British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations

[Desertia]

Before anyone even thinks of joining the case as a claimant they must get clarity from BASSA on the position on court costs (which are going to be a 6-7 figure sum, we're not talking about a couple of hundred quid...). I believe if you are a joint-claimant you are theoretically proportionally liable for any costs. Happy to proved wrong by a lawyer.

But why would BASSA and UNITE keep such a thing from their members? Is it the same way, Fume Event, that they are withholding the FACT that British Airways can sack any striker they wish. They just need to send someone down to the tribunal with a cheque months or even years later to pay whatever amount the unemployed benefit claimant has won for unfair dismissal.

I would suggest there is only one source of misinformation, half-truths and outright lies in this argument, and without giving too much of a clue away, they are the ones putting their members in the firing line!

[lowcostdolly]

Irretrievable breakdown in the working relationship

Am still reading this thread despite the hammering I got when I last posted. Have no insight into what is happening at BA (other than this thread) but do have some insight into employment law. It is insight only due to supporting a close friend who won their case. I am not a lawyer or do I have any legal qualification.

The above is a valid reason for dismissal so for all those of you voting yes to IA think very carefully......you will probably loose your jobs.

Given that (according to what I read on here) BA have tried to negotiate and the unions either do not turn up/walk out etc BA may well claim an "irretrievable breakdown" with individuals who go on strike. After all your union represents your views doesn't it? If they don't turn up etc what message do you think BA will claim they are getting from their staff when they can't even talk to them?

However even if the dismissal reasons are upheld by a tribunal years down the line Willie still has to be seen to have followed procedure for a fair dismissal by the tribunal. Even if they conclude he hasn't all the tribunal will do is make a recomendation for re-instatement......he is not obliged to do this and he won't. Why do you think BA has such a large holding pool for CC? I would guess it's because when he sacks the expensive/millitant ones he can replace them with these who no doubt will be on the T&C's BA want.

I'm guessing that what will happen to you guys is that BA will claim you contributed to the reason they will state for dismissal and the tribunal if they agree will adjust your damages accordingly. You won't however have a job with BA. BA will pay a nominal award decided by a tribunal judge and believe me it's not enough to live on.

And then there the question of your references for a future airline. They are not allowed to give you a bad one but they can refuse to give one....how would that look?

IA is not worth it IMHO but I am not in your shoes.

[Desertia]

CFC

CFC,

Out of interest, assuming the ballot goes your way, when do you intend to notify BA that you are unavailable to work? On day 1 of the strike, or as soon as you are scheduled to next turn up for duty?

Or are you intending on simply not telling them, or calling in sick?

I understand why you wouldn't want to do it downroute.

Just interested in seeing how December 21st may evolve. It's a Monday anyway, so I'd imagine there's a few more sickies that day than most on average.

[Fume Event]

There seems to be a line of logic being propogated here by numerous posters, that basically a big company like British Airways can behave how it likes towards its cabin crew and by association its customers who are adversely affected by these changes, and there is nothing you can do to stop them? I don't think so.

So contracts can be changed and new work practices introduced without any negotiation, or paying lip service to negotiation with the intention to impose anyway. Well on the 14th you will see that we do not agree with a management that operates in such a way. It is going to take a bitter strike to reverse such a high handed and contemptuous attitude towards employees.

And as for Fincastle, you aint going anywhere.

[CFC]

Desertia

Desertia, not sure why you are so interested, however not just me but all crew will only strike at base. If you are downroute you carry on as normal, arriving aircraft permitting.

There is no need to contact the company on strike day, I'm sure they'll be able to work out whats happening.

And all this from a workforce who really do not want to strike but feel no alternative now exists unless Willie gets talking again,

[Desertia]

CFC just genuinely interested.

If I phone my boss and say I'm not coming in and I give him a reason that's one thing. If I just fail to appear, there needs to be a bloody good reason (and I have a forgiving boss).

Again, given that BASSA tell us they are so sure about the legality of striking, I'm just asking whether there is a legal burden on the strikers to notify BA before they refuse to work?

The employment laws have changed a bit since Grunwick.

I suppose BASSA's interpretation of this will all appear on the Union websites if the ballot goes that way.

And Fume, what you and I "think" is irrelevant, it is what the law says that counts and how legal redress can be achieved, and at what cost.

And more to the point, to whom.

[Human Factor]

There is no need to contact the company on strike day, I'm sure they'll be able to work out whats happening.

Be aware that once the ballot result is announced (more than likely in favour), based upon previous disputes BA will contact you directly prior to the first strike day, whether you are rostered to work or not and will ask whether you are intending to strike. They need to know in order to plan accordingly. There may be a legal obligation for you to answer - BASSA will know. That said, any answer other than "No" will be taken to be a "Yes". Only those who are long-term sick, on leave or downroute will be exempt.

If you are downroute, provided you are prepared to operate back if an aeroplane appears, you will not be considered to be on strike until you arrive back at base. Take my advice, you do not want to go on strike downroute!

Make sure you get all the advice.

[finncapt]

Regarding the names on the court petition.

I warned several pages back, when someone queried why the name on the original petition was not Unite, that this was to prevent them being liable for costs if the court finds in BA's favour.

Be very careful about putting your name to this petition because you could lose your house and other possessions if it goes the wrong way.

The court may have required more names on the petition before allowing it to proceed so that BA have a chance of recouping their costs if they win.

I have seen this done in a court case, the other party had to prove that they would be able to meet my costs if they lost.

They were eventually thrown out as vexatious, so the matter did not proceed.

I do have a lien on their estate when they die though.

[Wobbler]

Fume Event

Any company can sack any worker any time it likes. In BA's case they stop paying them and remove their id and there is not much anyone can do about it. Several years down the line it may (or may not) be deemed to be illegal. That notwithstanding, am I missing something completely obvious - have BA not sent off an HR1 informing of 2000 compulsory redundancies. When they select those 2000, would it not be perfectly legal to sack the first 2000 to walk out?

[flyeruk69]

sacked for IA

For those of you who are saying you can be sacked for taking legal strike action , well you can be sacked however it is automatically deemed unfair dismissal in law and the relevant compensation paid , not a huge a amount but better than the nothing some would have us believe.

BA and in fact no large company with in the united kingdom has or even threatened to sack any workers who have taken legal industrial action since the law was changed in 1999. There have been a number of high profile strikes over the years.
BA didn't sack the ground staff who took unofficial action a few years ago, bar two or three who were deemed to have bullied and harassed other staff members and were dismissed on those grounds.

The statements on here that anyone who strikes will be sacked is pure supposition and very very unlikely as such a high profile company hates to find it's self in court for any reason. even staff who steal from the company are never ever prosecuted even when it involves £1000's.

BA didn't sack any of the cabin crew back in 1997 when the employment law was on the side of the company and would have been perfectly legal to do so, while the management has changed some what since then and they have a track record of sacking pilots at their previous airline for taking strike action ,remember that airline is governed by Irish law which differs from UK employment law.

I'm passionate about BA but I'm also passionate about the collective agreements crew have. I believe it is immoral to decided to change or disregard these agreements just because you don't like them and a predecessor agreed to them and now don't fit the agenda.

I will stand up for what I and many others believe in. I believe this imposition breaks my contract with BA. It says in my contract of employment the following -
" from time to time BA have collective agreements with the trade unions and these form part of your contract of employment"

The crewing levels on the long haul aircraft are written into the collective worldwide agreements signed by both the Tu's and BA ( ranks on board do not) and therefor form part of my contract of employment.

All the scaremongering on here will not sway me, I believe in what I'm fighting for, if on the outside chance BA go bust or decide to dismiss the striking workforce, which I doubt will happen, so be it but I will not be scared into accepting imposition now or in the future.

I believe in a negotiated change to my terms and conditions and this would involve meaningful talks not lip service to say we tried. The new crewing levels and service routines didn't get written over night, these have been worked on for months and months and I believe this was BA's agenda for the last 2 years or so, BA never had the intention to find a negotiated settlement or way forward unless it was solely on their terms, disregarding any collective agreements that may stand in the way.

I fully expect words about being delusional etc, the Tolpuddle Martyrs may well have been deemed to be delusional at the time but they laid the foundations for workers rights through TU's and the employment laws we ALL enjoy today, they were a long time coming but they had to start some where.

[finncapt]

Flyeruk69

I may not agree with you but I do respect your arguement.

You are, on this site, one of the few to give a thought out reason for your thinking rather than the BASSA 100% of some others.

Negotiation you understand, try and persuade your union reps and BA to do it.

[jackcat]

For those of you who are saying you can be sacked for taking legal strike action , well you can be sacked however it is automatically deemed unfair dismissal in law and the relevant compensation paid which I believe is around £78000, not a huge a amount but better than the nothing some would have us believe.

Take a look at direct.gov.uk for accurate information

If you win
The Employment Tribunal can order your employer to pay compensation. The compensation is unlimited for discrimination or dismissal on health and safety grounds.
For unfair dismissal claims the award is made up of:

• the basic award, worked out based on your age and length of service
• a compensatory award, up to a set limit reviewed every year (although the maximum is rarely awarded)

The Employment Tribunal can make an additional award on top of the two awards above. This is awarded if it orders your employer to re-employ you but your employer does not.
Up to £25,000 can be awarded for wrongful dismissal or other breaches of contract.
Recoupment

If you have claimed Jobseeker's Allowance (JSA) or Income Support (IS) since the event, recoupment may apply to your case.
Recoupment prevents double payment. It means your employer may deduct some or the entire amount you claimed in JSA or IS from the compensation awarded to you by an Employment Tribunal and repay it to Jobcentre Plus.
This rule applies when an Employment Tribunal makes an award of money for unfair dismissal and if applicable, for your employer's failure to:

• make a payment in the case of compensation for redundancy
• pay your wages during a period of medical or maternity suspension
• pay a 'protective award' to you if you are made redundant, or about be made redundant
• consult workplace representatives in collective redundancy situations

Compensation

Compensation is intended to replace lost earnings. There is no payment for hurt feelings, except in discrimination cases. You have to demonstrate to an Employment Tribunal that you tried to reduce your loss, for example by getting another job or claiming benefit.
Employment Tribunals look at whether you and your employer followed the principles in the Acas Code of Practice on disciplinary and grievance procedures (the Code).
If you have not followed the Code, it does not automatically make you or your employer liable (legally responsible) before an Employment Tribunal. However, an Employment Tribunal can adjust your compensation award by up to 25 per cent if they consider that you or your employer behaved unreasonably.

[swordsman]

The sum of £ 78,000 compensation for all is incorrect. The norm being 1 month for every year worked or there abouts .

[LD12986]

Regarding the names on the court petition.

I warned several pages back, when someone queried why the name on the original petition was not Unite, that this was to prevent them being liable for costs if the court finds in BA's favour.

Be very careful about putting your name to this petition because you could lose your house and other possessions if it goes the wrong way.

The court may have required more names on the petition before allowing it to proceed so that BA have a chance of recouping their costs if they win.

I'm only speculating but is the reason why Unite was not on the original petition, because Unite itself is not a party to the actual contract of employment between BA and the employee?

I wonder if the remaining BASSA reps will put their money where their mouths are and join the court case as claimants?

[flyeruk69]

Being dismissed for taking part in protected industrial action

You will usually be protected against being dismissed for taking part in ‘protected industrial action’.
Industrial action will normally be protected industrial action if it is official action organised by your trade union in-line with the law. It will be organised in that way if:

• the dispute is a trade dispute between workers and their own employer
• a secret postal ballot has been held and the majority of members voting have supported the action
• detailed notice about the action has been given to the employer at least seven days before it commences
• it has been called for by someone in the trade union with proper authority

If you are dismissed for taking industrial action for 12 weeks or less (including a period of just a few hours or days), you will be able to make a claim for unfair dismissal and your dismissal will be unfair. This applies whether you are dismissed while taking part in the action or at any time after you stopped taking part.
When working out whether you have been taking part for 12 weeks or less any lock-out days (when your employer stops you from working) aren't counted

[The Blu Riband]

The max compensation ever paid amounted to 18 months basic.
Which would be less than 78,000 even for BA crew

The point many of you are missing is that Bassa and their supporters do not believe that BA will be able to continue any kind of operation once the strike starts, and will therefore be keen to quickly agree terms.

Will this happen?

If BA cannot prevent the strike from taking place what will they do?

1. Negotiate - most likely , but actually the problem is that Bassa don't know what they want. There are no proposals , and the ballot has no particular aim.

2. Starve out the strikers - unlikely because BA cannot afford it, and nor could Willie's ego.

3. Dismiss the strikers - possible, but if they do they'll have to ultimately destroy Bassa to avoid retribution. Or will Bassa be effectively destroyed by then anyway.

[finncapt]

LD12986

You may well be right.

However, I think that if they suggest these things, BASSA must make it clear what the downside is and what, if any, indemnity they can give.

This has the potential to be far more serious than any industrial action to an individual crew member.

I don't know how Balpa got round this issue when they started court action.

[Desertia]

I believe in a negotiated change to my terms and conditions and this would involve meaningful talks not lip service to say we tried. The new crewing levels and service routines didn't get written over night, these have been worked on for months and months and I believe this was BA's agenda for the last 2 years or so, BA never had the intention to find a negotiated settlement or way forward unless it was solely on their terms, disregarding any collective agreements that may stand in the way.

FlyerUK69, your sentiments are admirable and put most articulately. However, you're still asssuming that your union gave its members a fair chance. When even other unions were complaining about the lack of participation and effort from your reps, are you not even prepared to question their leadership yourself?

Because if someone with a reasoned argument such as yourself places complete trust in an organisation which is clearly opposed to "negotiated change", then really you are getting exactly that for which you are paying.

Of course it took months for BA to work on their imposition, the whole process started in February, didn't it? But the "BA have been working on it for the last 2 years or so"?

Maybe you are correct. Perhaps, when they started this whole process, and based on past experience, BA assumed that BASSA would not negotiate reasonably.

The big question is, were they wrong?

[Tiramisu]

Originally posted by Human Factor
Be aware that once the ballot result is announced (more than likely in favour), based upon previous disputes BA will contact you directly prior to the first strike day, whether you are rostered to work or not and will ask whether you are intending to strike.

Human Factor,
I joined BA as Cabin Crew in 1984 and having been through two full strikes previously, I wasn't contacted about my intention to strike by BA.

[BABOBO]

I have been following this thread for a couple of weeks and this post is my first contribution.

I am BA Cabin Crew and also a BASSA member. The current situation we find ourselves in at BA is absolutely dreadful. There is a lot of different emotions, feelings, opinions and information/communications out there (both from the company and the unions).

I also received my ballot paper and after much thought and deliberation I have returned it with a NO vote.

The main reasons I am voting against industrial action is covered in a lot of other posts on here. One of my main reasons however is, that I truly don't believe in strike and with that, disrupting so many people who in the end pay our wages and ensure we at BA are all in a job.

I know a lot of crew feel they have been pushed into a corner by the company and feel there is no other options. I however feel, that during the last year the unions haven't made a real effort. A lot of 'tantrums have been thrown' and hidden and personal agenda's were involved. I don't say it is all the fault of the unions as BA doesn't have a clean record either, but in the end, BA is a company and are in the business to make money and making money is certainly something we currently aren't doing.

I honestly don't know what will happen next. There will probably be a big Yes vote followed by industrial action. Partly because the Unions don't see they have another choice and partly because I personally think the company isn't afraid of this trike. I am actually quite convinced WW has 'a plan up his sleeve' to deal with this possible strike which just might turn out in favour of the company.

Reading some of the other forums, I am shocked about the attitude of a lot of my colleagues. The majority seem to swallow everything BASSA throws at them. They have completely lost touch with reality and can't seem to think for themselves. They have a 'blind trust' in BASSA and all they say..... and anyone who challenges BASSA or has a diferent opion gets completely slated . It seems more like a sect than a trade union.

I am also quit upset to read on several forums how a lot of crew are deliberately trying to make the new complements unworkable and a complete failure. This obviously fed by BASSA, the very same union which signed off the exact same crewing levels at LGW!!! And respect to everybody at LGW who have made the base a succes and shown that the LGW model works!!!

On the contrary I am also worried that the coming few months may mean the end of the unions. Although I don't agree with a lot BASSA does, nore with the politics involved, I still feel the Unions do some good work and serve a purpose at BA. But unfortunately I feel they are digging their own grave......

There is a lot I'd like to say but this post is allready all over the place. I don't find it easy to get my point accross 'on paper' but I felt I had to make an attempt.

I am worried about crossing the picket line but I will cross..... and I trully hope BA will come out of this as a stronger company with a worforce respecting their company and visa versa!!!

Regards to all!!!