British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: on the edge
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You cannot compare Ryanair or EasyJet to BA as they run under totally different business models hence cost bases. Ryanair and Easy rely on expansion and new routes coupled with a very low cost base. Night stopping Ryanair or Easyjet crew anyone? Very rare.
Look at The Times recruitment and career pages, find a position that pays £60,000+ and then compare the scope and responsibilities of the two roles
. The issue that really concerns me is the low pay of the new entrant CC. How can anyone live in the Home Counties and enjoy any quality of life.
P.S That CSD recently moved from Datchet to Sunningdale
but I doubt any new entrant will be considering such a move themselves. 
Last edited by DarkStar; 7th Jul 2009 at 10:07.
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
But CFC, as you no doubt are aware in your role, the scheme differs between FC and CC so direct comparisons between a number of operated services are not always able to be made.
As for the heavy captain, I personally quite agree. The difference is, however, that it's perhaps one of the last vestiges of old agreements we have, whereas BASSA are only now confronting the need for change after many years of saying no to everything.
And if you think I'm just one of those nosy, whingeing flight crew I'd remind you my wife's a CSD and she's not enamoured of the militant ranty path that BASSA take, in fact she's more or less happy with a lot of BA's proposals. Trouble is, it seems to be that if you don't follow the BASSA path of enlightenment as crew, you get shot down in flames rather than engaged in any form of reasonable debate - I'd point you to some of your colleagues replies to people on the BA intranet CC forum. Distasteful and disrespectful to say the least. And, whilst I'm sure it wasn't you personally, who thinks they have the right, as an employee, to call the head of IFCE and the CEO "thieves and liars"? One of the many pearls on the BA forum which do nothing to bolster the oft repeated assertion that the premium crew are the cornerstone of this airline's success.
As for the heavy captain, I personally quite agree. The difference is, however, that it's perhaps one of the last vestiges of old agreements we have, whereas BASSA are only now confronting the need for change after many years of saying no to everything.
And if you think I'm just one of those nosy, whingeing flight crew I'd remind you my wife's a CSD and she's not enamoured of the militant ranty path that BASSA take, in fact she's more or less happy with a lot of BA's proposals. Trouble is, it seems to be that if you don't follow the BASSA path of enlightenment as crew, you get shot down in flames rather than engaged in any form of reasonable debate - I'd point you to some of your colleagues replies to people on the BA intranet CC forum. Distasteful and disrespectful to say the least. And, whilst I'm sure it wasn't you personally, who thinks they have the right, as an employee, to call the head of IFCE and the CEO "thieves and liars"? One of the many pearls on the BA forum which do nothing to bolster the oft repeated assertion that the premium crew are the cornerstone of this airline's success.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CFC
Well, CFC, I have just had a peruse of your previous postings on Pprune and you seem to be someone who just shoots down opinions without posting any of your own. That since you registered.
If you feel that BASSA has excelled in the negotiations with BA and achieved a solution that is acceptable to all BASSA members then please post it here.
Otherwise your one shot attempts at put downs are not contributions.
You actually put forward very few points and the ones that you do put forward don't seem to be very relevant or accurate.
For information the change to the box C limits within the BALPA deal are there specifically to reduce the requirement for 'heavy' crew. So, your concerns for flexible and cost saving pilots have been put to rest.
As to the LCY-NYC routes I am led to believe that the crewing is due to the small number of pilots who will be qualified to operate the 318 out of city. Combining the requirement to keep training costs down and the fleet small the regularity of the crossing precludes a 'one out one back' strategy.
Not sure how accurate the above is but there are fewer issues with the CC being LCY 'qualified' therefore the pool of available manpower is greater hence the frequency of LCY trips for CC will be fewer.
Rosco, odd then that until this recession they seem to have been quite good at making money?
Possibly not as much as they could have but, with this clean up going on, I think we will see a far better 'dinosaur' on the other side.
You can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs but, oddly enough, the eggs don't like being broken. Hence we end up in todays situation.
Why do you not understand my point? Its pretty clear.
As for the Bassa comment I'll just re-emphasise:
wobble2plank - you carry on believing just what you want to believe.
As for the Bassa comment I'll just re-emphasise:
wobble2plank - you carry on believing just what you want to believe.
If you feel that BASSA has excelled in the negotiations with BA and achieved a solution that is acceptable to all BASSA members then please post it here.
Otherwise your one shot attempts at put downs are not contributions.
You actually put forward very few points and the ones that you do put forward don't seem to be very relevant or accurate.
For information the change to the box C limits within the BALPA deal are there specifically to reduce the requirement for 'heavy' crew. So, your concerns for flexible and cost saving pilots have been put to rest.
As to the LCY-NYC routes I am led to believe that the crewing is due to the small number of pilots who will be qualified to operate the 318 out of city. Combining the requirement to keep training costs down and the fleet small the regularity of the crossing precludes a 'one out one back' strategy.
Not sure how accurate the above is but there are fewer issues with the CC being LCY 'qualified' therefore the pool of available manpower is greater hence the frequency of LCY trips for CC will be fewer.
Said it before and say it again BA is an incompetent dinosaur that simply has no clue in today's environment.
Possibly not as much as they could have but, with this clean up going on, I think we will see a far better 'dinosaur' on the other side.
You can't make an omelette without breaking some eggs but, oddly enough, the eggs don't like being broken. Hence we end up in todays situation.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Guess I'm in the BASSA disagreement sin bin then with CFC. 
How dare someone have a different opinion to the hive mind.
I think, and believe CFC and believe, that BASSA have totally failed both the junior crew and the LGW crews by their constant childish attitude toward change.
BASSA is more to blame for the current situation than BA is. BA takes some blame for weak management not nipping this in the bud and re aligning the CC t's & c's in the past to prevent such a painful and catastrophic change. BASSA however have constantly used that weakness to hold the company and the passengers to ransom with petty, worthless industrial action over the years and a totally inflexible approach to disruption.
How I look forward to the days when nobody needs to bustle into the cockpit for chocks 'to the minute' for the mass union discussion on the bus over how much time off is needed.
Welcome to the real world BASSA.
How dare someone have a different opinion to the hive mind.
I think, and believe CFC and believe, that BASSA have totally failed both the junior crew and the LGW crews by their constant childish attitude toward change.
BASSA is more to blame for the current situation than BA is. BA takes some blame for weak management not nipping this in the bud and re aligning the CC t's & c's in the past to prevent such a painful and catastrophic change. BASSA however have constantly used that weakness to hold the company and the passengers to ransom with petty, worthless industrial action over the years and a totally inflexible approach to disruption.
How I look forward to the days when nobody needs to bustle into the cockpit for chocks 'to the minute' for the mass union discussion on the bus over how much time off is needed.
Welcome to the real world BASSA.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The CSD is a very useful member of crew if they choose to be and, in fact, when they do choose to be they could quite easily replace another crew member in the service.
On the 747 and 767 they could work in CW and on the 777 in FC (or CW depending on config) because of the location of their office. It would also give them a good variation of cabins to work in.
Joetom LCY-SNN-JFK
The Two Pilot Flight Time Limitations(CAA rules not BA/BALPA) would not allow this 2 sector operation.
A318 T/O weight limitations off short runway at LCY and longer flight times as A318 LRC speed .78 ish as opposed to B777/747 .82/85 mach. Long turnaround SNN due pre-clearing pax for USA Customs/Immigration saving pax time at JFK.
Could put on three F/C but cheaper to slip at SNN and use two.
Bit technical for you perhaps, but you must check your facts before you post on this Forum!
A318 T/O weight limitations off short runway at LCY and longer flight times as A318 LRC speed .78 ish as opposed to B777/747 .82/85 mach. Long turnaround SNN due pre-clearing pax for USA Customs/Immigration saving pax time at JFK.
Could put on three F/C but cheaper to slip at SNN and use two.
Bit technical for you perhaps, but you must check your facts before you post on this Forum!
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA has been focusing on the highest paid crew members. Why else do you think they have been focusing on the allowances rather than raising the basic salary for new crew?
Another part of their proposal is the removal of another PSR at LGW. They have been working hard to keep it but all of the sudden they are willing to remove and have it replaced with a main crew member. That's another failure towards LGW and it's absolutely appalling. BASSA has, as I have said so many times, never cared about LGW as it's been an appendage down the road.
This is the situation you get after years of refusal to negotiate. A very deep fall.
Another part of their proposal is the removal of another PSR at LGW. They have been working hard to keep it but all of the sudden they are willing to remove and have it replaced with a main crew member. That's another failure towards LGW and it's absolutely appalling. BASSA has, as I have said so many times, never cared about LGW as it's been an appendage down the road.
This is the situation you get after years of refusal to negotiate. A very deep fall.
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Ps forgot to mention will probably a LGW c/c operation as the poor overworked Lhr EF c/c will not do longhaul trips.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: birmingham
Posts: 7
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sick to death of people saying we are not market rate. We are not if you compare us to VS, Easy jet etc. If you compare us to other EU carriers such as IB,LH,AF,KLM we are very competitive.
Join Date: Jan 2002
Location: on the edge
Posts: 186
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sick to death of people saying we are not market rate. We are not if you compare us to VS, Easy jet etc. If you compare us to other EU carriers such as IB,LH,AF,KLM we are very competitive.
Evidence please.
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: UK
Posts: 30
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I am sick to death of people saying we are not market rate. We are not if you compare us to VS, Easy jet etc. If you compare us to other EU carriers such as IB,LH,AF,KLM we are very competitive.
And by the was VS are one of our main competitors out of LHR..... just thought you should know!!!! ie They will take our business if they can!!!
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
.
Did a little digging, appears reason is Pilots will start work at LHR and get a taxi to LCY, am not a crew planner, but how about reporting for work at the airport you are flying from.
To save money would guess once pilots get back to LCY they stay local and operate next day, may be called back to back.
If I guess wrong, pilots will taxi back to LHR with all the costs and hours topping up.
Tell me I guessed wrong ????
Did a little digging, appears reason is Pilots will start work at LHR and get a taxi to LCY, am not a crew planner, but how about reporting for work at the airport you are flying from.
To save money would guess once pilots get back to LCY they stay local and operate next day, may be called back to back.
If I guess wrong, pilots will taxi back to LHR with all the costs and hours topping up.
Tell me I guessed wrong ????
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You guessed wrong. The pilots report at LHR because they spend the first day of the block on airport standby to provide cover for that days LCY departures and, once they are gone, LHR evening departures. On return they'll go back to LHR. Maybe they could report directly to LCY, but given the cost and availability of parking there I doubt it would be a cheaper option than providing transport from LHR.
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe in most parts of the world if you are required to travel for work you ar usually refunded for it or the journey laid on for you. BA does not base mainline crew at LCY and so the guys and girls both sides of the door report at base.
It's not perfect but then the only answer would be for BA to start dual basings - which is a whole other kettle of fish.
Moderator
Join Date: Feb 1998
Location: Europe
Posts: 3,051
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
First and final ´request & warning´.
Pilots´ terms and pilots´ new agreement with BA management have been discussed.
At length.
Everybody has had their say, enough already.
From now on, this thread will concern itself with CC terms and conditions, CC negotiations and CC union practices.
Any post mentioning whatever the pilots have/might/should/will do, will be be deleted from this thread.
This applies to everybody.
Everybody as in pilots quoting how reasonable, tactically correct and cooperative BALPA has been, and CC mentioning how over-paid pilots are on the one hand and how push-over BALPA has been on the other.
I say again; posts mentioning anything about pilots apart from the fact that they fly the aircraft, will be deleted.
Posters who think this does not apply to them, will have their posting privileges revoked.
Thank you all.
Pilots´ terms and pilots´ new agreement with BA management have been discussed.
At length.
Everybody has had their say, enough already.
From now on, this thread will concern itself with CC terms and conditions, CC negotiations and CC union practices.
Any post mentioning whatever the pilots have/might/should/will do, will be be deleted from this thread.
This applies to everybody.
Everybody as in pilots quoting how reasonable, tactically correct and cooperative BALPA has been, and CC mentioning how over-paid pilots are on the one hand and how push-over BALPA has been on the other.
I say again; posts mentioning anything about pilots apart from the fact that they fly the aircraft, will be deleted.
Posters who think this does not apply to them, will have their posting privileges revoked.
Thank you all.
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: USA
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can someone enlightnen me of the facts about the last BASSA strike/threat a couple of years ago ?
Its my understanding that it (if only partialy) was to have a barrier removed so that crew on newer contracts could progress up the salary scales of the older contracts?
If that was so, how does having another new entrant rate help BA if there will be more threats of IA further down the road to align with older contracts ?
Also since BA is reducing CC numbers not hiring, how can a new entrant rate bring immediate savings to the company ?
Thanks in advance for supplying the true facts.
Its my understanding that it (if only partialy) was to have a barrier removed so that crew on newer contracts could progress up the salary scales of the older contracts?
If that was so, how does having another new entrant rate help BA if there will be more threats of IA further down the road to align with older contracts ?
Also since BA is reducing CC numbers not hiring, how can a new entrant rate bring immediate savings to the company ?
Thanks in advance for supplying the true facts.
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Adi
The dispute of a couple of years ago was indeed about removing a ceiling to the wages of post-1997 crew (amongst many other things
). The conclusion of the dispute was that Unite overrode Bassa and concluded an agreement (for their own vicarious reasons associated with the illegal support for the previous Gate Gourmet strike, under threat by Willie Walsh). The removal of this pay ceiling was paid for by other Bassa members, despite anything that Bassa may argue.
For WW and BA, agreeing in principle to a new entrant wage with Bassa will further marginalise the very old contract Bassa CSD's/reps, and demonstrate to the courts the unsustainability of their agreements. These (supposed) guardians of all members T's & C's are in reality only looking after themselves - all you have to do is ask the Bassa membership at LGW to confirm that!
No, a new entrant rate will not save the company the required amount in the short term - it is the principle that they are establishing.
Ask yourself the question; do you think that the current impasse exists because Bassa are clever and have out thought Willie Walsh, or because WW has Bassa exactly where he wants them?
I'm sorry for my colleagues (but hope the worst for Bassa), but they are being outplayed at poker by a team that has all the hands covered against a team of part time rank amateurs.
My cabin crew colleagues (unfortunately) believe the b*ll**** hype and disinformation propogated by Bassa - they are lions being led to the slaughter by utter buffoons.
The dispute of a couple of years ago was indeed about removing a ceiling to the wages of post-1997 crew (amongst many other things
). The conclusion of the dispute was that Unite overrode Bassa and concluded an agreement (for their own vicarious reasons associated with the illegal support for the previous Gate Gourmet strike, under threat by Willie Walsh). The removal of this pay ceiling was paid for by other Bassa members, despite anything that Bassa may argue.For WW and BA, agreeing in principle to a new entrant wage with Bassa will further marginalise the very old contract Bassa CSD's/reps, and demonstrate to the courts the unsustainability of their agreements. These (supposed) guardians of all members T's & C's are in reality only looking after themselves - all you have to do is ask the Bassa membership at LGW to confirm that!
No, a new entrant rate will not save the company the required amount in the short term - it is the principle that they are establishing.
Ask yourself the question; do you think that the current impasse exists because Bassa are clever and have out thought Willie Walsh, or because WW has Bassa exactly where he wants them?
I'm sorry for my colleagues (but hope the worst for Bassa), but they are being outplayed at poker by a team that has all the hands covered against a team of part time rank amateurs.
My cabin crew colleagues (unfortunately) believe the b*ll**** hype and disinformation propogated by Bassa - they are lions being led to the slaughter by utter buffoons.
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Glasgow
Posts: 281
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
L Met