British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fume Event:
so are the cabin crew working as per the 'imposed' changed from Nov 16th?
that is the result to which you refer I presume....
All this time plotting the end of BASSA and the destruction of our T&C's and now look at this result.
that is the result to which you refer I presume....
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One legal question: If (for arguments sake) Unite win at the High Court, is BA actually required to revert back to the old crewing levels, or is it just required to pay damages for breach of contract (which on an individual crew level must be tiny)?
As our common law system works on the basis of damages, I think it may be later.
One other point, two lets of legal teams in London are now going to have their meters running until 1 February. The total cost of this case will reach a seven figure sum in next to no time. Whoever loses is going to be hit with a huge legal bill. If BA loses, it may well just be added to the crew savings target.
As our common law system works on the basis of damages, I think it may be later.
One other point, two lets of legal teams in London are now going to have their meters running until 1 February. The total cost of this case will reach a seven figure sum in next to no time. Whoever loses is going to be hit with a huge legal bill. If BA loses, it may well just be added to the crew savings target.
Join Date: Jul 2007
Location: London, UK
Posts: 6
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One legal question: If (for arguments sake) Unite win at the High Court, is BA actually required to revert back to the old crewing levels, or is it just required to pay damages for breach of contract (which on an individual crew level must be tiny)?
As our common law system works on the basis of damages, I think it may be later.
As our common law system works on the basis of damages, I think it may be later.
English law recognises two sets of remedies for dispute: the 'common law' remedy of damages, and a variety of additional 'equitable' remedies, such as injunctions.
Damages are available to a successful claimaint by right, so if the crew suing BA prevail they will be able to claim for what they have (individually) lost as a result of BA's imposition. Given the complexity of the agreements this will be hard to calculate!
Secondly, they may in addition be given an injunction requiring BA to return to the arrangements before imposition, provided they meet a number of complex criteria. All remedies apart from damages are at the discretion of the court, so they cannot be guaranteed. Most litigants obtain what they want without problems, but were there (for instance) evidence that crew were being unreasonable in their reaction to the imposition, they might be held not to have 'clean hands' and an injunction would be unavailable. That said, even if no injunction was granted, if BA continued to break the crew's contracts BA would be liable for damages for every further day the contracts were broken, so, were the crew to succeed, it would be unlikely that BA could avoid returning to the agreements in the short term. [This could be difficult if BA have shed so many staff they haven't enough to return to previous crewing levels!].
Moreover, a ruling that imposing terms broke the contracts would not be an absolute bar to BA seeking to modify the contracts, provided it did so lawfully.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: London
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Why do the crew have to work to the imposed agreements in the meantime then .Surely if it was victory for BASSA then they would have continued to work to their current agreements at least until after the court hearing in February.
I feel sorry for a lot of the crew stuck in the middle of this with no REAL voice. Just look what happend in early 2007 when the strike was called off at the last minute they were lead up the garden path and made to look like complete fools.It was the same back then talking the talk but when it came to walking the walk well it was a diffrent story .
Interesting times ahead ! .It's the crew who are on the older contracts who should be worried more than anyone.There must be say 5000 old contract and say roughly 9000 crew are on diffrent contracts with less money as it is they have got a bad deal .
Divide and conquer the oldest trick in the book .Willy will make promotion offers to alot of the crew on the new contracts and lure them over to the new fleet.At the end of the day if it's more money on the table for them well they'll go .
I feel sorry for a lot of the crew stuck in the middle of this with no REAL voice. Just look what happend in early 2007 when the strike was called off at the last minute they were lead up the garden path and made to look like complete fools.It was the same back then talking the talk but when it came to walking the walk well it was a diffrent story .
Interesting times ahead ! .It's the crew who are on the older contracts who should be worried more than anyone.There must be say 5000 old contract and say roughly 9000 crew are on diffrent contracts with less money as it is they have got a bad deal .
Divide and conquer the oldest trick in the book .Willy will make promotion offers to alot of the crew on the new contracts and lure them over to the new fleet.At the end of the day if it's more money on the table for them well they'll go .
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: boat
Age: 57
Posts: 76
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ZZZZZZ........zzzzzzzzzzz........ZZZZZZZZ.............BA cabin crew.
Its easy to strike, just consult the French.
I thought that they, the French were meant to strike as well, didn't they?
Its easy to strike, just consult the French.
I thought that they, the French were meant to strike as well, didn't they?
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I dont understand!!!
I wonder can some one please advise as if the court hearing was about Bassa fighting BA how and why was it listed Malone V BA and not BASSA v BA or UNITE V BA. Can a petition only be in the name of an individual? me thinks not. I am puzzled how the latest BASSA propaganda machine can state that its a "Victory". If both sides reached an agreement and Imposition stays it doesn't sound much of a "Victory" to me or am I just being "dim". And after the vote and the previous meeting to suspend the election of new Reps how is it that when everyone is expecting a "strike" ballot paper - one arrives in the post but its for electing new reps!!!!!
Join Date: Jun 2008
Location: Heathrow
Posts: 19
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Point to Ponder
And I quote
"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".
If the above is the case why is it the CAA set minimum crew levels for aircraft based on the number of passengers and if an airline operates at these levels rather than above it are THEY "Materially and detrimentally affected the health and well being of its staff and passengers". Compare the crew levels on a jumbo for Lufthansa and BA. Is there a difference? I think there might be.
Ina light hearted way "How many Bassa Execs does it take to change a light bulb?" Answers on a postcard. 4 seems to be the most popular answer so far
1) 1 to change the light bulb
2) 1 to supervise the person changing the light bulb
3) 1 to hand out a card asking if the person who changed the light bulb did it properly
4) 1 to write a 20 page missive telling everyone how hard it is to change the lightbulb without supervision!!!!
"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".
If the above is the case why is it the CAA set minimum crew levels for aircraft based on the number of passengers and if an airline operates at these levels rather than above it are THEY "Materially and detrimentally affected the health and well being of its staff and passengers". Compare the crew levels on a jumbo for Lufthansa and BA. Is there a difference? I think there might be.
Ina light hearted way "How many Bassa Execs does it take to change a light bulb?" Answers on a postcard. 4 seems to be the most popular answer so far
1) 1 to change the light bulb
2) 1 to supervise the person changing the light bulb
3) 1 to hand out a card asking if the person who changed the light bulb did it properly
4) 1 to write a 20 page missive telling everyone how hard it is to change the lightbulb without supervision!!!!
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: southampton
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
INJUNCTION DENIED...date set to air BASSA laundry and countersue
"BASSA seeks injunction to stop BA imposing changes on 16th November"
Did they win? Of course they didnt! Is that not clear from the fact that the Judge supports (and insists on) BA imposing changes on November 16th...I must say it seems pretty clear to me.
Did they win? Of course they didnt! Is that not clear from the fact that the Judge supports (and insists on) BA imposing changes on November 16th...I must say it seems pretty clear to me.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: southampton
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Tiramisu, I am an airbus FO but not a BALPA rep- I'm
afraid I have neither the intellect nor the patience, though have become quite obsessed with my recent re-discovery of the 'forum'! Such an insight on occasion, but also so easily misunderstood and more importantly, so easily misunderstood to represent the voice of many, where it could very easily all be the voice of one!
afraid I have neither the intellect nor the patience, though have become quite obsessed with my recent re-discovery of the 'forum'! Such an insight on occasion, but also so easily misunderstood and more importantly, so easily misunderstood to represent the voice of many, where it could very easily all be the voice of one!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Confused?
Originally Posted by Fume Event
BA have been holed below the waterline now in spite of all the desperate arguments to the contrary here
Bassa went to court to obtain a temporary injunction against BA plans - which Bassa failed to do. This was a temporary injunction and the case was always going to be heard at a full hearing at a later date.
So where is the victory here?
If I can repeat Lord Daddy Flash's question
Fume Event, Watersidewonker, mandyconn
Can you explain HOW this is a victory for BASSA, using facts and rational?
Thanks
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am puzzled as to why BASSA/UNITE are pressing ahead with the strike ballot. This is not a dig at the CC, I just don't understand the logic. Perhaps the more savvy amongst you could explain where my logic goes awry.
The ballot will be announced on the 14th of December. From this date BASSA have between 7 and 30 days in which to take industrial action. They have to give the company 7 days notice of the action. The trial will take place on Feb 14th. 30 days from Dec 14 is Jan 11th, if there is no action by Jan 11th then another ballot will be required. These are, as I understand it, facts.
Now for the bit I don't understand. Given that there is a trial to determine whether these matters are contractual, I don't see, in fact I would be amazed if the same judge did not grant BA an injunction preventing any strike before the trial. It is after all something he is going to rule on in a few days anyway. So what value is there in pressing ahead with a ballot now - surely it would be wiser to delay the strike ballot until the the first week in Dec and announce the result in early Jan. That way as soon as the trial is settled BASSA will have a strike ready to go. Rather than that they will nw have to go to the expense of reballotting in Feb with strike action in early March.
The ballot will be announced on the 14th of December. From this date BASSA have between 7 and 30 days in which to take industrial action. They have to give the company 7 days notice of the action. The trial will take place on Feb 14th. 30 days from Dec 14 is Jan 11th, if there is no action by Jan 11th then another ballot will be required. These are, as I understand it, facts.
Now for the bit I don't understand. Given that there is a trial to determine whether these matters are contractual, I don't see, in fact I would be amazed if the same judge did not grant BA an injunction preventing any strike before the trial. It is after all something he is going to rule on in a few days anyway. So what value is there in pressing ahead with a ballot now - surely it would be wiser to delay the strike ballot until the the first week in Dec and announce the result in early Jan. That way as soon as the trial is settled BASSA will have a strike ready to go. Rather than that they will nw have to go to the expense of reballotting in Feb with strike action in early March.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin
Age: 65
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fume Event #2832
...were these the books that showed the share price doubling recently?
You are quite right that the price doubled, incidentally. In fact BA was the best performing share on the LSE in Q3. Unfortunately it was from a low base. BA has been a dog for years. Its share price high was reached in early-2007, hitting 578p. It reached its low of 110p in Q4:2009, and tested it again early this year, reaching 116p. That's an 80% fall from its high, much more than the fall in UK equities generally (the fall from peak to trough of the FTSE 100 was under 50%). BA's price is now 66% up from its low, closing at 192p on Wednesday.
I'm afraid BA's share price performance doesn't really support your argument. Over any reasonable period it has been poor.
I know how important many people here feel BA's record profits to 3/08 were. Would you be surprised to know that the share price FELL, very consistently, through the year from 4/07 to 3/08. ie the 12 months covered by those record results? The price roughly halved over that record financial period.
Interesting, don't you think?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The market is pricing in the expectation that WW will smash BASSA - it's risen 4% this morning on the back of the court's news despite a nearly £300m loss.
If he doesn't smash BASSA, they'll be coming looking for their money back (including the recent £600m injection.)
If he doesn't smash BASSA, they'll be coming looking for their money back (including the recent £600m injection.)
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin
Age: 65
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
According to The Times...
...it was a draw yseterday:
"British Airways cabin crew won the argument but lost the battle on Thursday as they sought to prevent the airline imposing changes to working practices. Unite, the union that represents 14,000 BA crew, was seeking an injunction to stop the airline reducing staff numbers on long-haul flights but the application was denied. However, BA's crew won the broader argument about whether BA may have breached crew contracts and the airline will now face trial in the High Court on February 1, the Times writes."
"British Airways cabin crew won the argument but lost the battle on Thursday as they sought to prevent the airline imposing changes to working practices. Unite, the union that represents 14,000 BA crew, was seeking an injunction to stop the airline reducing staff numbers on long-haul flights but the application was denied. However, BA's crew won the broader argument about whether BA may have breached crew contracts and the airline will now face trial in the High Court on February 1, the Times writes."
Join Date: May 2008
Location: London
Posts: 53
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WW appeared to be saying this morning on Radio 4 that the Company had had no official contact from 'the union' about any kind of industrial action over the Christmas period.
Can this really be the case?
Either WW is fibbing, or given what hjas been said on much of this thread, those employees who look to the union to help them over proposed changes etc. are being let down by their union, it would seem.
Can this really be the case?
Either WW is fibbing, or given what hjas been said on much of this thread, those employees who look to the union to help them over proposed changes etc. are being let down by their union, it would seem.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flyluke - you are right, it would appear are being VERY let down. it is a real shame as there are some VERY hard working cabin crew with no interest in all this who just want to get on with their jobs and enjoy their careers.
yes there are legal minimum crewing levels for each aircraft type. the BA cabin crew have enjoyed the luxury of extra crew while times were good. I'm not sure the crew were complaining when they received crew-down payments when operating with fewer crew? they can do it perfectly healthily and safely at Gatwick after all.....
"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".
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Finland
Age: 77
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Mandyconn
I did not say that you cannot apply for costs and that is often what happens.
I stand by my remark
"costs were not awarded until the case finally came to trial".
Someone queried why the petitioners were not Unite or Bassa.
Maybe if costs were awarded against them (Unite or Bassa) they can pay and would be expected to pay.
However, generally, individuals are not so well off and were costs awarded against them there is only so much they can pay.
I would be very worried if I were one of those individuals.
Despite what they say, this smacks of Unite wanting to keep a step away from the Bassa leadership.
I did not say that you cannot apply for costs and that is often what happens.
I stand by my remark
"costs were not awarded until the case finally came to trial".
Someone queried why the petitioners were not Unite or Bassa.
Maybe if costs were awarded against them (Unite or Bassa) they can pay and would be expected to pay.
However, generally, individuals are not so well off and were costs awarded against them there is only so much they can pay.
I would be very worried if I were one of those individuals.
Despite what they say, this smacks of Unite wanting to keep a step away from the Bassa leadership.
Join Date: Sep 2000
Location: Essex,Uk
Posts: 184
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
290 million loss announced today,nobody dreamt that leman brothers would fail.Think long and hard before you make your mind up.Even the posties have accepted their fate.From one that heard my company go bust over the radio many years ago.The fate of the company is in the hands of the financiers not the pilots,cabin crew or engineers if they don't like what they see they will call in the loans.Good luck.