British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: East sussex
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Glamgirl,
it is very frustrating this lack of talks between the two parties. Comments have been made a few days ago might shed some light for you.....
Your Union is more than happy to sit down anytime, anywhere to resolve the issues between us, in the end that is what will need to be done. British Airways, so they say, will do the same... but only about new fleet. That is NOT acceptable to any of us.
They will NOT agree to remove or talk about any of the items of imposition.
Keep talking?
If Bill Francis is so keen to talk, why does he never do so? Instead, he prefers to do all of his talking in front of the camera, or via ESS emails. In reality, we have not spoken or heard a word from Bill Francis since June 30th this year. If he is so keen to reach an agreement, why does he not try to do so? In the past, every head of cabin service, no matter how difficult the situation, has maintained an open communication with the union to explore ways of trying to resolve the issues. To repeat, we have not received a single solitary word or phone call from him for nearly six months.
it is very frustrating this lack of talks between the two parties. Comments have been made a few days ago might shed some light for you.....
Your Union is more than happy to sit down anytime, anywhere to resolve the issues between us, in the end that is what will need to be done. British Airways, so they say, will do the same... but only about new fleet. That is NOT acceptable to any of us.
They will NOT agree to remove or talk about any of the items of imposition.
Keep talking?
If Bill Francis is so keen to talk, why does he never do so? Instead, he prefers to do all of his talking in front of the camera, or via ESS emails. In reality, we have not spoken or heard a word from Bill Francis since June 30th this year. If he is so keen to reach an agreement, why does he not try to do so? In the past, every head of cabin service, no matter how difficult the situation, has maintained an open communication with the union to explore ways of trying to resolve the issues. To repeat, we have not received a single solitary word or phone call from him for nearly six months.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CFC,
And there is the problem. Who runs the company? Who is in charge here? I know the union wants to be in charge of the company, but that's not how a company works.
I do find it odd that the union hasn't heard from BF since late June. Have they had comms from anyone else in management? I'm guessing it's a catch-22 regardless, because if BF did call the unions, he'd be harassing them, right?
Gg
Your Union is more than happy to sit down anytime, anywhere to resolve the issues between us, in the end that is what will need to be done. British Airways, so they say, will do the same... but only about new fleet. That is NOT acceptable to any of us.
They will NOT agree to remove or talk about any of the items of imposition.
They will NOT agree to remove or talk about any of the items of imposition.
I do find it odd that the union hasn't heard from BF since late June. Have they had comms from anyone else in management? I'm guessing it's a catch-22 regardless, because if BF did call the unions, he'd be harassing them, right?
Gg
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
we have not spoken or heard a word from Bill Francis since June 30th this year
So I take it that Bill was available before June 30th - but Bassa choose NOT to negotiate before then.
It has been commented elsewhere that during the last round of pension talks Bassa reps only turned up on average to 1 out of every 5 meetings, and Balpa were asked to look after their interests by the Bassa Chair on numerous occasions, I understand Bassa have acted in a similar manner throughout these talks.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: East sussex
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GG,
Why do you say the union wants to run the company?
Regarding BF not contacting the unions - if you find this hard to believe why not ask him yourself - he's regularly holding live webchats on the BA forum and has a floorplate meeting every Wednesday in CRC.
Why do you say the union wants to run the company?
Regarding BF not contacting the unions - if you find this hard to believe why not ask him yourself - he's regularly holding live webchats on the BA forum and has a floorplate meeting every Wednesday in CRC.
Join Date: Oct 2000
Location: uk
Posts: 267
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Bill Francis in today's BA news:
In This week’s BA News, head of IFCE Bill Francis addresses some of the top issues about cost savings in IFCE. since the Unite strike ballot opened, Bill and his team have telephoned more than 10,000 cabin crew and met up with many of them to make sure they have the facts before they vote.
And, as the ballot approaches its final week, Bill explains why he thinks Unite should lift its strike threat and resume talks on the issues facing cabin crew. Still talking: Bill Francis and his team have called more than 10,000 cabin crew to tell them about the airline’s package
Why are we trying to make cost savings in IFCE?
I’m really proud of the cabin crew we have. They do a fantastic job for our airline and our customers. But BA made a record loss last year, and analysts forecast we’re heading for losses again, of up to £800m this year.
Everywhere in BA, costs have to be reduced if we’re to stand any chance of achieving the profitability that is essential to securing our long-term future.
IFCE must play its part in this process.
Why is Unite balloting for a strike?
Unite doesn’t say on its ballot form why it is asking cabin crew to strike. I believe there’s no justification for Unite to create such uncertainty for our cabin crew and to threaten our customers in this way. Let me explain why:
1. Unite asked for a court hearing in February, but is threatening a strike now. We introduced our new crew complements from November after nine months’ consultation with Unite. We believe the changes don’t alter individual terms and conditions. We couldn’t wait any longer to make the cost savings and it meant I could offer 3,000 part-time contracts and 1,000 cabin crew the voluntary redundancy they had asked for. Most of those people have now left BA. Unite thinks the changes are contractual and need formal agreement. It started legal proceedings and when the High Court didn’t grant it an injunction to stop the changes going ahead, Unite asked for a full court hearing. Having chosen the legal route, why is Unite threatening a strike now, before the court hearing in February can consider the arguments?
2. We’re not taking pay or allowances away. There’s a two-year basic pay freeze in my plan, but even so, there will be incremental pay rises of between two and seven per cent this year, and again in 2010, for the 75 per cent of crew who are eligible. I’ve also offered to protect average variable pay for Heathrow crew by replacing it with a new fixed monthly travel payment. That’s an offer to Unite and we need it to agree if we are going to introduce it for all our Heathrow cabin crew.
3. There’s no dispute on new fleet. In a letter to Willie Walsh dated November 19, Unite wrote: “While we have clear concerns about your proposals in respect to ‘new fleet’, we are of course not in dispute over ‘new fleet’.” Despite this, Willie accepted a request from Unite when he met it in October to consider alternative ideas it might have, although we haven’t had any yet.
Why won’t you negotiate with the union?
I want to negotiate and reach an agreement with Unite on the rest of my plan, including changes to the worldwide disruption agreement and the offer of a new monthly travel payment. I cannot implement changes to contractual pay, hours or leave arrangements without agreement, and I don’t want to. As I’ve already said, crew complements were introduced after nine months of consultation, and that’s now in the hands of the court.
So why haven’t you met with Unite since June?
We have. We went to Acas in July, but those talks didn’t go smoothly.
On July 23, Unite registered a failure to agree because it insisted that talks could only continue if they were solely based on its own proposal and were nothing to do with our proposal. This resulted in the talks being escalated to Willie and the Unite general secretaries on August 27. We tried to meet again at Acas at the end of September, but by this time the two branches of
Unite would not sit in the same room together. The resumption of talks is not dependent on the ballot outcome. Talks can restart at any time. Despite lots of invitations since then, Unite still hasn’t agreed a date when it will meet us again.
Are you forcing new contracts on current crew?
No. My plan protects the pay and conditions for our current crew. We can’t afford the same contracts for future crew, which is why we’re planning to recruit them on different terms and conditions. That’s not unique. Our Gatwick crew are on different contracts to Heathrow, with Unite’s
agreement, and they do a great job looking after our customers and their safety.
But surely the threat of a strike will force the company to rethink its plans?
A strike would cost the company millions of pounds and this would make the savings and changes we need to make in IFCE much bigger.With the package that is on the table, that doesn’t need to happen. There is absolutely no reason for a strike. For the sake of our customers and our crew, I urge Unite to withdraw the threat and work with us.
In This week’s BA News, head of IFCE Bill Francis addresses some of the top issues about cost savings in IFCE. since the Unite strike ballot opened, Bill and his team have telephoned more than 10,000 cabin crew and met up with many of them to make sure they have the facts before they vote.
And, as the ballot approaches its final week, Bill explains why he thinks Unite should lift its strike threat and resume talks on the issues facing cabin crew. Still talking: Bill Francis and his team have called more than 10,000 cabin crew to tell them about the airline’s package
Why are we trying to make cost savings in IFCE?
I’m really proud of the cabin crew we have. They do a fantastic job for our airline and our customers. But BA made a record loss last year, and analysts forecast we’re heading for losses again, of up to £800m this year.
Everywhere in BA, costs have to be reduced if we’re to stand any chance of achieving the profitability that is essential to securing our long-term future.
IFCE must play its part in this process.
Why is Unite balloting for a strike?
Unite doesn’t say on its ballot form why it is asking cabin crew to strike. I believe there’s no justification for Unite to create such uncertainty for our cabin crew and to threaten our customers in this way. Let me explain why:
1. Unite asked for a court hearing in February, but is threatening a strike now. We introduced our new crew complements from November after nine months’ consultation with Unite. We believe the changes don’t alter individual terms and conditions. We couldn’t wait any longer to make the cost savings and it meant I could offer 3,000 part-time contracts and 1,000 cabin crew the voluntary redundancy they had asked for. Most of those people have now left BA. Unite thinks the changes are contractual and need formal agreement. It started legal proceedings and when the High Court didn’t grant it an injunction to stop the changes going ahead, Unite asked for a full court hearing. Having chosen the legal route, why is Unite threatening a strike now, before the court hearing in February can consider the arguments?
2. We’re not taking pay or allowances away. There’s a two-year basic pay freeze in my plan, but even so, there will be incremental pay rises of between two and seven per cent this year, and again in 2010, for the 75 per cent of crew who are eligible. I’ve also offered to protect average variable pay for Heathrow crew by replacing it with a new fixed monthly travel payment. That’s an offer to Unite and we need it to agree if we are going to introduce it for all our Heathrow cabin crew.
3. There’s no dispute on new fleet. In a letter to Willie Walsh dated November 19, Unite wrote: “While we have clear concerns about your proposals in respect to ‘new fleet’, we are of course not in dispute over ‘new fleet’.” Despite this, Willie accepted a request from Unite when he met it in October to consider alternative ideas it might have, although we haven’t had any yet.
Why won’t you negotiate with the union?
I want to negotiate and reach an agreement with Unite on the rest of my plan, including changes to the worldwide disruption agreement and the offer of a new monthly travel payment. I cannot implement changes to contractual pay, hours or leave arrangements without agreement, and I don’t want to. As I’ve already said, crew complements were introduced after nine months of consultation, and that’s now in the hands of the court.
So why haven’t you met with Unite since June?
We have. We went to Acas in July, but those talks didn’t go smoothly.
On July 23, Unite registered a failure to agree because it insisted that talks could only continue if they were solely based on its own proposal and were nothing to do with our proposal. This resulted in the talks being escalated to Willie and the Unite general secretaries on August 27. We tried to meet again at Acas at the end of September, but by this time the two branches of
Unite would not sit in the same room together. The resumption of talks is not dependent on the ballot outcome. Talks can restart at any time. Despite lots of invitations since then, Unite still hasn’t agreed a date when it will meet us again.
Are you forcing new contracts on current crew?
No. My plan protects the pay and conditions for our current crew. We can’t afford the same contracts for future crew, which is why we’re planning to recruit them on different terms and conditions. That’s not unique. Our Gatwick crew are on different contracts to Heathrow, with Unite’s
agreement, and they do a great job looking after our customers and their safety.
But surely the threat of a strike will force the company to rethink its plans?
A strike would cost the company millions of pounds and this would make the savings and changes we need to make in IFCE much bigger.With the package that is on the table, that doesn’t need to happen. There is absolutely no reason for a strike. For the sake of our customers and our crew, I urge Unite to withdraw the threat and work with us.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CFC
Originally Posted by CFC
Not being a member I wouldn't know. Maybe a question for them?
Originally Posted by CFC
I was a bit unsure about events up to that point but listening to the facts from the top table, comments from the representing lawyers along with personally speaking to reps and also colleagues on the day I took no hesitation in putting a cross in the yes box and posting it off toute suite.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: East sussex
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Perry Oaks,
remember that the goalposts were moved on two occasions by BF and he then went from headcount savings to a financial figure. Not saying the unions could have done more, but the circumstances were a bit strange around that time.
remember that the goalposts were moved on two occasions by BF and he then went from headcount savings to a financial figure. Not saying the unions could have done more, but the circumstances were a bit strange around that time.
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CFC,
It strikes me that BA have made these impositions because they HAVE to stop the flood of money leaving the company. Unless you think there is another reason? Maximising profit perhaps?
If BASSA can come up with alternative CC cost saving suggestions (that pass the independent audit test), then surely BA would be receptive to them rather than risk costly IA? Have BASSA tried to do so, since their wildly inaccurate 175 million package was proven to be bogus?
This was supposed to be the point of the negotiations, and BA were willing to grant BASSA access to the company accounts to prove it. If you remember, BASSA refused to do so. And you still have not told us why.
I would also like to know what harm it would have done to the BASSA cause to see these accounts, because the simple refusal to see them was simply sticking the collective BASSA head in the sand.
I don't see what choice BA have had in the matter, and I don't see that the onus is on them to come back to the table, especially when BASSA is telling its members not to discuss the issues with their "harrassing" managers.
The sensible thing is to VOTE NO and find some decent union representatives to go back to management and find out where compromises can be reached.
It strikes me that BA have made these impositions because they HAVE to stop the flood of money leaving the company. Unless you think there is another reason? Maximising profit perhaps?
If BASSA can come up with alternative CC cost saving suggestions (that pass the independent audit test), then surely BA would be receptive to them rather than risk costly IA? Have BASSA tried to do so, since their wildly inaccurate 175 million package was proven to be bogus?
This was supposed to be the point of the negotiations, and BA were willing to grant BASSA access to the company accounts to prove it. If you remember, BASSA refused to do so. And you still have not told us why.
I would also like to know what harm it would have done to the BASSA cause to see these accounts, because the simple refusal to see them was simply sticking the collective BASSA head in the sand.
I don't see what choice BA have had in the matter, and I don't see that the onus is on them to come back to the table, especially when BASSA is telling its members not to discuss the issues with their "harrassing" managers.
The sensible thing is to VOTE NO and find some decent union representatives to go back to management and find out where compromises can be reached.
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: East sussex
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It strikes me that BA have made these impositions because they HAVE to stop the flood of money leaving the company. Unless you think there is another reason? Maximising profit perhaps?
If BASSA can come up with alternative CC cost saving suggestions (that pass the independent audit test), then surely BA would be receptive to them rather than risk costly IA? Have BASSA tried to do so, since their wildly inaccurate 175 million package was proven to be bogus?
This was supposed to be the point of the negotiations, and BA were willing to grant BASSA access to the company accounts to prove it. If you remember, BASSA refused to do so. And you still have not told us why.
I would also like to know what harm it would have done to the BASSA cause to see these accounts, because the simple refusal to see them was simply sticking the collective BASSA head in the sand.
I don't see what choice BA have had in the matter, and I don't see that the onus is on them to come back to the table, especially when BASSA is telling its members not to discuss the issues with their "harrassing" managers.
If BASSA can come up with alternative CC cost saving suggestions (that pass the independent audit test), then surely BA would be receptive to them rather than risk costly IA? Have BASSA tried to do so, since their wildly inaccurate 175 million package was proven to be bogus?
This was supposed to be the point of the negotiations, and BA were willing to grant BASSA access to the company accounts to prove it. If you remember, BASSA refused to do so. And you still have not told us why.
I would also like to know what harm it would have done to the BASSA cause to see these accounts, because the simple refusal to see them was simply sticking the collective BASSA head in the sand.
I don't see what choice BA have had in the matter, and I don't see that the onus is on them to come back to the table, especially when BASSA is telling its members not to discuss the issues with their "harrassing" managers.
I do not remember Bassa refusing to view the company accounts - can you enlighten me with some facts...and once again, not belonging to Bassa, I therefore are unable to tell you why.
Talks are necessary to sort this mess out. It will take both sides to come to the table. The unions under the UNITE banner are ready and willing, I find it strange BA cannot find a way to sit down with them....or is there an ulterior motive by BA?
VOTE YES FOR YOUR FUTURE
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Ireland
Posts: 74
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi CFC
Thanks for taking the time to reply!
You must also remember that the company stated that if there were any delays to the BP being implemented then the additional costs caused by the delays would be added to the original target. (the same with any costs associated with IA).
Thanks for taking the time to reply!
Originally Posted by CFC
remember that the goalposts were moved on two occasions by BF
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: East sussex
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi P O,
fair enough - but looking from the Union stance, it cannot have been easy with ever changing figures to deal with.
Personally, I think the Unions and BA reps should be locked away in a hotel till they come to some form of agreement.
fair enough - but looking from the Union stance, it cannot have been easy with ever changing figures to deal with.
Personally, I think the Unions and BA reps should be locked away in a hotel till they come to some form of agreement.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CFC,
Where do I start?
Not agreeing to anything, pretty much. No discretion, no alleviations, refusal to turn up to meetings because the company wants to discuss something else than to what union wants to talk about, walking out of meetings when they don't like what they hear, making crew stay 2 local nights after disruption instead of getting home asap (legal limits permitting), lying to members about what the company wants, ostracising non-believers, and general no no no no no culture.
I know that BA management are willing and ready to come to the table. I also know that union refuses to come to the table unless they can decide what to "negotiate". I refer you to your post on page 200 (in blue).
Gg
Why do you say the union wants to run the company?
Not agreeing to anything, pretty much. No discretion, no alleviations, refusal to turn up to meetings because the company wants to discuss something else than to what union wants to talk about, walking out of meetings when they don't like what they hear, making crew stay 2 local nights after disruption instead of getting home asap (legal limits permitting), lying to members about what the company wants, ostracising non-believers, and general no no no no no culture.
Talks are necessary to sort this mess out. It will take both sides to come to the table. The unions under the UNITE banner are ready and willing, I find it strange BA cannot find a way to sit down with them....or is there an ulterior motive by BA?
Gg
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sunny East Sussex
Age: 49
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
BA accounts
All BA unions were offered access to PWC's latest audit of BA's accounts. BALPA looked at them and agreed to cost savings. BASSA refused and wouldnt accept the need for permanent change.
After ACAS talks, at the final, final talk, BA turned up to start the day with a presentation on their final position. BASSA refused to watch the presentation and went home. Their communique talked rudely about "some junior waterside clerk" and why should they have to listen to what BA had to say, after all, this economic downturn was just a blip!!!!!!
So yes, I would say BASSA refused to look at BA's acounts.
After ACAS talks, at the final, final talk, BA turned up to start the day with a presentation on their final position. BASSA refused to watch the presentation and went home. Their communique talked rudely about "some junior waterside clerk" and why should they have to listen to what BA had to say, after all, this economic downturn was just a blip!!!!!!
So yes, I would say BASSA refused to look at BA's acounts.
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Sunny East Sussex
Age: 49
Posts: 264
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
CFC
I think you may find BA management has been slashed in the last year by a far greater margin than the imposition on CC.
As they are now spread much more thinly, I'm not surprised the odd mistake slips through.
The cost cutting has hit all parts of the business. We have no choice if we are to survive.
I'm not BA management BTW
I think you may find BA management has been slashed in the last year by a far greater margin than the imposition on CC.
As they are now spread much more thinly, I'm not surprised the odd mistake slips through.
The cost cutting has hit all parts of the business. We have no choice if we are to survive.
I'm not BA management BTW
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: East sussex
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Not agreeing to anything, pretty much. No discretion, no alleviations, refusal to turn up to meetings because the company wants to discuss something else than to what union wants to talk about, walking out of meetings when they don't like what they hear, making crew stay 2 local nights after disruption instead of getting home asap (legal limits permitting), lying to members about what the company wants, ostracising non-believers, and general no no no no no culture.
I know that BA management are willing and ready to come to the table
Join Date: Nov 2003
Location: East sussex
Posts: 141
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi P-T-G,
the management I come into contact in IFCE do not last long. They either move on within BA or just cannot take the pressure (from above) and the merry go round continues. You only have to look at new onboard responsibilities that have been changed by 'management' to see they have not got a clue.
As for continually slashing I feel BA would do much better with a smaller but much higher calibre of management to run this airline.
the management I come into contact in IFCE do not last long. They either move on within BA or just cannot take the pressure (from above) and the merry go round continues. You only have to look at new onboard responsibilities that have been changed by 'management' to see they have not got a clue.
As for continually slashing I feel BA would do much better with a smaller but much higher calibre of management to run this airline.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You only have to look at new onboard responsibilities that have been changed by 'management' to see they have not got a clue