British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The allowance system has been a useful tool in the past - it enabled the company to pay effectively a higher take home salary by exploiting a marginal tax rate on allowances. It also kept the pensionable pay of those on allowances at a much lower level. For crew it made up a low basic salary into a more reasonable take home and acted as a bribe to ensure crew turned up for "poor" trips.
What is a amazing is that it has taken HMRC so long to tackle the misuse of a system of meal allowances. The system should provide you with money to eat while downroute, not pay the mortgage at the end of the month. Sadly for those heavily reliant on allowances HMRC have looked at it and due to poor returns when they undertook the review have decided to re-assess the taxation rate on what is now obviously now far more income than meal allowances.
Unions that clung to the old allowances and premiums now have the job of trying to address what will effectively be a paycut for their members, but a paycut driven by the government not BA
What is a amazing is that it has taken HMRC so long to tackle the misuse of a system of meal allowances. The system should provide you with money to eat while downroute, not pay the mortgage at the end of the month. Sadly for those heavily reliant on allowances HMRC have looked at it and due to poor returns when they undertook the review have decided to re-assess the taxation rate on what is now obviously now far more income than meal allowances.
Unions that clung to the old allowances and premiums now have the job of trying to address what will effectively be a paycut for their members, but a paycut driven by the government not BA
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not entirely sure where BASSA get the 80% tax rate from though! 
A taxation rate that high would be of national concern as anything where to Government takes back 80pence in the pound is clearly unfair. Lets face it, politicians don't pay normal taxes on their expenses and those earning over £150,000 per annum only pay 50 pence in the pound.
I suggest we wait and see what the findings of the HMRC actually are. Incidentally BAPLA have been and currently are heavily involved in this issue in an attempt to protect their membership and deliver balance to the HMRC outside of some possibly skewed figures for both flight crew and thus cabin crew. Are BASSA doing the same?
A taxation rate that high would be of national concern as anything where to Government takes back 80pence in the pound is clearly unfair. Lets face it, politicians don't pay normal taxes on their expenses and those earning over £150,000 per annum only pay 50 pence in the pound.
I suggest we wait and see what the findings of the HMRC actually are. Incidentally BAPLA have been and currently are heavily involved in this issue in an attempt to protect their membership and deliver balance to the HMRC outside of some possibly skewed figures for both flight crew and thus cabin crew. Are BASSA doing the same?
Couldonlyaffordafiver
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: The Twilight Zone near 30W
Posts: 1,934
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not entirely sure where BASSA get the 80% tax rate from though!
While I'm on...
Calling CFC:
Can you explain what a 2.7% pay freeze is please?
A freeze is a freeze. There is no % involved.
Join Date: Nov 2008
Location: Nice
Age: 74
Posts: 108
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The 80% tax means that 80% of the allowance would be subject to tax at the standanrd rate of income tax which is 20%. Not 80% tax charged on the allowance, the actual tax charged if the 80% figure is correct would equate to 16% as detailed in the next paragraph.
For instance say for a £30 meal allowance, 20% (£6) would be tax free and 20% tax would be charged on the remaining £24 = £4.80 tax on £30. which brings the tax down to about 16% tax on the entire £30 allowance for a meal taken or not. Of course meal allowances are all different depending where the allowance is paid and the rate of exchange on the day etc.
The only way to escape any tax on meal allowances would be for the airline to arrange for meals to be taken in the hotels on long haul flights paid for by the airline. then no income tax could be charged. That is impossible on short haul flights unless a night stop is involved.
This is nothing new, the allowance system has been taxed but not on 80% of the allowance. To state 80% tax will be charged on an allowance is very misleading and not correct.
Most airlines gave up this old fashioned type of meal allowance payment system decades ago and have an hourly rate instead that is less complicated to work out.
As the allowances have already been subject to income tax HMRC would not be able to go back 6 years to reclaim tax as someone mentioned because they reached agreements for the amount of tax in the previous years that has already been paid.
The worst that could happen is if 100% of the meal allowance became taxable like other income is.
In the past BA cabin crew have enjoyed high incidental payments with a lower basic salary. The take home amount was the all imprtant point, that was fine then. None of the incidental payments are pensionable though.
For instance say for a £30 meal allowance, 20% (£6) would be tax free and 20% tax would be charged on the remaining £24 = £4.80 tax on £30. which brings the tax down to about 16% tax on the entire £30 allowance for a meal taken or not. Of course meal allowances are all different depending where the allowance is paid and the rate of exchange on the day etc.
The only way to escape any tax on meal allowances would be for the airline to arrange for meals to be taken in the hotels on long haul flights paid for by the airline. then no income tax could be charged. That is impossible on short haul flights unless a night stop is involved.
This is nothing new, the allowance system has been taxed but not on 80% of the allowance. To state 80% tax will be charged on an allowance is very misleading and not correct.
Most airlines gave up this old fashioned type of meal allowance payment system decades ago and have an hourly rate instead that is less complicated to work out.
As the allowances have already been subject to income tax HMRC would not be able to go back 6 years to reclaim tax as someone mentioned because they reached agreements for the amount of tax in the previous years that has already been paid.
The worst that could happen is if 100% of the meal allowance became taxable like other income is.
In the past BA cabin crew have enjoyed high incidental payments with a lower basic salary. The take home amount was the all imprtant point, that was fine then. None of the incidental payments are pensionable though.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: 35,000 ft
Posts: 468
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Does anyone know the legality of the ballot if when instigated, the address list of members is correct, but by the time of ballot closing, several members have resigned?
I won't strike and it will be quite easy crossing a 5 man picket line based at Waterside when I go to T5.
However, what I am wondering is whether the people who have/are taking VR are being balloted? Will UNITE know who they are?
Surely if they are not going to be with the company WHEN INDUSTRIAL ACTION TAKES PLACE, then they have no right to vote on the matter?
Or will that just be one of the many legal loopholes that BA will be picking them up on..?
Now, what do we think - has UNITE thought about that and excluded them all from the vote? Place your bets please...............
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: Finland
Age: 77
Posts: 465
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hiflyer
An interesting point.
If , say, all those who took VR voted yes and a strike was called it could be quite embarrassing to BASSA if they represented the difference between a yes and a no vote.
At the end of the day I think we will have to wait and see what happens and whether BASSA call a strike.
I don't think BA care what happens with the vote, they will wait to see if the strikers strike.
I can't understand why, if BASSA are convinced they are going to win the court case, they are thinking about a strike.
An interesting point.
If , say, all those who took VR voted yes and a strike was called it could be quite embarrassing to BASSA if they represented the difference between a yes and a no vote.
At the end of the day I think we will have to wait and see what happens and whether BASSA call a strike.
I don't think BA care what happens with the vote, they will wait to see if the strikers strike.
I can't understand why, if BASSA are convinced they are going to win the court case, they are thinking about a strike.
Last edited by finncapt; 20th Nov 2009 at 13:06. Reason: Another r
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Having trawled through some of the ridiculous comments by so called 'No' voters, it seems, if you are crew at all, that you are completely unrepresentative of what is going on.
And WinstonSmith, your comments about the Chairwoman of BASSA does not reflect the huge support she has. You are on your own.
On my current crew, support is 100% and was obvious from the Briefing Room, that everyone felt the same way. BA monitors of this forum may draw some comfort from people like WS, but it is a false dawn.
The reality is that BA's cabin crew are even more resolute than before. The YES vote is of course a foregone conclusion, all there is to debate is by what margin.
My prediction is, and I will be back after the 14th to remind you all, is that the YES vote will be more than 95% again.
And WinstonSmith, your comments about the Chairwoman of BASSA does not reflect the huge support she has. You are on your own.
On my current crew, support is 100% and was obvious from the Briefing Room, that everyone felt the same way. BA monitors of this forum may draw some comfort from people like WS, but it is a false dawn.
The reality is that BA's cabin crew are even more resolute than before. The YES vote is of course a foregone conclusion, all there is to debate is by what margin.
My prediction is, and I will be back after the 14th to remind you all, is that the YES vote will be more than 95% again.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If I was in a briefing room with you I'd say I'd vote yes just to shut you up! Once again, the ballot return is irrelevant. It's how many are prepared to go on strike that counts. And that sure as hell isn't 95%. Has Willie rushed back to the negotiating table now you're balloting like crew predicted? Does he look scared? Or relaxed?
Join Date: May 2003
Location: london
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fume Event, along with your 95% yes predication, would you care to share with us all what the turnout will be?
Because as we all know (well most of us) a 95% yes vote from a 70% turn out is much different to 95% of a 100% turn out.
But Carnage M has summed it up well, it really does all depend on the numbers prepared to actually go on strike
Because as we all know (well most of us) a 95% yes vote from a 70% turn out is much different to 95% of a 100% turn out.
But Carnage M has summed it up well, it really does all depend on the numbers prepared to actually go on strike
Join Date: May 2002
Location: uk
Posts: 337
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Even that is irrelevant.
BA expect a strike.
They will try and stop it by legal action, but if that fails they will attack the strike.
There is no choice.
BA must win , and they will because enough crew will turn up to keep perhaps 50% of the operation going at lhr, 100% at lgw.
By the 2nd or 3rd day the strike will collapse and voila, BA will have won.
And broken Bassa as well.
BA expect a strike.
They will try and stop it by legal action, but if that fails they will attack the strike.
There is no choice.
BA must win , and they will because enough crew will turn up to keep perhaps 50% of the operation going at lhr, 100% at lgw.
By the 2nd or 3rd day the strike will collapse and voila, BA will have won.
And broken Bassa as well.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In regards to the increase of tax. The union(s) have only announced the tax increase for LGW crew, for some reason. I find this very odd, as we're on hourly pay. No announcement of tax increase at LHR - for meal allowances. Yet. I can't help but think that this announcement is to gain support for the union from LGW members. That's how the re-deployment issue was announced as well.
I think it's rotten to the core, to be honest. Members are being bullied - FACT. Information is with-held - FACT. Information is misleading - FACT.
The tactics are getting more and more disgusting. The sooner this is all over and done with, the better. I can pretty much guarantee that there won't be a strike on the 21st/before Christmas. How do I know this? Several reps are rostered to fly, and they will have arranged their time off in advance for any strike.
The "YES" mob who claim that "everyone" on their crew is voting YES, have got to get a grip. Do you really think that a few NO voters would tell you? Why are you asking anyone at all how they're voting anyway? It's a secret ballot, and it's not your right to ask, nevermind know what others are voting.
Gg
I think it's rotten to the core, to be honest. Members are being bullied - FACT. Information is with-held - FACT. Information is misleading - FACT.
The tactics are getting more and more disgusting. The sooner this is all over and done with, the better. I can pretty much guarantee that there won't be a strike on the 21st/before Christmas. How do I know this? Several reps are rostered to fly, and they will have arranged their time off in advance for any strike.
The "YES" mob who claim that "everyone" on their crew is voting YES, have got to get a grip. Do you really think that a few NO voters would tell you? Why are you asking anyone at all how they're voting anyway? It's a secret ballot, and it's not your right to ask, nevermind know what others are voting.
Gg