorded their objection to such changes.
Should a permanent injunction be granted against British Airways at the trial, the cabin crew will return to current working agreements. They will also be entitled to compensation for work carried by them in the interim period of imposition.
The decision is such that British Airways were not awarded any costs today. During the hearing BA conceded that there are significant issues to be answered by them regarding the alleged breach of contract.
British Airways have today issued a statement to suggest that BA crew have lost their case. On the contrary, the court has decided that they would be best placed to pursue a permanent injunction in February.
BASSA and Amicus, both sections of Unite, are delighted with this decision.
The forthcoming ballot for industrial action is an entirely separate issue. The decision does not alter the ability of the unions to resolve matters industrially, and therefore will not detract from Unite’s ability to achieve an overwhelming ’yes’ vote in support.
Steve Turner
I notice that the words "dismiss", "reject" and "refuse" don't appear anywhere in the statement. But that is precisely what the Judge did: he refused the application for an interim injunction. The union is in no better position than it would have been in had it never made the application for an interim injunction.
Moreover, the Judge made it very clear that he would have dismissed the application had the unions not managed to agree with BA not to pursue it. That is a shot across the unions' bows; if they were advised that they would win this hearing, they ought to think twice about where they are getting their legal advice.
Nor did the Court decide that the union would be "best placed" to puruse their claim at any particular time. Having made their opening submissions, the union capitulated (presumably seeing the writing on the wall - and realising that even they could not re-write an adverse judgment as a "GREAT RESULT"). So the unions agreed with BA that no costs would be sought against the union if it agreed to drop its application. The Judge only ruled on the application before him, and he dismissed it because the union decided (in effect) to abandon their application.
But the fact that the union has had to walk away with its tail between its legs is no obstacle to another round of, frankly, lies. If they are "delighted" with the result, they have less sense than we thought.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: House
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well at least BASSA are willing to have a go in court unlike another union i dare to mention. A big yes vote and a workforce unwilling not to see T&C eroded makes this fight worth a shot after all many of us don't want to get into bed with BA for fear of catching something.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Time for Walsh to Resign
Ha ha hahaha!!!!!
OH the tears are running down my face. You PPRUNERS must feel so let down by Walsh. All this time plotting the end of BASSA and the destruction of our T&C's and now look at this result.
Walsh's position is now untenable. He should resign forthwith. And as far as the daft post about starting another union - BA would love that and we will never make that mistake again. How ridiculous BALPA now look picking the wrong battle with Walsh over OpenSkies. So much for intelligent and elegant negotiating.
Now BA are really in a corner. They are in the unenviable position of trying to shaft us and at the same time wanting us to make their impositions work. Well it aint goner happen.
Interesting times ahead. And don't say I didn't tell you.
OH the tears are running down my face. You PPRUNERS must feel so let down by Walsh. All this time plotting the end of BASSA and the destruction of our T&C's and now look at this result.
Walsh's position is now untenable. He should resign forthwith. And as far as the daft post about starting another union - BA would love that and we will never make that mistake again. How ridiculous BALPA now look picking the wrong battle with Walsh over OpenSkies. So much for intelligent and elegant negotiating.
Now BA are really in a corner. They are in the unenviable position of trying to shaft us and at the same time wanting us to make their impositions work. Well it aint goner happen.
Interesting times ahead. And don't say I didn't tell you.
Last edited by Fume Event; 5th Nov 2009 at 20:40.
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: House
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So the more i read the more i feel today has been another step towards victory for BASSA im going to enjoy the next few days bus trips putting a point across about this little dispute. Well done all the BASSA team,Steve and the legal team involved our day will come BA is on the backfoot can't wait for the result on the 14th December.