British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: May 2003
Location: london
Posts: 376
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A Lurker
You know absolutely nothing of me, of what I know and what I don't know
Could I ask do you have any legal qualifications? A simple yes or no will suffice
Nope - just a good grasp of my agreements
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: London
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would love a mutually acceptable agreement between both parties, but does anyone know what items of our agreements BASSA/Unite are planning to negotiate on? They could be using this time to ''guage our views on matters. Like an online poll of what things are important to us (ie. pay. promotion prospects, hours, fixed days off, etc etc) and what we would be willing to give up (CAT payments, fixed monthly payment to be brought in, seperate or intergrated new fleet/new contract etc etc)
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Age: 53
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ALurker
ALurker quotes the law:
I think I've addressed this: only binding if it states that is is binding in the agreement itself- not your contract.
The Custom & practice may certainly be relevant, though.
ALurker quotes the law again:
Did you say you had no individual contract? I believe you did...
I think you're wrong, by the way, I am as certain as I can possibly be that you DO have a contract. Are you certain YOURS personally refers to specific agreements?
The last sentence "many collective agreements are indirectly underpinned by law" is an awfully vague thing to hang the future of the union on.....
Not quite sure what "Oh dear" refers to?
The law (if it has not been amended) clearly states that the agreement itself has to state it's legally binding. It specifically states that the reference from the contract in not enough:
Why don't you just go and find out if your agreements say they're legally binding? That'd shut me up.
If the law is contradictory, you'd better hope for a very sympathetic judge, because it could go either way.... Have you heard THAT from your union?
"Collective agreements are made between employers and Trade Unions. They are not intended to be legally enforceable unless in writing and stated to be so but this is rare. Collective agreements may be binding as between the workers and an employer if incorporated into the workers' contracts by express reference or implied by custom and practice."
The Custom & practice may certainly be relevant, though.
ALurker quotes the law again:
Usually, collective agreements are not in themselves legally enforceable. However, parts of collective agreements such as pay rates, or references to agreements, may be inserted into the employment contracts of individual employees. Because individual employment contracts are legally enforceable, many collective agreements are indirectly underpinned by law
I think you're wrong, by the way, I am as certain as I can possibly be that you DO have a contract. Are you certain YOURS personally refers to specific agreements?
The last sentence "many collective agreements are indirectly underpinned by law" is an awfully vague thing to hang the future of the union on.....
Not quite sure what "Oh dear
" refers to?The law (if it has not been amended) clearly states that the agreement itself has to state it's legally binding. It specifically states that the reference from the contract in not enough:
Whether agreement intended to be a legally enforceable contract.
— (1) A collective agreement shall be conclusively presumed not to have been intended by the parties to be a legally enforceable contract unless the agreement—
(a)
is in writing, and
(b)
contains a provision which (however expressed) states that the parties intend that the agreement shall be a legally enforceable contract
— (1) A collective agreement shall be conclusively presumed not to have been intended by the parties to be a legally enforceable contract unless the agreement—
(a)
is in writing, and
(b)
contains a provision which (however expressed) states that the parties intend that the agreement shall be a legally enforceable contract
If the law is contradictory, you'd better hope for a very sympathetic judge, because it could go either way.... Have you heard THAT from your union?
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Bucks
Posts: 204
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
dave747436
if incorporated into the workers' contracts by express reference or implied by custom and practice
I think I've addressed this: only binding if it states that is is binding in the agreement itself- not your contract.
The Custom & practice may certainly be relevant, though.
Dave - my contract clearly states both of the above by express reference and is clearly implied by years of custom and practice!
ALurker quotes the law again:
Quote:
Usually, collective agreements are not in themselves legally enforceable. However, parts of collective agreements such as pay rates, or references to agreements, may be inserted into the employment contracts of individual employees. Because individual employment contracts are legally enforceable, many collective agreements are indirectly underpinned by law
Did you say you had no individual contract? I believe you did...
I said we had no individually negotiated contracts - ours are all the same
I think you're wrong, by the way, I am as certain as I can possibly be that you DO have a contract. Are you certain YOURS personally refers to specific agreements? 100% refers to our collective agreements
The last sentence "many collective agreements are indirectly underpinned by law" is an awfully vague thing to hang the future of the union on.....
Dave how can that be vague? It states clearly.....
"if incorporated into the workers' contracts by express reference or implied by custom and practice" Which quite clearly our agreements are.
The law is quite clear on all of this as is stated above
I think I've addressed this: only binding if it states that is is binding in the agreement itself- not your contract.
The Custom & practice may certainly be relevant, though.
Dave - my contract clearly states both of the above by express reference and is clearly implied by years of custom and practice!
ALurker quotes the law again:
Quote:
Usually, collective agreements are not in themselves legally enforceable. However, parts of collective agreements such as pay rates, or references to agreements, may be inserted into the employment contracts of individual employees. Because individual employment contracts are legally enforceable, many collective agreements are indirectly underpinned by law
Did you say you had no individual contract? I believe you did...
I said we had no individually negotiated contracts - ours are all the same
I think you're wrong, by the way, I am as certain as I can possibly be that you DO have a contract. Are you certain YOURS personally refers to specific agreements? 100% refers to our collective agreements
The last sentence "many collective agreements are indirectly underpinned by law" is an awfully vague thing to hang the future of the union on.....
Dave how can that be vague? It states clearly.....
"if incorporated into the workers' contracts by express reference or implied by custom and practice" Which quite clearly our agreements are.
The law is quite clear on all of this as is stated above
Join Date: Aug 2000
Location: Bahrain
Posts: 457
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Lurker,
Welcome back.
I'm not sure you are grasping this finicky legal stuff, any more than Fume is grasping the fact that Wicked Willie has the full backing of the money men:
I feel the need to point out that there could be a vast legal difference between "many" and "all". It is only an interpretation on my part.
But as has been pointed out, the legal teams will know how to argue this one.
Cheers,
D
Welcome back.
I'm not sure you are grasping this finicky legal stuff, any more than Fume is grasping the fact that Wicked Willie has the full backing of the money men:
"Because individual employment contracts are legally enforceable, many collective agreements are indirectly underpinned by law."
But as has been pointed out, the legal teams will know how to argue this one.
Cheers,
D
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Epsom
Age: 65
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Da Dog
JNB LGW Diversion.
If the crew had insisted on 2 nights at LGW having been away for 4 or 5 days, would the time spent in a hotel at LGW counted towards their time off after the trip?
I find it hard to believe anyone who had been away from home for 4 or 5 days would want to be stuck in a LGW hotel perhaps miles from anywhere when home base and perhaps their loved one's are only a 45 minute drive away.
I assumed a diversion to any of the London airports would have resulted in a short bus drive to base unless other forces such as exceeding legal working limits prevented that.
Last time I was a passenger on a flight that diverted (a short haul flight) we waited an hour and the same crew flew us on to LHR.
JNB LGW Diversion.
If the crew had insisted on 2 nights at LGW having been away for 4 or 5 days, would the time spent in a hotel at LGW counted towards their time off after the trip?
I find it hard to believe anyone who had been away from home for 4 or 5 days would want to be stuck in a LGW hotel perhaps miles from anywhere when home base and perhaps their loved one's are only a 45 minute drive away.
I assumed a diversion to any of the London airports would have resulted in a short bus drive to base unless other forces such as exceeding legal working limits prevented that.
Last time I was a passenger on a flight that diverted (a short haul flight) we waited an hour and the same crew flew us on to LHR.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Netherlands
Age: 58
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would still love to see these questions answered with specifics, not with hollow statements.
Quote fincastle84
Quote fincastle84
As I have said before
If you go on strike you must have a reason to come off /cancel strike action.
What is BASSA's reason for stopping strike action?
Perhaps BA are quite happy to replace the crew member they have just taken off - where will BASSA be then?
BA could then impose the other items and bring in new fleet.
Will BASSA then ballot again for strike action?
They could try for another injunction.
The courts may get very fed up with them (and Unite possibly).
Devil's advocate hat on!!!
If you go on strike you must have a reason to come off /cancel strike action.
What is BASSA's reason for stopping strike action?
Perhaps BA are quite happy to replace the crew member they have just taken off - where will BASSA be then?
BA could then impose the other items and bring in new fleet.
Will BASSA then ballot again for strike action?
They could try for another injunction.
The courts may get very fed up with them (and Unite possibly).
Devil's advocate hat on!!!
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Age: 53
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
ALurker
ALurker said
The express reference has to be in the AGREEMENT, AL.
Not your contract
In the AGREEMENT. The actual written word of the AGREEMENT that your contract refers to.
Your contract refers to agreements being part of the contract. This may not be conclusive. You need to know the actual wording of the agreement..
Each and every agreement needs to include the phrase "and this shall be legally binding" or similar.
I don't know a clearer way of saying this.
Sorry to quote it again but please read it carefully!
Right, it's 4am here & I'm off to bed but please bear in mind this.
The dozens of posters here are not trying to prove that they're right & you're wrong - in the main I think they're trying to get you (and others like you who are willing to engage) to ask questions of your union.
Then apply the same rigor to the Unions answers as you apply to ours, here.
eg: Look at Unite's answer to the question "Can BA dismiss you for striking?"
Ask yourself if the answer is full and frank. Does it mention that you don't have to be rehired and that the absolute maximum compensation is around 70grand? But this is a fact.
Has Unite ever done an independent poll of the members, or even an online poll so that it really knows the will for a strike? Are you happy with this?
On a show of hands BASSA passed the motion that it would not negotiate on permanent savings. That still stands. Are you happy with this?
Unite have stated that there will be no negotiation with BA until the impositions have been reversed. But BA cannot comply even if it wanted to - these crew have left the company. Are you happy with this non-negotiating stance?
Have BASSA explained why the new LHR crewing levels have health & safety implications at LHR, when the same BASSA approved the same crewing levels at LGW and deemed them adequate?
There is clearly a grey area in the law here, and I'm sure neither side is absolutely sure it will win.
Has Unite explained the implications of going on strike over imposition in Dec/Jan and then the Judge finding that the impositions are in fact legal in Feb?
Just ask some questions and take a good long look at the answers to see if you're happy.
My own personal opinion is that you need a strong BASSA to survive this war to negotiate away New Fleet. THAT is the biggest threat to your career, and there's nothing in your contract or agreements to stop it (afaik).
Night all.
Dave - my contract clearly states both of the above by express reference
Not your contract
In the AGREEMENT. The actual written word of the AGREEMENT that your contract refers to.
Your contract refers to agreements being part of the contract. This may not be conclusive. You need to know the actual wording of the agreement..
Each and every agreement needs to include the phrase "and this shall be legally binding" or similar.
I don't know a clearer way of saying this.
Sorry to quote it again but please read it carefully!
Whether agreement intended to be a legally enforceable contract.
— (1) A collective agreement shall be conclusively presumed not to have been intended by the parties to be a legally enforceable contract unless the agreement—
(a)
is in writing, and
(b)
contains a provision which (however expressed) states that the parties intend that the agreement shall be a legally enforceable contract
— (1) A collective agreement shall be conclusively presumed not to have been intended by the parties to be a legally enforceable contract unless the agreement—
(a)
is in writing, and
(b)
contains a provision which (however expressed) states that the parties intend that the agreement shall be a legally enforceable contract
The dozens of posters here are not trying to prove that they're right & you're wrong - in the main I think they're trying to get you (and others like you who are willing to engage) to ask questions of your union.
Then apply the same rigor to the Unions answers as you apply to ours, here.
eg: Look at Unite's answer to the question "Can BA dismiss you for striking?"
Ask yourself if the answer is full and frank. Does it mention that you don't have to be rehired and that the absolute maximum compensation is around 70grand? But this is a fact.
Has Unite ever done an independent poll of the members, or even an online poll so that it really knows the will for a strike? Are you happy with this?
On a show of hands BASSA passed the motion that it would not negotiate on permanent savings. That still stands. Are you happy with this?
Unite have stated that there will be no negotiation with BA until the impositions have been reversed. But BA cannot comply even if it wanted to - these crew have left the company. Are you happy with this non-negotiating stance?
Have BASSA explained why the new LHR crewing levels have health & safety implications at LHR, when the same BASSA approved the same crewing levels at LGW and deemed them adequate?
There is clearly a grey area in the law here, and I'm sure neither side is absolutely sure it will win.
Has Unite explained the implications of going on strike over imposition in Dec/Jan and then the Judge finding that the impositions are in fact legal in Feb?
Just ask some questions and take a good long look at the answers to see if you're happy.
My own personal opinion is that you need a strong BASSA to survive this war to negotiate away New Fleet. THAT is the biggest threat to your career, and there's nothing in your contract or agreements to stop it (afaik).
Night all.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
The law is quite clear
I think the discussion between A Lurker, dave747436 and Desertia has clearly proven that the law in this is clearly not clear or straightforward and it is perhaps it is this grey area that the court case in Feb will rule on.
While I disagree with much of the way that BASSA has handled this it is welcome that Lurker is here debating the finer points of this dispute. Perhaps this willingness to engage in debate, discussing the issues, is something that BASSA could learn from.
While I disagree with much of the way that BASSA has handled this it is welcome that Lurker is here debating the finer points of this dispute. Perhaps this willingness to engage in debate, discussing the issues, is something that BASSA could learn from.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi Slidebustle,
I've been flying mainly on 757s, but from tomorrow onwards for the next three weeks, I'll be on the 767s to Moscow, Larnaca and Athens flights and they are packed! I'll let you know on Friday.
Slidebustle, you said that it's good for everyone to move around working different positions and I completely agree with you. Especially on the 767 when you have high Club loads it's up to the CSD to ensure there is a spread of experience in both cabins. It's unfair to the crew, passengers and the CSD of course. I have spent many a busy flight with over 100 club with brand new crew having to literally take them through the whole service routine which can be exhausting. I'm not moaning, as new crew are enthusiastic and a joy to work with, but when you have 100 club as we used to on the old matrix, it's hard work. I have to disagree with Dave747, I have and will always move crew if I see fit for the benefit of everyone, especially the passengers.
It's the mandatory part of the IFCE Pre-Flight Briefing Checklist that I adhere to.
I've been flying mainly on 757s, but from tomorrow onwards for the next three weeks, I'll be on the 767s to Moscow, Larnaca and Athens flights and they are packed! I'll let you know on Friday.
Slidebustle, you said that it's good for everyone to move around working different positions and I completely agree with you. Especially on the 767 when you have high Club loads it's up to the CSD to ensure there is a spread of experience in both cabins. It's unfair to the crew, passengers and the CSD of course. I have spent many a busy flight with over 100 club with brand new crew having to literally take them through the whole service routine which can be exhausting. I'm not moaning, as new crew are enthusiastic and a joy to work with, but when you have 100 club as we used to on the old matrix, it's hard work. I have to disagree with Dave747, I have and will always move crew if I see fit for the benefit of everyone, especially the passengers.
It's the mandatory part of the IFCE Pre-Flight Briefing Checklist that I adhere to.
Last edited by Tiramisu; 8th Dec 2009 at 21:45.
Jpax
"Last time I was a passenger on a flight that diverted (a short haul flight) we waited an hour and the same crew flew us on to LHR. "
Yep, short haul might be able to do that, but with JNB - LGW you might be unable to operate onto LHR because of Legal Flight Time limitations and in addition JNB-LGW would probably trigger some Long Haul specific Union rules.
Yep, short haul might be able to do that, but with JNB - LGW you might be unable to operate onto LHR because of Legal Flight Time limitations and in addition JNB-LGW would probably trigger some Long Haul specific Union rules.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: LHR
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JPAX
If the crew had insisted on 2 nights at LGW having been away for 4 or 5 days, would the time spent in a hotel at LGW counted towards their time off after the trip?
I find it hard to believe anyone who had been away from home for 4 or 5 days would want to be stuck in a LGW hotel perhaps miles from anywhere when home base and perhaps their loved one's are only a 45 minute drive away.
I assumed a diversion to any of the London airports would have resulted in a short bus drive to base unless other forces such as exceeding legal working limits prevented that.
Last time I was a passenger on a flight that diverted (a short haul flight) we waited an hour and the same crew flew us on to LHR.
I find it hard to believe anyone who had been away from home for 4 or 5 days would want to be stuck in a LGW hotel perhaps miles from anywhere when home base and perhaps their loved one's are only a 45 minute drive away.
I assumed a diversion to any of the London airports would have resulted in a short bus drive to base unless other forces such as exceeding legal working limits prevented that.
Last time I was a passenger on a flight that diverted (a short haul flight) we waited an hour and the same crew flew us on to LHR.
It's different on flights within Europe and non-long range flights (DEL, DFW, DXB, JFK, MIA etc). On non-long range longhaul trips we can extend our duty to 16:15 hours. I'm not sure about the limits on Eurofleet.
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: southampton
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
So, how long is the scheduled flight, JNB-london, when does the crew go out of legal hours...I would imagine there's a buffer of about 3 or 4 hrs there.....but let's say the flight is a little late and no LEGAL limits are exceeded, why would crew need TWO nights off? It was just one sector back, yes?
Join Date: Jun 2002
Location: southampton
Posts: 102
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alexlandraa, when you say that crew 'need' 2 or 3 nights off, I just don't agree...I would define 'need' as in the required rest mandated by the UK Civil Aviation Authority....I would be very suprised if after a 10hour flight, crew 'need' 36 or 48 hours off.....do the pilots 'need' the same amount of 'rest'? If our passengers are stranded all over the UK because Heathrow is snow-closed for a couple of hours, are you saying you would still 'need' 2 days off rather than take a sensible, legally sanctioned amount of time off and keep the show on the road by getting the people that pay our wages to where they paid us to take them?
Last edited by flybymerchant; 9th Dec 2009 at 12:12. Reason: CAA typo
Join Date: Aug 2001
Location: Surrey (actually)
Posts: 248
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, Alexandraa, you are confusing union agreements with Flight Time Limitations, which are worlds apart.
For example, I once did a rostered 4 day PHX, back to back with a 3 day BOM. When I arrived at LHR, after the BOM, I was force-drafted to do a JFK the next day. All perfectly legal, within FTLs. That's 10 days, and 3 trips, going in different directions, and I'm a pilot, so my FTLs are more limiting than CC's.
So your claiming the need for 2 days off, legally is total rubbish. But I'm not surprised; the union probably do use the term "illegal". "Against our (totally outmoded, dinosaur) agreements", would be be closer to the truth.
For example, I once did a rostered 4 day PHX, back to back with a 3 day BOM. When I arrived at LHR, after the BOM, I was force-drafted to do a JFK the next day. All perfectly legal, within FTLs. That's 10 days, and 3 trips, going in different directions, and I'm a pilot, so my FTLs are more limiting than CC's.
So your claiming the need for 2 days off, legally is total rubbish. But I'm not surprised; the union probably do use the term "illegal". "Against our (totally outmoded, dinosaur) agreements", would be be closer to the truth.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
In regards to the JNB-LGW diversion, here's a few pointers. Aircraft landed, everyone off the aircraft. Crew troop up to LGW ops, demanding 2 local nights in hotel. Ops look into it, and still have a couple of hours to play with before the crew go out of hours. They were adamant that this crew would not get hotac (it's only a few miles away from base by the way...). Lots of phone calls to various departments, and finally, a fleet of cars turned up to take the crew to LHR. No hotac, no "extras", it was just a matter of go home and see you on your next duty. This is actually what happened.
In regards to contracts, I'm glad other people have picked up on the wording of the law. I did try to explain it as best I could, but I obviously couldn't do so quite as eloquently as others. I thank those who've tried to input their interpretation of things.
Gg
Oh, and A Lurker, my question 3 as mentioned several times by me asked you what your suggestions were toward cost savings, ie what you personally think would be acceptable. You claim to have answered this already, but I can't see it. You said initially that you didn't have time to answer it due to Christmas shopping, but I haven't seen any sort of reply since then. I'd be ever so grateful if you could reply to this question, thanks.
In regards to contracts, I'm glad other people have picked up on the wording of the law. I did try to explain it as best I could, but I obviously couldn't do so quite as eloquently as others. I thank those who've tried to input their interpretation of things.
Gg
Oh, and A Lurker, my question 3 as mentioned several times by me asked you what your suggestions were toward cost savings, ie what you personally think would be acceptable. You claim to have answered this already, but I can't see it. You said initially that you didn't have time to answer it due to Christmas shopping, but I haven't seen any sort of reply since then. I'd be ever so grateful if you could reply to this question, thanks.
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: York
Posts: 737
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JPAX asked
AFAIK there is absolutely no limit to the amount of MT positioning that can be done after a flying duty. (Provided sufficient rest exists before the next duty) It seems this has become BA's new policy, in response to BASSA's intransigence. A short drive from LGW-LHR isn't too bad, but I wouldn't want to be sitting in a bus for 8hrs, from EDI or GLA, to LHR after a very long night in an a/c!
It's a power struggle, pure and simple. Customers suffer, but cabin crew do too. And all for what???
Who runs this company, and for whose benefit?
I assumed a diversion to any of the London airports would have resulted in a short bus drive to base unless other forces such as exceeding legal working limits prevented that.
It's a power struggle, pure and simple. Customers suffer, but cabin crew do too. And all for what???
Who runs this company, and for whose benefit?
Last edited by 4468; 8th Dec 2009 at 23:37.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: LHR
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm referring to our agreements and not FTL or the agreements which our pilots have as they are different.
We need to have at least 3 local nights at base before we can do another duty. In case of any disruption we can choose whether we want to our full MBTRs after the trip or a minimum of 3 MBTRs to keep our roster fixed.
We need to have at least 3 local nights at base before we can do another duty. In case of any disruption we can choose whether we want to our full MBTRs after the trip or a minimum of 3 MBTRs to keep our roster fixed.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: LHR
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alexlandraa, when you say that crew 'need' 2 or 3 nights off, I just don't agree...I would define 'need' as in the required rest mandated by the UK Commercial Aviation Authority....I would be very suprised if after a 10hour flight, crew 'need' 36 or 48 hours off.....do the pilots 'need' the same amount of 'rest'? If our passengers are stranded all over the UK because Heathrow is snow-closed for a couple of hours, are you saying you would still 'need' 2 days off rather than take a sensible, legally sanctioned amount of time off and keep the show on the road by getting the people that pay our wages to where they paid us to take them?
Not saying that I agree with the disruption agreement. Only stating the facts. Look at what happened in BKK and SIN last year because of it.