British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It would seem that more and more crew are coming to realise the shambles that BASSA have led them into.
It is indeed sad that, in order to get a balanced, reasoned and argued view, crew need to come to an open public forum and not have access to debate upon their own Union forums.
Throughout this rather lengthy discourse a whole gambit of reason as to why the BASSA stance is flawed has been aired by a variety of posters. Some of whom work for BA, some of whom work as crew for other Airlines, some of whom fly as pax with BA and some of whom have flown with BA and thus can offer a comparison insight.
Unfortunately, apart from one or two BASSA posters who were prepared to accept valid argument, most of the return from those supporting the BASSA stance has been in the nature of rhetoric, BASSA/Unite 100%, questioning the facts of others without countering with facts from the BASSA proposals.
The 'new' crewing levels introduced on SH yesterday didn't seem to cause a blip. In line with the new procedures the max pax in Club before an extra crew member is required has now dropped from 21 to 16. Hardly world shattering.
I think Unite/BASSA have been backed heavily into a corner. They announced that imposition would be met with Ballot. Well they've balloted. They announced that balloting would result in a strong 'Yes' vote. Then they transmit a begging missive stating that they realise that the 90%+ vote of last time, which resulted in a win for BA and nothing for BASSA, is unachievable but please vote anyway as people die in countries for the right to vote! Running scared? If BASSA want to delay IA for 8 weeks, but only with the agreement of BA, then that would take IA past the court case date. I don't think BA will allow that to happen! So, after the ballot BASSA have 4 weeks to take IA. Over what? Nobody from BASSA seems to be able to state over what.
The court case comes in Feb and is one that BASSA MUST WIN TO SURVIVE! If BASSA lose the case then BA will come hunting for costs and damages and it will be a bill that even Unite cannot cover. (just think forward bookings and disruption costs!)
This has nothing whatsoever to do with New Fleet, productivity or even, as far as BASSA are concerned, money. Why else fight on when BA stated that they would 'top up' pay with an average payment if the CC took hourly rate? Simple the 'averaging' would benefit those at the bottom whilst those at the top would see a drop. Surely that's how averaging works? It is also exactly what the pilots did five years back and the new system works extremely well.
BASSA is in a power struggle. Willie Walsh wants to get rid of the BASSA grip on the decision making in the company and return it to where it should be, the operations department. The BASSA hierarchy cannot and will not give this up.
Time to change a corrupt (just look at the 'show of hands' not to vote us out yet at the last meeting!) BASSA heirarchy.
Waiting for CFC's words of infinite wisdom.
It is indeed sad that, in order to get a balanced, reasoned and argued view, crew need to come to an open public forum and not have access to debate upon their own Union forums.
Throughout this rather lengthy discourse a whole gambit of reason as to why the BASSA stance is flawed has been aired by a variety of posters. Some of whom work for BA, some of whom work as crew for other Airlines, some of whom fly as pax with BA and some of whom have flown with BA and thus can offer a comparison insight.
Unfortunately, apart from one or two BASSA posters who were prepared to accept valid argument, most of the return from those supporting the BASSA stance has been in the nature of rhetoric, BASSA/Unite 100%, questioning the facts of others without countering with facts from the BASSA proposals.
The 'new' crewing levels introduced on SH yesterday didn't seem to cause a blip. In line with the new procedures the max pax in Club before an extra crew member is required has now dropped from 21 to 16. Hardly world shattering.
I think Unite/BASSA have been backed heavily into a corner. They announced that imposition would be met with Ballot. Well they've balloted. They announced that balloting would result in a strong 'Yes' vote. Then they transmit a begging missive stating that they realise that the 90%+ vote of last time, which resulted in a win for BA and nothing for BASSA, is unachievable but please vote anyway as people die in countries for the right to vote! Running scared? If BASSA want to delay IA for 8 weeks, but only with the agreement of BA, then that would take IA past the court case date. I don't think BA will allow that to happen! So, after the ballot BASSA have 4 weeks to take IA. Over what? Nobody from BASSA seems to be able to state over what.
The court case comes in Feb and is one that BASSA MUST WIN TO SURVIVE! If BASSA lose the case then BA will come hunting for costs and damages and it will be a bill that even Unite cannot cover. (just think forward bookings and disruption costs!)
This has nothing whatsoever to do with New Fleet, productivity or even, as far as BASSA are concerned, money. Why else fight on when BA stated that they would 'top up' pay with an average payment if the CC took hourly rate? Simple the 'averaging' would benefit those at the bottom whilst those at the top would see a drop. Surely that's how averaging works? It is also exactly what the pilots did five years back and the new system works extremely well.
BASSA is in a power struggle. Willie Walsh wants to get rid of the BASSA grip on the decision making in the company and return it to where it should be, the operations department. The BASSA hierarchy cannot and will not give this up.
Time to change a corrupt (just look at the 'show of hands' not to vote us out yet at the last meeting!) BASSA heirarchy.
Waiting for CFC's words of infinite wisdom.
This has nothing whatsoever to do with New Fleet, productivity or even, as far as BASSA are concerned, money.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bucks
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Student In Debt
New Fleet as yet, has not been brought up and UNITE themselves say at the moment BA Cabin Crew are not in dispute over New Fleet as this is a totally separate issue to the recent imposition.
As and when New Fleet is imposed there will be a second round of balloting and the threat of IA will once again be upon us
As and when New Fleet is imposed there will be a second round of balloting and the threat of IA will once again be upon us
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Overseas
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Student in debt - Tell me you are joking? The only thing CC should be worried about is New Fleet as that IS the game changer. No court is ever going to prevent a company imposing 'essential' changes to T&C's, and convincing a court that theses tiny changes to working levels are essential will be childs play to a QC.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sunny East Sussex
Age: 49
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BASSA election
There has been a lot of talk about voting out the current BASSA reps after this fiasco is over. I'm afraid it may not be that simple.
Of the list of positions up for election, only the deputy convener positions were available for new candidates. All other positions required a person with at least 2 years as a current rep . I think the chairperson position required 4 years!!!!
So, even if all BASSA members wanted a completely new bunch of reps, they could only replace the junior reps, and all the old guard are safe.
Of the list of positions up for election, only the deputy convener positions were available for new candidates. All other positions required a person with at least 2 years as a current rep
. I think the chairperson position required 4 years!!!!So, even if all BASSA members wanted a completely new bunch of reps, they could only replace the junior reps, and all the old guard are safe.
Junior trash
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As and when New Fleet is imposed there will be a second round of balloting and the threat of IA will once again be upon us
Savings from future crew
The proposal to mix future crew with current crew would have required significant changes for you.
I’ve listened to your feedback and I will now look to make savings from future crew at Heathrow, who will join a separate new fleet. These crew will be rostered and will fly separately from you on new terms and conditions. We do not envisage any new crew joining BA until the business begins to grow again.
The proposal to mix future crew with current crew would have required significant changes for you.
I’ve listened to your feedback and I will now look to make savings from future crew at Heathrow, who will join a separate new fleet. These crew will be rostered and will fly separately from you on new terms and conditions. We do not envisage any new crew joining BA until the business begins to grow again.
Join Date: Aug 2003
Location: somewhere between Miami and Havana
Posts: 123
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, even if all BASSA members wanted a completely new bunch of reps, they could only replace the junior reps, and all the old guard are safe.
Join Date: May 1999
Location: Overseas
Posts: 203
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The trouble is, Mr Lurker, just whom is New Fleet an imposition upon? Not existing staff as their contract of employment remains the same. Surely any company has the right to employ new people on whatever (legal) contract they like - as long as people are prepared to sign, thats it.
This is why so many of us are so frustrated with BASSA. New Fleet cannot be stopped by the union - only negotiation could have secured all new joiners onto existing contracts. Remember what came out of the racecourse 'meetings'? No to any negotiations. So thats it then. New Fleet will arrive because BA can do it. Anything else; crewing levels, disruption agreements, days off, finishing times or numbers of seniors on board is merely froth on the ocean of change that New Fleet will bring.
BASSA could have stopped New Fleet but they (not the 14000 members) decided on a No Negotiations stance. Just remember that in 5 years time.
This is why so many of us are so frustrated with BASSA. New Fleet cannot be stopped by the union - only negotiation could have secured all new joiners onto existing contracts. Remember what came out of the racecourse 'meetings'? No to any negotiations. So thats it then. New Fleet will arrive because BA can do it. Anything else; crewing levels, disruption agreements, days off, finishing times or numbers of seniors on board is merely froth on the ocean of change that New Fleet will bring.
BASSA could have stopped New Fleet but they (not the 14000 members) decided on a No Negotiations stance. Just remember that in 5 years time.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
One thing I have been constantly amazed about, is how BASSA manages to throw the various parts of the company to the lions in order to protect LHR. (Think of the regions, the Glasgow base, the Ts&Cs at LGW they happily gave away to prevent LHR having to work harder, despite those Ts&Cs now being 'unsafe for pax' and 'bad for crew health' etc when LHR crew have to work with them)
Anyway, one thing that I was really shocked by, and that very few people have picked up on, is that now the BASSA reps are starting to sell out Eurofleet in order to protect WorldWide. The cannibal is starting to eat itself! I know a lot of crew are upset about the pay cut BASSA offered, that BA didn't even want, and I know a few crew have worked out one of the other little cheeky bits in their offering, ie the increments freeze for most people. How many of the senior reps and CSDs are on the top increment already? That freeze won't make a jot of difference to the likes of the BASSA chair.
The issue I'm thinking about is the kind offer of BASSA to let the WW 767 go to Eurofleet. Why? Because WW crew hate the 767 trips, there is no bunk for them to rest in, and they are usually some of the lowest paying trips.
Do the crew on Eurofleet, (who are more often than not there for a lifestyle choice because they like being home at night) want a load of low paying trips to Africa and Canada in the middle of the winter? Did anyone actually ask them?
Say by some twist of technology the 767 had some giant winglets and new super biofuel engines fitted and was now being used on BKK/SYD or NRT, triggering all sorts of lovely box payments, do you think Eurofleet would be getting a look in still? Not a chance. So, not just content to feed other bases to the lions, they now turn on their own colleagues at their own base, and without even asking their opinions, they try and get rid of the dross they don't like and offload it on good old Eurofleet. Thanks a bunch!
Can you imagine if BA suggested using WW crew on a 777 to do the night moscow? Or the day moscow? They could probably fill up the 1st Class cabin, we all know what the club loads can be like. It would be a great product, better IFE etc. Can you imagine the WW crew going "to moscow, and back, on the same day Darling? I don't think so!!"
They should be ashamed of themselves, and Eurofleet crew have every right to be angry.
Eurofleet crew watch out, you're next in line to be sold out
Anyway, one thing that I was really shocked by, and that very few people have picked up on, is that now the BASSA reps are starting to sell out Eurofleet in order to protect WorldWide. The cannibal is starting to eat itself! I know a lot of crew are upset about the pay cut BASSA offered, that BA didn't even want, and I know a few crew have worked out one of the other little cheeky bits in their offering, ie the increments freeze for most people. How many of the senior reps and CSDs are on the top increment already? That freeze won't make a jot of difference to the likes of the BASSA chair.
The issue I'm thinking about is the kind offer of BASSA to let the WW 767 go to Eurofleet. Why? Because WW crew hate the 767 trips, there is no bunk for them to rest in, and they are usually some of the lowest paying trips.
Do the crew on Eurofleet, (who are more often than not there for a lifestyle choice because they like being home at night) want a load of low paying trips to Africa and Canada in the middle of the winter? Did anyone actually ask them?
Say by some twist of technology the 767 had some giant winglets and new super biofuel engines fitted and was now being used on BKK/SYD or NRT, triggering all sorts of lovely box payments, do you think Eurofleet would be getting a look in still? Not a chance. So, not just content to feed other bases to the lions, they now turn on their own colleagues at their own base, and without even asking their opinions, they try and get rid of the dross they don't like and offload it on good old Eurofleet. Thanks a bunch!
Can you imagine if BA suggested using WW crew on a 777 to do the night moscow? Or the day moscow? They could probably fill up the 1st Class cabin, we all know what the club loads can be like. It would be a great product, better IFE etc. Can you imagine the WW crew going "to moscow, and back, on the same day Darling? I don't think so!!"
They should be ashamed of themselves, and Eurofleet crew have every right to be angry.
Eurofleet crew watch out, you're next in line to be sold out
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: uk
Age: 55
Posts: 46
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The issue I'm thinking about is the kind offer of BASSA to let the WW 767 go to Eurofleet. Why? Because WW crew hate the 767 trips, there is no bunk for them to rest in, and they are usually some of the lowest paying trips.
The 767 trips are not hated by the majority of crew who work on it they in fact much prefer it, especially going to the east coast of the states, which it mainly goes. In fact the most crew enjoy it. Granted there is a perception with crews who don't fly the 767 you get less days off but there are less trips that generate two days off than the 777.
As for being paid less for the trips, this is also not true, the majority of trips pay the same, if not more as many of the 777/ 747 trips excluding the long range trips. There are more trips on the worldwide fleet that are none long range than long range
As for in flight rest well some of the days are long and not a bunk in sight, the same can be said for a lot of the 777's we fly on.
The proposal from BASSA to have Eurofleet to do the 767 work was to protect the CSD rank on Eurofleet it also gave other crew on Eurofleet a bit of long haul if they wanted it.
The 767 trips are not hated by the majority of crew who work on it they in fact much prefer it, especially going to the east coast of the states, which it mainly goes. In fact the most crew enjoy it. Granted there is a perception with crews who don't fly the 767 you get less days off but there are less trips that generate two days off than the 777.
As for being paid less for the trips, this is also not true, the majority of trips pay the same, if not more as many of the 777/ 747 trips excluding the long range trips. There are more trips on the worldwide fleet that are none long range than long range
As for in flight rest well some of the days are long and not a bunk in sight, the same can be said for a lot of the 777's we fly on.
The proposal from BASSA to have Eurofleet to do the 767 work was to protect the CSD rank on Eurofleet it also gave other crew on Eurofleet a bit of long haul if they wanted it.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Amazing isn't it, reading through the posts posted by BA crew, some members of BASSA or at least were until BASSA messed it all up again.
This is a Union that is so out of touch with its membership. The BASSA reps, you know the ones, those who sit at the top of the tree on the LH, high paying, part timer trips. Those who back slapped the 'sacked' allocator who 'apparently' seemed to always allocate the same high paying trips to the same crews and then gets hailed a hero by the BASSA front line.
They have no body parts left to throw to the wolves, all external bases are gone or already rationlised. They are experiencing an attack on the core body of BASSA, something that could threaten their elevated position and they will do anything to protect themselves. They aren't interested in the affect on junior crew of the imposition of new fleet. They are concerned that New Fleet will remove their ludicrously high paying cushy routes that they hold so dear. The ones that no one else can get on because the dinosaurs at the top of BASSA seem to get them all of the time. They aren't interested in rationalising the pay system as an average out will see the top end losing money! Can't have that can we now! Before anyone cries foul and 'they are rewarding experience'. The FC have already gone through this process and the fleets are much more relaxed as a result. It takes away the destination payment lottery and replaces it with 'where would I like to see this time'.
This Union is totally out of control. IA for New Fleet? What ballot again? It cannot be done as a previous poster pointed out it is all rolled up by BA into the one, current imposition.
Time for change and time those milking the system and the junior crew to move aside. The world, economics, demographics and time have passed you by.
Can you change the Union? Of course. You can force a ballot of no confidence in the leadership team if BASSA lose the court action and end up paying all of your Union contributions to BA as a direct result of ineffectual action. BASSA love votes of no confidence, I wonder if they would like that one?
This is a Union that is so out of touch with its membership. The BASSA reps, you know the ones, those who sit at the top of the tree on the LH, high paying, part timer trips. Those who back slapped the 'sacked' allocator who 'apparently' seemed to always allocate the same high paying trips to the same crews and then gets hailed a hero by the BASSA front line.
They have no body parts left to throw to the wolves, all external bases are gone or already rationlised. They are experiencing an attack on the core body of BASSA, something that could threaten their elevated position and they will do anything to protect themselves. They aren't interested in the affect on junior crew of the imposition of new fleet. They are concerned that New Fleet will remove their ludicrously high paying cushy routes that they hold so dear. The ones that no one else can get on because the dinosaurs at the top of BASSA seem to get them all of the time. They aren't interested in rationalising the pay system as an average out will see the top end losing money! Can't have that can we now! Before anyone cries foul and 'they are rewarding experience'. The FC have already gone through this process and the fleets are much more relaxed as a result. It takes away the destination payment lottery and replaces it with 'where would I like to see this time'.
This Union is totally out of control. IA for New Fleet? What ballot again? It cannot be done as a previous poster pointed out it is all rolled up by BA into the one, current imposition.
Time for change and time those milking the system and the junior crew to move aside. The world, economics, demographics and time have passed you by.
Can you change the Union? Of course. You can force a ballot of no confidence in the leadership team if BASSA lose the court action and end up paying all of your Union contributions to BA as a direct result of ineffectual action. BASSA love votes of no confidence, I wonder if they would like that one?
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Flyeruk69 wrote
A common theme in BASSA....
But do they want it? Did anyone bother to ask them? It's not like BASSA didn't have months and months and months to actually poll their members and find out what they, the members, actually want. The members are supposed to be the important ones in the union. And by that I mean the vast majority, not the gold-plated few.
The proposal from BASSA to have Eurofleet to do the 767 work was to protect the CSD rank...
it also gave other crew on Eurofleet a bit of long haul if they wanted it.
Join Date: Sep 2007
Location: United Kingdom
Posts: 27
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Don't forget about the Purser / Main Crew swap on the 3-class B777 at LGW!!! In BASSA's very first counter proposal this was one of the only items BASSA agreed with...... now they are trying to gain support at LGW from Pursers by saying 'Pursers loose out in allowances due to less longhaul flying beacuse of the Purser / Main Crew swap'...... funnily enough they (BASSA) forget to mention / remind crew, they agreed with this particular bit of the company's proposal!!!
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: leafy suburbs
Posts: 308
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
New Fleet
I always thought that the New Fleet was associated with the A380 and B787. So on that basis, I am certain New Fleet will happen.
I speculate that the A380 and B787 will end up doing the "lucrative" routes. So if this IS BASSA's line of thinking (though to be honest, reading through these threads I find it hard to believe at the moment) they would be upset at the "New Fleet" as all the money making routes will disappear.
BASSA have missed an opportunity by not negotiating.
I was beginning to find this thread monotonous, but new blood has ignited my interest with well thought out arguments.
To CFC et al, if you would be so kind to answer the questions put to you, "we" as readers and contributors would have a much better appreciation of where you are coming from. The attitude of "because I said so" does not wash. I, and I imagine most of the contributors here, are information hungry. To get a balanced view of the CC situation and thoughts, throwing your toys out of the pram does not help. You would get far more appreciation if your arguments were well put, even if people did not agree with you. I would also think that you may feel satisfaction that you have put your points over in an adult way.
Just for the record I do work for BA, though not in CC, so I want as much reasoned information as possible from BOTH sides, but at the moment it is rather one sided!
I speculate that the A380 and B787 will end up doing the "lucrative" routes. So if this IS BASSA's line of thinking (though to be honest, reading through these threads I find it hard to believe at the moment) they would be upset at the "New Fleet" as all the money making routes will disappear.
BASSA have missed an opportunity by not negotiating.
I was beginning to find this thread monotonous, but new blood has ignited my interest with well thought out arguments.
To CFC et al, if you would be so kind to answer the questions put to you, "we" as readers and contributors would have a much better appreciation of where you are coming from. The attitude of "because I said so" does not wash. I, and I imagine most of the contributors here, are information hungry. To get a balanced view of the CC situation and thoughts, throwing your toys out of the pram does not help. You would get far more appreciation if your arguments were well put, even if people did not agree with you. I would also think that you may feel satisfaction that you have put your points over in an adult way.
Just for the record I do work for BA, though not in CC, so I want as much reasoned information as possible from BOTH sides, but at the moment it is rather one sided!
Signs of the much needed changes in BA are also beginning to appear in the paperwork. New directive this week clearly shows that the head of IFCE (cabin crew head honcho), amongst other things, will now report to the Director of Flight Ops for safety and compliance responsibilities under EU-Ops. That has been a long time coming, and is a necessary shift in the power balance.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, the head of IFcE finally reports directly to the Director of Flight Operations!
Just as with almost every other Airline in the world!
Does this mean that the line responsibility will finally be placed with the Captain? With no wishy washy grey blurring of the lines of responsibility? All crew, crew rest, disruption, hours, discretion etc. etc. being decided not by a power hungry Union but by the Captain with the best interests of the paying passenger at heart?
One can only hope so!
Just as with almost every other Airline in the world!
Does this mean that the line responsibility will finally be placed with the Captain? With no wishy washy grey blurring of the lines of responsibility? All crew, crew rest, disruption, hours, discretion etc. etc. being decided not by a power hungry Union but by the Captain with the best interests of the paying passenger at heart?
One can only hope so!
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: East Sussex
Posts: 119
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
My understanding is that cabin service has always been the Captains responsibility and that it was delegated to the CSD to organise on his/her behalf.
I thought discression was the Captains responsibility.
I thought discression was the Captains responsibility.