British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by midman
I'm not sure I understand - where will the difficulties lie in WW in providing the service on say a standard JFK flight?
Bearing in mind it's still a minority of flights with IFE problems, the product has been reduced, and the CSD is there to man a trolley to fill the gap of the lost crewmember.
Worst case scenario as I see it is that the crew rest will be reduced marginally. (No hardship on the Bombay I did last week when half the crew were in bed 1.15 after take-off)
I'm not sure I understand - where will the difficulties lie in WW in providing the service on say a standard JFK flight?
Bearing in mind it's still a minority of flights with IFE problems, the product has been reduced, and the CSD is there to man a trolley to fill the gap of the lost crewmember.
Worst case scenario as I see it is that the crew rest will be reduced marginally. (No hardship on the Bombay I did last week when half the crew were in bed 1.15 after take-off)
It's great to hear that taking a crew member off a flight will only reduce crew rest.
My post was based only from what I read on the BA ESS Forum through CSD and Purser postings and talking to friends who are CSDs on Worldwide.
My apologies as I'm not qualifed to predict what problems you may have not having any worldwide experience.
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Many many CC are on very low basic pay(pen pay).
The CC are one section of staff that when the pensions are closed will be very hard hit.
So at this time the CC need to hold on to all T+Cs, infact an increase in T+Cs would be the order of the day.
Many many CC make up for low basic pay by loads of extras payments, which is OK in the short term.
A reasonable fix may be, the mid figure between pen pay and total pay per year should be used for pen pay from now, and pay per year would be that figure, see below.....
14k pen pay.
28k allowance etc etc
42k is total cost per year.
28k is the mid point.
Result would be, a saving of 25% in cost per year of CC to the company.
CC would have a reasonable pension figure.
CC would have taken a T+C/pay cut of 25%, but a good uplift in pensions, this will tend to be much better news for the old ones, because the pensions will be closed very soon.
The 28k may have to be paid in a clever way to avoid CC taking too much sick, guess the same reasons why all these allowances started in the first place.
Fly LHR to AAA and back/ 7 hours total = £100 allowances.
Fly LHR to BBB and back/ 7 hours total = £50 allowances.
The above is Madness, I hope the new fleet like AAA ??????????
The CC are one section of staff that when the pensions are closed will be very hard hit.
So at this time the CC need to hold on to all T+Cs, infact an increase in T+Cs would be the order of the day.
Many many CC make up for low basic pay by loads of extras payments, which is OK in the short term.
A reasonable fix may be, the mid figure between pen pay and total pay per year should be used for pen pay from now, and pay per year would be that figure, see below.....
14k pen pay.
28k allowance etc etc
42k is total cost per year.
28k is the mid point.
Result would be, a saving of 25% in cost per year of CC to the company.
CC would have a reasonable pension figure.
CC would have taken a T+C/pay cut of 25%, but a good uplift in pensions, this will tend to be much better news for the old ones, because the pensions will be closed very soon.
The 28k may have to be paid in a clever way to avoid CC taking too much sick, guess the same reasons why all these allowances started in the first place.
Fly LHR to AAA and back/ 7 hours total = £100 allowances.
Fly LHR to BBB and back/ 7 hours total = £50 allowances.
The above is Madness, I hope the new fleet like AAA ??????????
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
We're up to 165 pages in this discussion, and it is only now that pensions have suddenly become an issue.
They've hardly been the elephant in the room. Is perhaps the reason that they are being brought up now that BASSA's leadership has run out of straw men with which to try and scare its members? Can we expect a BASSA missive soon pretending they've been worried about it all along?
I'm sure intelligent people will quickly realise that there isn't much point in wondering what BA trustees, shareholders and Iberia want to do to sort that out if you don't work for them any more.
I am, on the other hand, fairly certain you would do better if you still worked for the new joint venture, especially if you were willing to discuss the issue with the aforementioned parties.
VOTE NO AND RESIGN FROM BASSA!
They've hardly been the elephant in the room. Is perhaps the reason that they are being brought up now that BASSA's leadership has run out of straw men with which to try and scare its members? Can we expect a BASSA missive soon pretending they've been worried about it all along?
I'm sure intelligent people will quickly realise that there isn't much point in wondering what BA trustees, shareholders and Iberia want to do to sort that out if you don't work for them any more.
I am, on the other hand, fairly certain you would do better if you still worked for the new joint venture, especially if you were willing to discuss the issue with the aforementioned parties.
VOTE NO AND RESIGN FROM BASSA!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sussex,UK
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Just a couple of questions, if I may. Bearing in mind that the main point of seeking an injuction against the imposition was due to it being "detrimental to the health and well being of crew and passengers", does this mean that if BASSA were to win their case in February, they would insist that LGW crew complements were brought back to the same level as LHR? And if LHR crew were to receive compensation for working with less crew in the interim, would LGW crew also be afforded the same rights? And finally, bearing in mind that at LGW, the crewing levels were signed off by the unions each time they were amended, would that mean that union members would have a case against them for sanctioning those same crewing levels at LGW, despite the fact that they now consider such levels unhealthy and unsafe? Surely that would be a clear case of failing to protect their members interests?
Just curious....
Jsl
Just curious....
Jsl
Last edited by jetset lady; 15th Nov 2009 at 20:17. Reason: spelling...oops!
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sussex,UK
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You won't get an argument from me on that, Jockster, but a fair few of the 100% BASSA posters seem convinced that they will win in February. I'm wondering whether they have considered the other possible consequences if, by any remote chance, they were to be victorious.
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Surrrey
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well done Jockster.
The union is rubbish hence its a secured a full trial!!!
The phone calls at home the cringe worthy begging letters and emails, if the union was rubbish it wouldnt be causing panic.
The union is rubbish hence its a secured a full trial!!!
The phone calls at home the cringe worthy begging letters and emails, if the union was rubbish it wouldnt be causing panic.
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Surrey (actually)
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The union is rubbish hence its a secured a full trial!!!
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Epsom
Age: 65
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A full trial on 1st Feb and hoping for a strike mid to end of December for same reason-who is in a panic?
Why not wait until full trial on 1st Feb if one is so confident of winning the battle?
Why not wait until full trial on 1st Feb if one is so confident of winning the battle?
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sussex,UK
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by am i bothered
The phone calls at home the cringe worthy begging letters and emails, if the union was rubbish it wouldnt be causing panic.
Do you honestly see any way that BASSA can possibly win this case, considering that they have already sanctioned these crewing levels at another base? Surely that leaves their argument dead in the water?
Last edited by jetset lady; 15th Nov 2009 at 21:17.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Location: The Deep South (Sussex)
Posts: 783
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Some think that BASSA are playing the long game.
Some that they are playing the short game.
...but many outside observers believe that they may be playing the end game!
Some that they are playing the short game.
...but many outside observers believe that they may be playing the end game!
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Surrey (actually)
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The damage has already been done, with the threatened IA, to any BA forward bookings. Hence, if I were WW, I would just wait, and watch the lambs run to the slaughter. And slaughter it will be; there are plenty of other people out there who will do the job for less money.
What a shame BASSA didn't sit down, negotiate, and try to work out a solution (it was only 82 million, at the start). Too many egos, writing cheques they expect other people to cash, to miss-quote Top Gun.
What a shame BASSA didn't sit down, negotiate, and try to work out a solution (it was only 82 million, at the start). Too many egos, writing cheques they expect other people to cash, to miss-quote Top Gun.
Would it be fair to say that if there is a ballot or strike, and BA win the hearing in Feb that BA will claim all the losses from forward bookings, etc back from Unite anyway?
Alternatively, if Unite win at court, BA simply recruit new entrants onto Mid Fleet ,sorry, New Fleet, and saves money anyway?
Alternatively, if Unite win at court, BA simply recruit new entrants onto Mid Fleet ,sorry, New Fleet, and saves money anyway?
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: LHR
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hunterboy, I believe that your statement is correct. WW has said before that any additional losses to the company would be recovered from the offending department, so for arguments sake lets say that the threat of industrial action from CC is £100M. Total savings from IFCE is now £240M. Oh dear.
I would expect that by 1st Feb BASSA won't be in court over the loss of crew members on-board. Instead, I would expect them to be fighting a few hundred cases of unfair dismissal following their sackings on day one of the strike. Just my two pennies worth...
Come on BASSA, get back to the table and negotiate your way out of tis impending self destruction.
I would expect that by 1st Feb BASSA won't be in court over the loss of crew members on-board. Instead, I would expect them to be fighting a few hundred cases of unfair dismissal following their sackings on day one of the strike. Just my two pennies worth...
Come on BASSA, get back to the table and negotiate your way out of tis impending self destruction.
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It appears that a number of recent posters on this thread are unaware of the dos and don´ts.
So here´s a repeat:
Posts containing the following will be deleted without further explanation, and may lead to a thread-ban for the poster:
Don´t waste your time and ours; stick to the above please.
Thank you.
flapsforty
Moderator
So here´s a repeat:
- Posts need to be about the BA-BASSA conflict.
- Posts need to contain one or more arguments to support a position.
- Posts need to have a discernible point.
- Posts need to add something to the discussion.
Posts containing the following will be deleted without further explanation, and may lead to a thread-ban for the poster:
- Personal attacks; as in kicking the player rather than playing the ball.
- BALPA, whatever it did or did not do and how that compares to BASSA.
- One-liners, silly nonsense and obvious gloating and/or provocation from either side.
Don´t waste your time and ours; stick to the above please.
Thank you.
flapsforty
Moderator
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Regarding the comments about BASSA going to court. Just because the court has agreed this doesn't mean that BASSA necessarily has a cast iron case. I was in court recently (as the plaintiff) and whilst the court was happy to give the defendant his time in court, if they didn't surely they would be passing judgement before hearing the defence evidence.
Just because BASSA has a day in court doesn't make it right, it just gives it a day in court to look like idiots in public.
Just because BASSA has a day in court doesn't make it right, it just gives it a day in court to look like idiots in public.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Vote No To Strike
The important thing that BASSA strike supporters are forgetting is that none of us are indispensable. Go ahead and strike and you'll loose the very thing you are trying to protect or save. Get back to the negotiating table and you may salvage something.
As far as emails, letters and phone calls from BA are concerned, they've all been non offensive, non threatening and very reasonable.
This includes the phone call I had from my Manager on Saturday morning which was a polite, friendly chat.
If this was my business, I would be doing exactly what Willie Walsh and Bill Francis are doing.
As far as emails, letters and phone calls from BA are concerned, they've all been non offensive, non threatening and very reasonable.
This includes the phone call I had from my Manager on Saturday morning which was a polite, friendly chat.
If this was my business, I would be doing exactly what Willie Walsh and Bill Francis are doing.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Pension news
Updated news related to the Pension pot and the merger here:
http://www.cityam.com/news-and-analysis/sydvk6tusw.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj
Key pieces of information in case you can't be bothered to read (in no particular order):
"Actuaries are expected to complete a triennial review of the pension scheme by the end of the year. They will confirm the size of the hole in the company’s savings pot, which stood at £2.7bn in September but is forecast to rise to at least £3bn by the end of December."
"BA's pension trustees are obliged to complete a triennial review by June and recommend how to handle the deficit. The process involves a detailed economic analysis of the pension and projections of its investment returns, macroeconomic conditions and payout levels. Since the trustees' last review, BA has paid about £1.8 billion, or about $3 billion, into its two pension plans in the past three years,comprising £330 million a year in annual contributions plus top-ups."
and
""BA's pension problem is no surprise to Iberia, which clearly wants the merger to happen," said John Ralf, an independent pension consultant. "Although it is not a done deal it seems unlikely the results of the actuarial valuation will torpedo the deal -- there is just too much at stake for both BA and Iberia."
He expects future pension contributions to rise and to be spread over longer periods.
"BA shareholders should be neutral to positive about the deal, but Iberia's shareholders may regret it down the line," he added. "Ring-fencing assets is difficult and anyway this seems to last for only five years."
From what I can infer from the two articles, both the Pension Trustees and Iberia need to be satisfied for the deal to go ahead, but the review is not expected to throw up any major shock (BA hasn't put a lot in recently.... O RLY?!).
http://www.cityam.com/news-and-analysis/sydvk6tusw.html
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB1000...googlenews_wsj
Key pieces of information in case you can't be bothered to read (in no particular order):
"Actuaries are expected to complete a triennial review of the pension scheme by the end of the year. They will confirm the size of the hole in the company’s savings pot, which stood at £2.7bn in September but is forecast to rise to at least £3bn by the end of December."
"BA's pension trustees are obliged to complete a triennial review by June and recommend how to handle the deficit. The process involves a detailed economic analysis of the pension and projections of its investment returns, macroeconomic conditions and payout levels. Since the trustees' last review, BA has paid about £1.8 billion, or about $3 billion, into its two pension plans in the past three years,comprising £330 million a year in annual contributions plus top-ups."
and
""BA's pension problem is no surprise to Iberia, which clearly wants the merger to happen," said John Ralf, an independent pension consultant. "Although it is not a done deal it seems unlikely the results of the actuarial valuation will torpedo the deal -- there is just too much at stake for both BA and Iberia."
He expects future pension contributions to rise and to be spread over longer periods.
"BA shareholders should be neutral to positive about the deal, but Iberia's shareholders may regret it down the line," he added. "Ring-fencing assets is difficult and anyway this seems to last for only five years."
From what I can infer from the two articles, both the Pension Trustees and Iberia need to be satisfied for the deal to go ahead, but the review is not expected to throw up any major shock (BA hasn't put a lot in recently.... O RLY?!).
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Epsom
Age: 65
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
All companies would expect their managers to have a friendly chat with their staff when industrial disputes are about to happen and different work practices have been introduced.
If they did not contact you for a friendly chat they would't be good managers.
I know some people will see this as panic on the management's side but it isn't, it's normal practice to ensure that their staff are not stressed when strike action is perhaps on the horizon. Most employees find strike action very stressful.
If they did not contact you for a friendly chat they would't be good managers.
I know some people will see this as panic on the management's side but it isn't, it's normal practice to ensure that their staff are not stressed when strike action is perhaps on the horizon. Most employees find strike action very stressful.