British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations

[wobble2plank]

FTW,

Instead of just 'crowing' others post please, give us all the benefit of your expansive knowledge?

I can contemplate many things, one of which is that BA, as seen by the eyes of the investment community, will take on outdated practices.

The BASSA (as many of the CC don't agree with the actions of their own union) actions are potentially damaging the lives of many, many other individuals. That is why these actions are of great interest to many others who don't tow the BASSA line.

If you have good, factual reasons to back up you asinine one liners then please share them otherwise continue with your rantings. I have no 'cage' to rattle, just a different viewpoint.

[wobble2plank]

Oh dear, womble to plank - your cage seems to have been a bit rattled

Yawn, great post.

[From Tunbridge Wells]

Actually, reading back through the myriad of posts, I do actually wonder what some posters on here agendas are? If you're BA flight crew, you've had your consultation with the company - I wouldn't comment on it but good for you.

This being a cabin crew thread, why do so many of you who clearly aren't cabin crew make it your mission to try and have your views heard? It won't affect any future outcome and just serves to widen any divide between BA flight crew and cabin crew (of course, that's assuming some of you actually are flight-crew and not wannabees)?

[midman]

Originally Posted by ottergirl

We would all lose out on an hourly rate on Eurofleet at the moment just like our Flight Crew colleagues have - who could have predicted a one for one exchange rate with the Euro? And that is the trouble with a rate independent of the local cost of living, cheaper to administrate no doubt but would be more workable if the UK became a Euro zone.

I've seen this argument quoted on CF, that the hourly rate is a bad thing because the pound is weak. But have you ever stopped to question the 'Bassa received wisdom' and analyse the option yourself? Would you be surprised to hear it would mean you'd be better off today had the system been introduced on 1 Jan this year?

No? Thought not, so I'll do it for you.

For starters, on day 1 of the introduction of the system you will be provided with exactly the same spending power that you have with allowances. The pot for the year is divided into an hourly rate, as BF suggested for non-food allowances, and as was done for the pilots.

Then, the only time you lose out on any subsequent exchange rate fluctuation is when you actually spend any foreign currency. (If you spent no money abroad in the whole year, you would receive your hourly rate in your salary, and the exchange rate could double or treble with absolutely no impact on you.)

Most of the food allowances aren't actually spent, so lets say you spent as much as 30 Euros on food and drink on every nightstop. (Highly unlikely?) Lets say you had 10 nightstops /month (optimistic again), then you'd be spending 300 Euros/month maximum on food + drink.

Based on historical exchange rates, (source x-rates.com)
on 1 Jun 08 that would have cost you Ł245/month.
on 1 Jan 09 that would have cost you Ł285/month
on 1 Jun 09 that would have cost you Ł260/month
today that would cost you Ł267/month

So, in these very turbulent times with the very weak pound, fluctuations on a year on year basis have been at worst Ł40/month and that's assuming lots spent on food and drink and optimistic rostering of nightstops. You'd be better off today than at the beginning of the year. Also, actual likely spending will result in less fluctuation than this.

Also note that as Bassa suggests we are coming out of recession, surely the pound should strengthen, and then the exchange rate will actually work in your favour! You'd actually be better off each month! (I don't agree with Bassa here)

So, look at how much you actually spend on a nightstop, look at what the exchange rates are likely to do, and ask whether it's really such a hardship to switch to a guaranteed hourly rate, with all destinations having a similar value.

Having tried both systems, I'd go for hourly rate every time.

[wobble2plank]

FTW

This being a cabin crew thread, why do so many of you who clearly aren't cabin crew make it your mission to try and have your views heard? It won't affect any future outcome and just serves to widen any divide between BA flight crew and cabin crew (of course, that's assuming some of you actually are flight-crew and not wannabees)?

My bold.

This is why many posters get 'annoyed' at some, albeit a minority, of the posts in this thread and attempt to bring the real world into the 'lala lady' world of BASSA.

If you go back through this thread you will find several incidents of 'Bring BA down',' I would rather see the company fail than work for this' etc.

THIS makes it the interest of not only Cabin Crew but everone who works for BA. THIS makes it important that everyone has the option to make their opinion heard. BASSA does not have the power nor the right to bring the company down and 26,000 other employees have the right to jobs.

Until that changes discussion will continue. Remember that CC training, as required by the CAA, only takes a few days, the service might not be 'slick' but the company will continue.


edit:

It won't affect any future outcome and just serves to widen any divide between BA flight crew and cabin crew

There only exists a divide between those who wish to push and promote it. I, personally, get on very well with the CC I meet but, as the old idiom goes, you can't please all of the people all of the time.

[deeceethree]

flying_chick,

Court business isn't your strong point, is it?

The Judge decided that it was up to BA to run it's business, and ruled that the proposed changes were unlikely to be contractual, but a full hearing would be required. So he dismissed the injunction and also refused to entertain any of Unite's submissions about New Fleet. How is that a victory for BASSA, lol? Steve Turner was heard on the BBC saying that the day in court, so far, had cost into 6 figures! Brilliant - I think the accountants at Unite will quickly tire of that, lol!

And the court date has been set for February because Unite/BASSA agreed to BA's requirement for no strike to affect Christmas business!

I'd say BASSA has been well and truly done over, hah hah!

[midman]

Originally Posted by From Tunbridge Wells

Actually, reading back through the myriad of posts, I do actually wonder what some posters on here agendas are? If you're BA flight crew, you've had your consultation with the company - I wouldn't comment on it but good for you.

This being a cabin crew thread, why do so many of you who clearly aren't cabin crew make it your mission to try and have your views heard? It won't affect any future outcome and just serves to widen any divide between BA flight crew and cabin crew (of course, that's assuming some of you actually are flight-crew and not wannabees)?

The same could be asked of the Bassa reps in offering a pay cut - instead of consulting with its members, suggesting a target saving and costing out the impact on its members, resulting in a calculated percentage cut, what did your intelligent sophisticated reps say?

"We'll have what they got"

How much do you pay for this representation?

[Matt101]

FTW - Understandable really as nobody seems to be able to have an actual debate on here, all you get in return is BASSA 100% and "we shall see who is right".

I used to be CC so I know it is an intelligent and diverse community so why is that not represented here with some quantifiable facts and reasoned arguments as opposed to "I am keeping my double breakfast so there".

That argument is made even more nauseating given you haven't been asked to give up any money just to work harder to keep the company afloat, so you'll excuse me when the self righteous attitude some (not necessarily you) display when "supporting their representatives" annoys me a little.

[wobble2plank]

Matt101,

I agree with your appraisal of the overall view of the Cabin Crew.

Sadly, those who try to promote the BASSA position have only rhetoric to fall back on. There are few facts that uphold the position that BASSA holds. Anyone who looks outside of the company to see the position that the global economy is in and, with it, the position of the long haul aviation industry, would be unable to justify the lack of change that BASSA advocate.

Change is needed. It was needed post 9/11 and it is needed even more now.

If BASSA can, with facts and accountable proof, give an alternative then, please, post it. Let the nay sayers hear the counter argument to the cuts that BA wish to make. Put, in black and white, changes that will allow the savings that are required to keep the company trudging on.

Otherwise don't, please, keep plying 'BASSA 100%' without explanation.

[From Tunbridge Wells]

WTP, as I said earlier, I wouldn't question you (if you are flight crew???) on Balpa's settlement and no, I'm not going to get into the ins and outs of what Bassa are up to.

I do, however, believe one of the Balpa reps has very recently suggested that you (that's a general "you") , keep your opinions about cabin crew negotiations to yourself.

That sounds like sterling advice so maybe a good time to take a few steps back and have a reflect? Peace.

[wobble2plank]

FTW

I do, however, believe one of the Balpa reps has very recently suggested that you (that's a general "you") , keep your opinions about cabin crew negotiations to yourself.

That sounds like sterling advice so maybe a good time to take a few steps back and have a reflect? Peace.

Well, as the Crew Forum and the BASSA forum are full of how 'BALPA rolled over', 'The pilots gave in because they get their money back later', etc. I feel that trying to silence someone on a public forum with 'BALPA advised' is, somewhat, ironic.

BASSA is advocating industrial action that could severely damage the company I work for. What I fail to understand is what BASSA are gunning for? What I would like to know is what, casting aside BASSA's rhetoric, BASSA are acceptable to change over? What will the Cabin Crew Union do to assist the company to change for the future? How does BASSA, in the public eye, justify retaining the over inflated payments that LH pays?

Surely, as an employee of the company you, as a Union, are so hell bent on destroying, you owe the rest of us 'roll over and take it' dogs an explanation as to where we went wrong?

WTP, as I said earlier, I wouldn't question you (if you are flight crew???) on Balpa's settlement and no, I'm not going to get into the ins and outs of what Bassa are up to.

The forums described above have been alive with opinions as to what BALPA/Pilots should have done, some of which have been neither pretty or physically possible. BALPA negotiated within the time frame available and thus had influence on what changes/savings were made.

BASSA have neglected to take the same opportunity. Now, when imposition comes, BASSA cries foul.

So, again, what gives BASSA the right to think they can dictate the futures of all those working for BA who are not in BASSA?

Oh, and I think I can make my own mind up as to whether or not I wish to discuss this matter on a public forum. Sorry, but educated discussion will continue.

[overstress]

FTW: if such a suggestion was made I think it was probably to do with not discussing it with crew at work. You will have a hard time stopping people posting on this forum, it's up to the mods to decide what is acceptable, not you, IMHO.

However this is one of the few forums where crew can read opinions other than "yay, BASSA 100%, you lot have got it coming next etc" ('we lot' have already 'had it', BTW)

So I expect the thread will chunter on as BASSA carry on down their default path....

[From Tunbridge Wells]

Ok, will leave you all to it as I am not going to get into a flight crew/cabin crew playground scenario. In the words of Shirley Conran, "Life's too short to stuff a mushroom"
Carry on your educated debate and have fun

[Glamgirl]

Well well well, looks like I got famous!

Seriously, sticks and stones and all that. I'm fully aware that not everyone would agree with me, especially the hard-liners. I didn't expect it. Although I will take it as a complement that I'm "eloquent". Not bad for a LGW cc is it?

I'm not nor have I ever been anti crew. I'm anti stupidity and ignorance. I'm also not keen on blatant lies and mis-information as well as not representing members of a union properly. I'll explain (again):

Nobody was asked whether they were willing to accept a pay cut (as proposed by Bassa).

The injunction failure has been hailed as a success by Bassa.

Bassa refused to negotiate in regards to several things, disruption agreement and set monthly allowance instead of variable allowances are two that springs to mind instantly.

Anyone who questions Bassa's actions are shot down in flames. One might as well call them infidels. In case any of the hard-liners haven't realised this yet, we live in a democracy.

Here's the official from Bassa regarding the ballot:

For immediate issue: Saturday 7th November,
2009
The ballot of BA’s 14,000 cabin crew will open on Monday 16th November, Unite the union has announced. Unite says that BA’s continued
failure to consult properly on 2000 notified redundancies and the company’s determination to impose fundamental changes to working practices, work organisation and terms and conditions of
employment leave it no other option but to ballot the cabin crew workforce. The union says that the company’s imposed
reduction to crew numbers is unfair and unworkable leaving fewer people doing more work but for less money - and that this will hit the service to passengers. Given the safety critical role that cabin crew have onboard, Unite fears that fewer crew will only lead to a worsening service to loyal BA customers paying premium prices as they are forced to prioritise essential tasks. Unite has called the ballot in response to the company’s determination to force through a package of measures including contractual changes without agreement of the cabin crew and their union. BA's changes will be imposed from November 16th, the day the ballot opens, on all existing cabin crew, reducing crew numbers on all flights by between one and three and forcing through new working schedules. BA cabin crew have repeatedly told the management that, while they accept cost savings need to be made given current circumstances, these must be by agreement and not undermine frontline services. Earlier this year, the cabin crew offered to take a pay cut as part of comprehensive proposal aimed at retaining in-flight staffing levels and thus ensuring that customers would not lose out. The company dismissed these proposals out of hand, although Unite believes the proposals would have delivered the company tens of millions of pounds in savings year on year. The ballot will close on Monday, 14th December, 2009.

My bolds. The first relates to that LGW has been operating like this for years, so it's not unworkable. The second relates to taking off between 1-3 crew off flights by all existing crew. Ehm, hello, it's not possible to take another crew member off LGW flights. This, to me, emphasises the lack of care for LGW crew. The last bold is pretty self-explanatory, although I'll repeat that the membership were never asked. Well, apart from a couple of hundred hands.

I also see that NewFleet isn't part of the ballot. Smart move. It might be even smarter to advice (asap) the crew who think another ballot will come after this one. They believe that when the crewing issues have been balloted, and a few months down the line there will be another ballot for NewFleet (or against, should I say). This won't be possible, I'm afraid. One cannot ballot/strike about potential future income. This information should be put out to members. Actually, it must be told, and now.

I know some people will find it amusing to say nasty things about me, but go right ahead. I'm not easily offended, I've got thick skin and don't forget, I'm eloquent . Funnily enough, a couple of days ago, I had a fantastic conversation with a wonderful customer who asked me if I was a rep and when I said no, she said that I should be. Interesting, no?

Gg

[wobble2plank]

And another one bows out to be replaced by another CF pseudonym.

It was never a debate about CC/FC, it was always a debate about CC and their destruction by BASSA.

Until then.

Hopefully with good, valid and factual argument and reason.

[wobble2plank]

Earlier this year, the cabin crew offered to take a pay cut as part of comprehensive proposal aimed at retaining in-flight staffing levels and thus ensuring that customers would not lose out. The company dismissed these proposals out of hand, although Unite believes the proposals would have delivered the company tens of millions of pounds in savings year on year.

As usual, the failure to publish the facts as proven by an outside agency (PWC) that these savings (to be repaid after the recession) were not worth what Unite/BASSA portrayed, will see the ballot through!

Glam Girl, good luck in trying to convince your BASSA colleagues that what they follow is untenable.

As we have both found, if you question, with fact and reason, the BASSA line then either you are ridiculed or persuaded to 'stop discussing' your opinion.

Sad really, I would like to hear what BASSA has to offer.

[whattimedoweland]

Hi,All at Pprune.

Thought I would just pop along and say hello to you all for the first time in a year or so.Hope you are all well.

I will leave it for now with my best wishes to you all.

I'll will make another visit at around 5pm,Monday 14th November.

Until then,take care.

Kind Regards,

WTDWL.

[finncapt]

So that there is no arguement I write on pprune in several fora(e) and am a retired BA (last on the airbus) captain.
This is a public forum and I feel I am allowed to write on it.

Being retired I don't care whether BA goes bust or not as I am in APS part6 and can manage on my pension (even if it were reduced because of the current underfunding).

Whilst in BA, I voted once for strike action in the middle 90's.
I can't remember the actual reason, but my reason for voting for a strike was to protect the pilots at LGW who, as I remember it, were to be offered inferior pay and conditions (is it what is called scope?).
I think the vote for a strike was in the order of 80%+ (others may correct me if I am wrong).
The company backed down at the eleventh hour because of the strength of opinion.
Would I have gone on strike?
Probably yes but I certainly didn't want to.

What do BASSA consider is a % mandate for a strike?
What % do BASSA think is required for a strike to actually happen?
What do BASSA consider is a company concession for cancelling a strike ballot?
What do BASSA, once the strike occurs, consider is how they will end the strike?

It is all very well going on strike but you have to have to be sure that the majority will support it, if it is called, and have a clearly defined idea of how you are going to end it.
From what I read, BASSA haven't suggested how they will end it.

Do not worry, I am as passionate as every current employee to see BA continue - I gave over 30 years to it and the flying needs to be done - so let's keep it being called British Airways.

[wobble2plank]

whattimedoweland

Hope you are well are too.

Deleted, the semantics of the thread were leading to me posting things I shouldn't. Apologies.

Interestingly you posted this:

I've got to say,with one exception!!,as a CSD the 11 contract crew have been great and I will be sad to see any of them go.Hard working,enthusiastic and good fun.

Hard times at present will make it hard for BA to keep you.If I had a say there would be a lot of the dead wood/'don't give a sh*t people out before you.

Hope there is a turn round and we can welcome you back.

Perhaps that is what is coming to roost now?

[doishquattroserche]

OK ,let's try to have a think outside the box.Now all it quietly children,yes ,you at the back! then i'll begin.
The ceo (willie wash at present ,but whoever it is) wakes up one morning ,his biggest creditors call in a large cash sum,the next fuel bill/contract goes unpaid and the company is bankrupt. Not likely but just supposing .A venture capitalist comes in ,suggest the there may be a future for a similar buisness but insists on certain principals. Min LEGAL flight crew compliments and the same for cabin crew. NBO as 2 pilots ,DEL with 8 cabin crew .This would be still far easier than a SSH there and back which my pal in TUI has just done . Flight crew drive a complicated machine safely ,we are customer service in the air,the CAA safety part of our job(the legal part) can be taught in days.
What would be the market rate for us cabin crew in this circumstance ,15K all in ,maybe 20?
For pilots ,maybe 40k for an f/o and 60K a skipper ,others would go east with their useful qualifications. Would any airline east of clacton be calling out for our services,think about it.....Less than 60K in charge of a jumbo and i'd expect the insurers would be having kittens,not so with cabin crew.
Not anyones fault but a long haul aircraft with lots of seats makes flight crew costs easier to bear (they become more efficient) but does not really reduce the focus on cabin crew costs.
Vote and leave if the decision is not to your liking ,i will.The various issues ive read about losing your house are probably that you have been greedy in the boom times,haddly a reason to suggest "bringing down" a blue chip PLC .
Go easy out there........