British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations

[ottergirl]

Thank you

Thanks flitegirl, that does make it clearer. Actually sounds that the service isn't all that different. We have food options in the Club kitchen as well. Hope its nicer in Oz than it is here!

[A Lurker]

MODS

Can you please remove post 4224 as it bears no relevance whatsoever to this thread

Thank you

[Freddielaker]

I disagree. Post 4224 is relevant. Does it perhaps touch a nerve?

[A Lurker]

Freddielaker

Doesnt touch a nerve at all with me - it quite simply bears no relevance to British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations

Or can you explain exactly how it is relevant?

[Tiramisu]

A Lurker,
Your posts have been an interesting read, but Midman in post 4224 has posted something that happens frequently on a lot of our Worldwide flights. The post should not be removed as one could say that posts 4229, 4230, 4231, 4232 and 4233 have no relevance either.

[Tiramisu]

Good luck but please don't take us all down with you

plodding along,
You'll have seen by now from the posts on this thread that there are many of us who have Voted No To Strike and will come to work normally.
I sincerely hope Willie Walsh does not suspend any flights.
Thanks for wishing us luck, but ultimately, it's the passengers who've paid for flights that need it most. I really hope their holidays and travel arrangements are not ruined as we will all get blamed for it.

[SlideBustle]

I think the strike would have more credibility if the union actually had a stated plan of action for negotiations after this and do they know what kind of things they will be suggesting to save over £100m when BA remove the impositions which there will probably need to be more savings required, should pre-Nov 16th/Dec 1st crew complements be reinstated. Pay cut anyone?? How about all of us being forced on new fleet?? The union seem to think a Yes vote will either make Willie/Bill go away, or that it is a message to say ''no''to impositions - this is before the union know if it's contractual or not as we won't know until after the strike (should there be one!!)

This whole situation is causing so much stress and worry for everyone.... I'm sure other workers in BA, our customers who have flights booked and not least of all us! I for one am feeling extremely stressed and overwhelmed with worry (sounds OTT but it is mine/colleagues job/livelyhood that you enjoy that we are talking about).

[Desertia]

I had a CSD on a recent trip who changed all of the working positions because the CSD refused to do a trolley and said it was not part of the job description.

That CSD also deserves to be ejected from the company. Clearly they are out for themselves and don't give a jot about anyone else, their own crew for a start, let alone their passengers, managers or shareholders.

One would like to think that by making their colleagues work even harder purely because of their own laziness, they've illustrated very well to those crew as to WHY they should vote NO - to remove such power from these old crocks who are past their sell by date. I hope one or more of the crew reported this to the company so that the said individual can be disciplined (I believe that even their own union have told them to follow the impositions for now, so they are acting on their own). If not, Alexandraa, don't hesitate to treat them like any other useless or disruptive colleague. In a choice between yourself and the CSD, I'm fairly certain which side BA would believe!

Why should BA have to employ such a lazy ne'er-do-well? Because their mates that run the union say so?

Here is proof, if you ever needed it, as to why Wicked Willie has the full backing of the board in taking on these self-centred, greedy old BASSA diehards.

I expect we'll hear some more from the willie bashers on this subject.

[A Lurker]

Tiramisu

A Lurker is taking a 24-hour break from this thread, standing in the corner and writing out 100 times;

I will leave the moderating to the moderators.
I will leave the moderating to the moderators.
I will leave the moderating to the moderators.
I will leave the moderating to the moderators.
I will leave the moderating to the moderators.
etc.etc.etc.

[IheartMBT]

After posting for the first time a few pages back ( and getting shot down straight away).I decided it wasnt worth it. I also walked away with the smug satisfaction, thinking that half the people on this forum, are not actually what or who they claim to be.
I then showed my hubby ( a real BA pilot) the posts, imagine my horror when my husband confirmed to me that these were the views held by many of his collegues.
As i stated in an earlier post I am more than aware of the views held my most of our flight crew collegues(inc my hubby). There are also many points i agree with BUT and this is a BIG BUT, i do not agree with imposition. Impostion is the start of a very dangerous path. Once this has been imposed, what next......NEWFLEET?????
But i am not going to argue back and forth( as seems to be the trend on this thread). What i am going to say is that the tone in which many post is not acceptable. I am sick of the constant undertone that crew are not intelligent or are just sheep.
What is intelligence? what is it measured by ? School or uni qualifications. If so does that then mean my hubby should be "dishing out food and drinks" and i should be flying the plane? (As i have more educational qualifications than him).
Please stop the judgemental comments, it is very offending. Just because we believe in something that you dont doesnt make it stupid. I have an opinion and that should be respected. My husband told me after his last flight, that his FO was horrified when he told him that I had voted Yes. His comment was "couldnt you "control" that!!!!!!!!!!!!!". My husband answered that even though he was not of the same opinion as me, he respected my right to choose what i thought was right for my future.

To repeat I voted YES. Not to bring BA to its knees or to dent an already dented pension fund, but to try and secure my future. Remember both our wages are provided by BA so I did think more than twice about where to put my cross. But i was cabin crew before i became a captains wife ( and if some of my collegues are to be believed as i am only wife number 1), I will be cabin crew after I was a Captains wife!!!! (just kidding hon!!!!)

[TopBunk]

MBTLover

A good post, congratulations. If I may just debate one part:

There are also many points i agree with BUT and this is a BIG BUT, i do not agree with imposition. Impostion is the start of a very dangerous path. Once this has been imposed, what next......NEWFLEET?????

If you were the company haemoraging money by the day, and establish a generous timetable of several months for discussions about the solution with the Trade Unions, one of which who acts petulantly, refuses to turn up, refuses to be given presentations, refuses to sit in the same room as other TU colleagues, walks out early from talks, refuses to look at the accounts etc what would you do as a responsible company leadership?

The financial environment is not improving and there is no indication that that TU would seriously return to the table and hold meaningful discussions anyway. So, several months after the deadline and after no progress is made in the Big Brother house with ACAS and many £10's of millions more have been lost, what are the company to do?

I think that they had little option but imposition; I guess that they could have followed through with the 2000 CR's and invoked SOSR, but no, they have been very patient with BASSA/Unite and have imposed a first stage solution that involves minimal changes to the individual CC member.

As to NewFleet, I suspect that unless BASSA call off the ballot and return seriously to the negotiating table that they will find out that they have no say in the matter, and that by continuing down the path to IA that they merely seal their own destiny and hasten the introduction of NF.

As has been said many times before, it need not have been like this, if only BASSA had stepped up to the plate as a responsible player and partner in the company's future.

[Desertia]

IHeartMBT,

You should keep an open mind to the possibility that if your "Yes" vote contributes to IA, and you choose to walk out on day one of any strike that might be called, then you could be the "ex-cabin crew wife" of a "working Captain", for all the reasons which have been clearly explained at various points in this thread.

(I am of course assuming that you intend to man the picket lines, please correct me if I'm wrong).

[Human Factor]

There are also many points i agree with BUT and this is a BIG BUT, i do not agree with imposition. Impostion is the start of a very dangerous path. Once this has been imposed, what next......NEWFLEET?????

IheartMBT,

You make some valid points, however the reason it has got to this stage (remember, "New Fleet" was taken off the table at one point) is because BASSA refused to negotiate. This was as a result of a show of hands at the racecourse meeting. Whether you were at that meeting or not, I don't need to know, but the fact remains that your union had a mandate from (some of) its membership to refuse to negotiate.

The list of 18 points furnished on the previous pages could have been negotiated through point by point and perhaps "New Fleet" would still have been off the table. That is part of the give and take of negotiation but the fact remains that BA have to do something to save money from each department. If BASSA were not prepared to negotiate, what choice did they have.

Rightly or wrongly, BASSA's previous form left BA nowhere to go other than imposition.

[midman]

CSD refusing to man trolley

Originally Posted by Desertia

That CSD also deserves to be ejected from the company.
I hope one or more of the crew reported this to the company so that the said individual can be disciplined.

How about mentioning it to the Captain? After all, the CSD is responsible to the senior manager on board, the Captain, for delivery of service standards. The Captain has the means to ensure the service is conducted to the required standards.

Unofficial work to rule is an extremely dodgy road to go down

[midman]

Originally Posted by IheartMBT

To repeat I voted YES. Not to bring BA to its knees or to dent an already dented pension fund, but to try and secure my future.

Thanks for an interesting post.
What I and many of my colleagues don't understand is how voting Yes will secure your future.

Could you explain the link between the two?

[Desertia]

That BA Court Case in full.

I must apologise to Ms. Malone, who at least has the cojones to put her name to the action. This is the letter BASSA members are being asked to sign:

Dear Colleague

Claim against British Airways PLC

You still have time to put your name on the list of those to be represented in this case.

The court proceedings were started in the name of three individual members of the union. They can represent you in this case.

The court subsequently ordered us to provide a list of cabin crew members of the union, represented by the three named Claimants. By joining the list you will not be a party to the action, but you will be entitled to the benefit of the outcome of the case if successful.

The case is due to be heard on 1st February 2010. In the interim there may be developments upon which we need to take instructions. In view of the numbers of members involved, and bearing in mind the fact that some may well be abroad at any time, it would be impossible to obtain the view of each individual member should we need to do so urgently as the case develops.

To enable me to add your name to the list, I must ask you to sign a copy of this letter and return to it to me at

O.H. Parsons & Partners
3rd Floor
Sovereign House
212-224 Shaftesbury Avenue
London
WC2H 8PR

as soon as you can.

By signing and returning this letter you will be agreeing to the following:

1. That you allow your name to be put forward as a person represented by the Claimants in the case of Elizabeth Anne Malone & Others –v- British Airways PLC (Case No: HQ09X04816).

2. That you are and will remain a member of Unite the Union throughout the court proceedings.

3. That you authorise Unite the Union and its lawyers to negotiate on your behalf without obtaining your direct instructions.

4. That you authorise Unite the Union and its lawyers to conclude settlement of your claim on the best possible terms, subject to legal advice, without obtaining your direct instructions.

5. Under the terms of this agreement, Unite the Union will support this claim in accordance with the union’s rulebook and its agreement with the union’s lawyers.

Please sign and date the copy of this letter and add your name, address and BA Staff Number. Once the signed letter is received, your name will be added to the list of Claimants.

[finncapt]

Still no explicit indemnity from costs.

Why don't they put that in the letter?

They may get a few more takers if they can guarantee that.

[Desertia]

I agree, Finn, although it does say:

By joining the list you will not be a party to the action

Of course you'd still need to be a legal beagle or eagle to understand the proper implications.

[Runway vacated]

Oh FFS!

IheartMBT you ask

Imposition is the start of a very dangerous path

And then try to make a case for going on strike over where it MAY lead. What is being imposed on you is entirely the fault of your utterly inept union, and is SO benign that the multitudes of unemployed ex VS and BMI cc will be slack jawed at your assertion that somehow you are hard done by.

Can you not see the writing on the wall? UNITE are a proper union for real grown ups, and many of those grown ups are losing their jobs, their homes and their families. They are where UNITE really want to focus their energies. They are not really that worried about a bunch of overpaid primadonnas having a hissy fit about working a TINY bit harder for the same money. That, at least, is how I suspect a Corus worker will see the position of BA cc.

UNITE want to come to an agreement with BA before the court hearing that will save face all round, but BASSA want to force UNITE's hand by holding a ballot that will compel them to back an utterly unwinnable strike. Ultimately this will lead to the obliteration of BASSA and will leave UNITE with egg on it's face. A price, I suspect, that UNITE are prepared to pay to get rid of the thorn in their side that is BASSA.

Some future you have voted for.

[JayPee28bpr]

Still no explicit indemnity from costs

Isn't this covered by the "By joining the list you will not be a party to the action, but you will be entitled to the benefit of the outcome of the case if successful" comment? If signatories are not parties to the action, it is hard to see how they can be made liable for costs.

I am not a lawyer, but my interpretation of the letter is more that if members do not "join the list", then BA will not owe them anything even if Unite wins its action. Basically, if members do not join the list, implicitly they are acknowledging no contractual breach by BA, or at least not one they wish to contest, and therefore no entitlement to restitution in the event Unite wins. This appears to be the point of the "you will be entitled to the benefit of the outcome...if successful". In other words, members who do not sign up will not be entitled to the benefit of the outcome if successful. More importantly, perhaps, Unite's argument is that each and every member's individual contract of employment has been breached by BA. Asking the Union to provide a list of members who wish to assert this position seems reasonable. Or, put another way, if only a small number of members, all of whom hold Union office, assert this position, then it suggests the action is vexatious.

Whether or not BA is in breach is far less obvious than many people on either side of the discussion seem to think. However, it is only an issue anyway if people contest what BA has done. Presumably, the reason the judge asked for a list of people affected by the changes was to test whether or not individual members actually wish to do so.