British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: M3 usually!
Posts: 491
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
finncapt,
The action is being taken by UNITE (the country's second largest union) and not by BASSA or Amicus so I guess ultimately it will be UNITE who pays the bill if it all goes wrong. Presumably they have considered this in their calculations. That being said, I am unable to find any assurances in the blurb that is being sent out so would not like to swear to it!
As I read it, it is the court who has asked UNITE to provide the names of the crew who wish to proceed against BA but it does not say why. The original hearing was headlined as Malone v British Airways which is the name of one of BASSA's reps. Still no clearer really as to the risks. May have to wait to Feb to find out.
The action is being taken by UNITE (the country's second largest union) and not by BASSA or Amicus so I guess ultimately it will be UNITE who pays the bill if it all goes wrong. Presumably they have considered this in their calculations. That being said, I am unable to find any assurances in the blurb that is being sent out so would not like to swear to it!
As I read it, it is the court who has asked UNITE to provide the names of the crew who wish to proceed against BA but it does not say why. The original hearing was headlined as Malone v British Airways which is the name of one of BASSA's reps. Still no clearer really as to the risks. May have to wait to Feb to find out.
Re: reduced complement
Just operated a couple Longhaul flights with two different, v. pleasant CSDs and no issues at all with reduced crew level despite full cabins and one or two passenger and IFE issues. May I suggest it's not the reduced compliment that matters, it's the state of mind of those in charge on the day - then again the LGW crews know that.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Bath Road
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Crash and Burn
I think we need to speak to the CAA. If safety is being compromised then how come the legal minimum crew level onboard a 3 Class 777 would be 6 crew? or is it 8 I can't remember.
Also can you please explain why, when previously asked to fly a crew member down, it didn't compromise safety because you were paid a one-down payment.... If it is a safety issue, why didn't you refuse to fly when you were one down.. Why compromise safety to line your own pocket?
As the Union will be using safety as a defence come Feb, I am genuinely interested to know the difference between a 1 down payment and working the same level for free??
Surely the LGW fleet should be grounded right away until the crewing levels can be brought into line with the OLD LHR agreement?
Should the crew bases in BHX, GLA and MAN still have existed and BA had wanted to reduce the number of crew on routes operated by those bases, do you think BASSA would have cared? Not for a second if it had protected LHR.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Bath Road
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I have done a trip with a CSD who couldn't be less bothered and kept complaining, not only at the aircraft but also on the bus to and from the hotel and of course also at the hotel, about having to work in the cabin for an eternity until retirement - where in the job description does it say that the CSD should be part of the service this CSD kept asking.
Our CSD also threw comments card into the hands of those passengers with a complaint. If they wanted to email WW personally with their complaint our CSD happily offered to give them his email address. On top of this - endless speeches to some of the passengers about WW bringing down the airline and wanting to screw the entire cabin crew community.
CW Galley Operator (7) also spent both sectors complaining about running the galley without being paid to do it - the pursers should do it - not main crew. A main crew actually works as galley operator in First without any problems - response from CW Galley Operator - that's actually an agreement between BA and the unions!
Do some crew even know that many airlines have main crew working as galley operators? It's actually happening not too far away - Deutsche Lufthansa AG is one of them!
Our CSD also threw comments card into the hands of those passengers with a complaint. If they wanted to email WW personally with their complaint our CSD happily offered to give them his email address. On top of this - endless speeches to some of the passengers about WW bringing down the airline and wanting to screw the entire cabin crew community.
CW Galley Operator (7) also spent both sectors complaining about running the galley without being paid to do it - the pursers should do it - not main crew. A main crew actually works as galley operator in First without any problems - response from CW Galley Operator - that's actually an agreement between BA and the unions!
Do some crew even know that many airlines have main crew working as galley operators? It's actually happening not too far away - Deutsche Lufthansa AG is one of them!
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: LHR
Posts: 111
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
To Crash and Burn
My thoughts exactly with relation to the "One Down Payment"...
You can just hear the judge "Miss M, please can you tell me why BASSA agreed to compromise safety in exchange for financial reward on... (BA provide a long list of departures with one down) yet now without the reward you claim the operation is unsafe? Furthermore, Gatwick based BA Cabin Crew operate to lower crewing levels, is this unsafe?"
How I would love to be a fly on the wall that day. I see BASSA are requesting reports from crew of onboard difficulties, incuding reduced rest. How many reports of east coast flights will there be when bunk rest was reduced from 90 minutes to 60 minutes? By the way, crew are not entitled to bunk rest on these flights
The BASSA train appears to be coming off the rails. Can the cabin crew take action against the union leadership for "representing" them so appallingly?
You can just hear the judge "Miss M, please can you tell me why BASSA agreed to compromise safety in exchange for financial reward on... (BA provide a long list of departures with one down) yet now without the reward you claim the operation is unsafe? Furthermore, Gatwick based BA Cabin Crew operate to lower crewing levels, is this unsafe?"
How I would love to be a fly on the wall that day. I see BASSA are requesting reports from crew of onboard difficulties, incuding reduced rest. How many reports of east coast flights will there be when bunk rest was reduced from 90 minutes to 60 minutes? By the way, crew are not entitled to bunk rest on these flights
The BASSA train appears to be coming off the rails. Can the cabin crew take action against the union leadership for "representing" them so appallingly?
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: England
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
When we talk about pension benefits, don't forget.....
Our company have a very generous AVC scheme for those NAPS members (inc. A Lurker). No charge to invest in any of the three funds and some of the best performing returns in the market.
It's important not to lose sight of all the benefits of working for BA, we are taken care of! Ask any of our cabin crew colleagues who have come from other carriers. My friend has worked for a global telecoms company for 12 years full time (middle manager) and just been made redundant, he was given 12000 GBP.
BA has a history of implementing legislation on time eg. working time directive, age discrimination and partime working to name a few. I can assure any doubters that the outside world is VERY different.
As we go through this tough, but necessary change we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that these benefits don't just come on a plate. These benefits come from being sucessful. This year we are going to lose 700-800 m GBP we can't have it both ways, the appropriate response is 'how can we help? Anything else threatens all that we enjoy, wood for the trees and all that!
It's important not to lose sight of all the benefits of working for BA, we are taken care of! Ask any of our cabin crew colleagues who have come from other carriers. My friend has worked for a global telecoms company for 12 years full time (middle manager) and just been made redundant, he was given 12000 GBP.
BA has a history of implementing legislation on time eg. working time directive, age discrimination and partime working to name a few. I can assure any doubters that the outside world is VERY different.
As we go through this tough, but necessary change we shouldn't lose sight of the fact that these benefits don't just come on a plate. These benefits come from being sucessful. This year we are going to lose 700-800 m GBP we can't have it both ways, the appropriate response is 'how can we help? Anything else threatens all that we enjoy, wood for the trees and all that!
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With the new changes imposed, during the safety demo on the 747, there are now no crew covering doors 5. They are standing at the front of E zone.
During start up and taxi when generally there is a higher probability of things going wrong like an engine fire, why have BA decided to leave these doors unguarded? A recent point of case was the Phoenix evacaution which occurred just after start up. If crew are at the front of E zone, they would be unable to reach the doors at the back if there was an emergency evacuation due to panicking passengers blocking the aisles.
This is not the first time BA have compromised safety to reduce crew. They and one other airline (KLM I think), were the only two to deactivate the emergency exits at 3 left and right on the 747-100's and 200's.
During start up and taxi when generally there is a higher probability of things going wrong like an engine fire, why have BA decided to leave these doors unguarded? A recent point of case was the Phoenix evacaution which occurred just after start up. If crew are at the front of E zone, they would be unable to reach the doors at the back if there was an emergency evacuation due to panicking passengers blocking the aisles.
This is not the first time BA have compromised safety to reduce crew. They and one other airline (KLM I think), were the only two to deactivate the emergency exits at 3 left and right on the 747-100's and 200's.
Last edited by Fume Event; 23rd Nov 2009 at 18:21.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: Island of Aphrodite
Age: 75
Posts: 530
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fume Event.
Since you are concerned about safety, I will repeat my last post as a simple question.
If you thought safety was compromised on your trip by the withdrawal of one crew member, did you submit an ASR?
Simple question, simple answer requested - Yes or No
Since you are concerned about safety, I will repeat my last post as a simple question.
If you thought safety was compromised on your trip by the withdrawal of one crew member, did you submit an ASR?
Simple question, simple answer requested - Yes or No
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: London
Posts: 9
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Working a crew member down
Just out of interest, will BA flights ever operate with less than the new crew complement, with them receiving an extra payment? Or are the new crewing levels the absolute minimum they are able to go out with, so if someone can't operate at the last minute and a standby crew member is unable to be found, the flight won't go/ be delayed until they get someone else?
The all new disruption agreement is not an 'agreement'. It's called the operational recovery procedure. The company won't do any more agreements as it leads to the tail wagging the dog as has become the case now.
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Bath Road
Posts: 266
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA runs the airline - and they are also both scared and desperate to lose control of their power!
Not a single aircraft can leave LHR will less crew than agreed without BA having to gain permission from Miss Malone and her pact.
Can anyone remember when BASSA ordered an aircraft enroute LHR from somewhere in the US to divert because the cabin crew were running out of hours - as per agreement - but they were within legal limitations as per JAR-OPS? WW went mad and was furious. Fully understandable.
Marty172 - Good question. The new crewing levels are above minimum legal requirements. 747 has 14 CC (A minimum of 12 is required - 11 can be carried without passengers on UD), 767 has 7 CC and CANNOT leave base with less than that. 777 has 11 CC and minimum crew is either 8 or 9 depending on configuration.
It still doesn't mean anything because BASSA will do everything they can to fight any aircraft leaving with even less crew now. That's my opinion.
Not a single aircraft can leave LHR will less crew than agreed without BA having to gain permission from Miss Malone and her pact.
Can anyone remember when BASSA ordered an aircraft enroute LHR from somewhere in the US to divert because the cabin crew were running out of hours - as per agreement - but they were within legal limitations as per JAR-OPS? WW went mad and was furious. Fully understandable.
Marty172 - Good question. The new crewing levels are above minimum legal requirements. 747 has 14 CC (A minimum of 12 is required - 11 can be carried without passengers on UD), 767 has 7 CC and CANNOT leave base with less than that. 777 has 11 CC and minimum crew is either 8 or 9 depending on configuration.
It still doesn't mean anything because BASSA will do everything they can to fight any aircraft leaving with even less crew now. That's my opinion.
Fume Event
Why was it safe to operate one down if you had extra pay to do it, but now less safe if you don't get the payment?
The CAA fix the min safe number of crew on a 744 and it's 12.
The CAA fix the min safe number of crew on a 744 and it's 12.
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: South of MAN, North of BHX, and well clear of Stoke ;-)
Posts: 487
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fume Event
Iberia crew had much of their ancillary payments restructured in 2005/6, and have worked through a FOUR YEAR pay freeze.
BA operate to the Rules and Regulations of the CAA. Are you inferring therefore that in your impending litigation, you will be naming the CAA as defendants also? 
Times are changing. It's time BASSA represented the majority of its membership, not just those in The La La Home for senior junkets.
Whilst Iberia cabin crew get a pay rise even though they earn greatly more than BA cabin crew, it seems that it is only the British part of the new conglomerate which is expected to be efficient and profitable.
This is not the first time BA have compromised safety to reduce crew.
Times are changing. It's time BASSA represented the majority of its membership, not just those in The La La Home for senior junkets.
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: LHR
Posts: 741
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I believe Unite, the parent union of BASSA, have stated on their website that the union will cover all court costs of the plaintives.
Anyone with access to the BASSA site may be able to confirm this.
If I was on the list, I would also want binding guarantees that I would also be indemnified for any compensation awarded by the court to BA.
Anyone with access to the BASSA site may be able to confirm this.
If I was on the list, I would also want binding guarantees that I would also be indemnified for any compensation awarded by the court to BA.
You have to go into this with your eyes wide open knowing exactly what you're letting yourself in for.
Last edited by LD12986; 23rd Nov 2009 at 21:21.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Fume Event should already know that BA have received approval from the CAA for the new crewing arrangements. The name of the CAA contact who confirmed this is available on the dark side forum. The regulator has concluded that if the crew are standing in the aisles doing the safety demo (which is when door 5 is unguarded) then they should be able to get to the door in an emergency faster than seated and strapped in passengers. Of course it doesn't help if you're trying to play the safety card and the regulator has stated that there isn't a card to be played.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It is not unusual of course to operate one crewmember down through sickness or disruption.
How shocked were our pax to hear recently, that we could 'legally' depart one crew member down, but BASSA wouldn't allow it! Hence a one hour delay on stand awaiting a further crew member! How shocked also were the cabin crew to hear their restrictive practices revealed in a PA to the customers they would be sharing the next hour with!
My response? Why wouldn't we tell the pax the true reason for their delay??
We were even told the a/c would be recalled to stand if we attempted to depart with perfectly legal (though not 'industrial') crew numbers! (Even with the agreement of the crew!!) Such is the current stranglehold of BASSA. Enough is enough!
This lead me to ask, who is running this airline? And for whose benefit? It certainly doesn't seem to be for the fare-paying public!!
CRM in BA in a 'few' respects is already a joke. Just read the BASSA website (as I do!) to see the reality!
All power to the excellent majority of our cabin crew who live and work in the real world! Some of whom have posted here.
Last edited by 4468; 23rd Nov 2009 at 22:58.