British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Dec 2000
Location: on the golf course (Covid permitting)
Posts: 2,131
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SlideB
Not so at all.
X flying hours in BA LH in 1 year/900 hours per person = Y crew numbers.
What reduced time off downroute would mean is more days off at home. The company save on the hotac money. Ok, so you get fewer allowances, but you all spend them all downroute, don't you
. But get your union to negotiate, say, splitting the savings in some proportion with the company and you gain quality of life at home at the expense of a small loss of allowances.
Worth it in my book.
Longhaul crew in fairness if we believe the figures reach 900hours quickly anyway so having single nighstops on LAX, SFO would probably exacerbate that so probably would cost the company more to have crew grounded all the time! They would need more crew!
X flying hours in BA LH in 1 year/900 hours per person = Y crew numbers.
What reduced time off downroute would mean is more days off at home. The company save on the hotac money. Ok, so you get fewer allowances, but you all spend them all downroute, don't you
. But get your union to negotiate, say, splitting the savings in some proportion with the company and you gain quality of life at home at the expense of a small loss of allowances.Worth it in my book.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Before a militant jumps on my back - I do NOT want to be shafted, work in slave labour for half the pay blah blah - but just answer this if you are going to say ''BA will give us a 30% paycut and longer days'' - where have they stated WE will have this?? Thanks (I'm sure many people will love to hear the answer if you provide one as they have been asking for months!!!
Is this a galley FM rumour, I think I am pretty much up to date with both the company and the union bulletins but I can honestly say that I have never seen that anywhere.
I believe that anything that we do has to be negotiated with our trade Union, I don't agree with you when u say the company gave us deadlines.
The company made it it impossible for us to negotiate and when they said we give untill, whenever it was, to think about it, it was done fully knowing that we couldn't possibly agree with what they were asking.
I agree with you though, when u say that there is room for improvement on how we are used, however that would need to be negotiating.
I voted yes because I believe in protecting my future and will vote yes again because I don't support dictatorship.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: LHR
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SlideBustle
I think VS did have nightstops on the west coast for some time but realised that crew were both fatigue and hitting their 900 hours faster than they could have imagined. We have a couple of 3 day trips to LAX and SFO and 4 day trips to CPT where we position one way and work the other. Even those ones are tiring.
Full-time crew are very close their 900 hours. Part-time crew and particular those on 75% are way above their limits. Logically they should average 675 block hours a year but many are 100 hours plus on top of that.
No, you probably hit the nail on the head there. WW crew are unflexible at disruptions whilst EF are. I don't even know what your disruption agreement looks like (or even if you've got one). All I know is that you can claim to have 18 hours rest after you have gone out of hours (?).
Full-time crew are very close their 900 hours. Part-time crew and particular those on 75% are way above their limits. Logically they should average 675 block hours a year but many are 100 hours plus on top of that.
No, you probably hit the nail on the head there. WW crew are unflexible at disruptions whilst EF are. I don't even know what your disruption agreement looks like (or even if you've got one). All I know is that you can claim to have 18 hours rest after you have gone out of hours (?).
Join Date: Feb 2008
Location: Stockport
Age: 84
Posts: 282
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
SlideBustle
You said:
I think you are wrong on this one. I am SLF and so no expert on the topic, by my understanding from earlier posts is that only time with the doors shut counts towards the 900 hours, so in that context the number of nights away from base is irrelevant. If the number of flight legs remains the same, you still need the same number of crews. The saving would come from hotel costs. One night off the stopover at a destination saves more or less one crew-year of hotel costs at that destination.
A single night at LAX could mean that you would be setting off for home at just about the time your body thinks you should be going to bed. On the other hand, when I used to fly regularly to California, I would go out on a Saturday, be happy on local time on Sunday and Monday, but find it hard to stay alert through Tuesday afternoon. The time change had various different effects on other people.
So, shorter stopovers would benefit the company, might be a minor financial disadvantage to crew members, and could have positive or negative effects on crew member efficiency.
You said:
Longhaul crew in fairness if we believe the figures reach 900hours quickly anyway so having single nighstops on LAX, SFO would probably exacerbate that so probably would cost the company more to have crew grounded all the time! They would need more crew!
A single night at LAX could mean that you would be setting off for home at just about the time your body thinks you should be going to bed. On the other hand, when I used to fly regularly to California, I would go out on a Saturday, be happy on local time on Sunday and Monday, but find it hard to stay alert through Tuesday afternoon. The time change had various different effects on other people.
So, shorter stopovers would benefit the company, might be a minor financial disadvantage to crew members, and could have positive or negative effects on crew member efficiency.
Last edited by Dairyground; 19th Dec 2009 at 19:23. Reason: Spelling correction
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Down the airway.
Posts: 689
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Look boys and girls, some of us punters, with or without gold cards, probably now do not really give a flying porcupine what happens to brat attitudes. But please, the next time you want to strike, won't you wait and make sure you down hatboxes from around June to July next year.
That would coincide quite neatly with the football world cup in Johannesburg. If you withdrew your honourable labour services then, some of us who live down here would be eternally grateful and might even come back to fly with you. Just think as well of the impact of such a strike and the entertainment value to be derived from the screams of agony coming from a lot of football fans.
That would coincide quite neatly with the football world cup in Johannesburg. If you withdrew your honourable labour services then, some of us who live down here would be eternally grateful and might even come back to fly with you. Just think as well of the impact of such a strike and the entertainment value to be derived from the screams of agony coming from a lot of football fans.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: LHR
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I'm not one to make a fuss over working harder but nighstops on some of our WW destinations would be extremely tiring!
Reaching your 900 hour quicker will happen if you still get the same amount of MBT at base and they will roster you as they do nowadays. A 4 day LAX trip is total 7 days with days off included. If it goes down to a nightstop, it would be 6 days in total. If BA would roster you as previously and give you a trip after a nightstop LAX, you would reach your 900 hours before you know it.
Reaching your 900 hour quicker will happen if you still get the same amount of MBT at base and they will roster you as they do nowadays. A 4 day LAX trip is total 7 days with days off included. If it goes down to a nightstop, it would be 6 days in total. If BA would roster you as previously and give you a trip after a nightstop LAX, you would reach your 900 hours before you know it.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Netherlands
Age: 58
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Establishing the interests of all parties involved is best not done on an individual level (as this thread so clearly demonstrates). That is also because most people (not excluding yours truly) are used to the positional way of arguing. You even do it with your significant other or children. Think about it.
What is necessary is that a leader stands up on either side who is willing to stop arguing and start listening. Hopefully new voices withing BASSA will start calling for this new leadership...
Only then can you establish the common interests of the crew and the company. It is complicated to explain but everybody has a so called mental model of the world (WW is evil, CC are spoiled, People are out to get me, etc). In group 'hysteria' (pardon the expression) these mental models are played on to make people follow leaders. You can use this for good or for bad. History teaches us that.
Anyways, without getting knee deep in theory, suffice it to say that in order for people to accept a new reality you first need to deconstruct existing convictions (mental models) to make room for new thinking.
Maybe, just maybe, all people here on this forum have exactly the same interest at heart...
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 471
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally posted by romans44
I wish people ( especially people who do not work for the company and can only rely on what the media says) would stop going on about money.
This has nothing to do with money, it has never been about money and it won't be about money....
You know, as much as I do, that we have offered a pay cut and it was turned down
I wish people ( especially people who do not work for the company and can only rely on what the media says) would stop going on about money.
This has nothing to do with money, it has never been about money and it won't be about money....
You know, as much as I do, that we have offered a pay cut and it was turned down
Are you serious? Please tell me that you were only joking!
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Netherlands
Age: 58
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with Romans44. I don't think it really is about money (as I have been trying to explain) at all. In 90% of all work related conflicts where money is named as the cause it turns out to be something else. Most always the culprits are:
I can understand that the cc is p1ssed off because nobody consulted them how to make changes to crew complements. Maybe if they had been they had suggested the changes themselves. Who knows? *
* please note this is just an example. Please don't start arguing the positions again...
- Not feeling appreciated;
- No influence on personal or career development;
I can understand that the cc is p1ssed off because nobody consulted them how to make changes to crew complements. Maybe if they had been they had suggested the changes themselves. Who knows? *
* please note this is just an example. Please don't start arguing the positions again...
Join Date: Apr 2001
Posts: 118
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alexandraa,
Agreed - you will reach your 900 hours quicker. And since full time WW crew are already up to 900 hours per year you'll get the rest of the year off 
There are only so many trips that can be done in year to stay within 900 hours; if you get only one day in (say) LAX you will get the other day at home.
For the record, I prefer 48 hours downroute form the body clock/lifestyle POV but that's purely personal preference.
Apologies for the thread creep.
Reaching your 900 hour quicker will happen if you still get the same amount of MBT at base and they will roster you as they do nowadays.
There are only so many trips that can be done in year to stay within 900 hours; if you get only one day in (say) LAX you will get the other day at home.
For the record, I prefer 48 hours downroute form the body clock/lifestyle POV but that's purely personal preference.
Apologies for the thread creep.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: LHR
Posts: 28
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
There are only so many trips that can be done in year to stay within 900 hours; if you get only one day in (say) LAX you will get the other day at home.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 32
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Money money money
Romans44,
Ok, say it isn't about money (although it is, as BA are trying to run a business...) - what is it really about?
It's about BASSA saying NO NO NO to anything BA have ever tried to negotiate. I believe it all started when BA gave all departments a cut-off date for negotiations. BASSA didn't like this, so it was all NO's from then on. The FACT is that BASSA would NOT negotiate. Full stop. Although BASSA are LYING to their members and the media saying it's the other way round, THAT is the dictatorship.
It's always been 'their way, or no way'. Unfortunately that has not and will not get them anywhere. I cannot wait for the value of this strike debacle to go onto their cost saving target...
Poor Willie Walsh trying to get through to you guys
Ok, say it isn't about money (although it is, as BA are trying to run a business...) - what is it really about?
It's about BASSA saying NO NO NO to anything BA have ever tried to negotiate. I believe it all started when BA gave all departments a cut-off date for negotiations. BASSA didn't like this, so it was all NO's from then on. The FACT is that BASSA would NOT negotiate. Full stop. Although BASSA are LYING to their members and the media saying it's the other way round, THAT is the dictatorship.
It's always been 'their way, or no way'. Unfortunately that has not and will not get them anywhere. I cannot wait for the value of this strike debacle to go onto their cost saving target...
Poor Willie Walsh trying to get through to you guys
Last edited by Lord Daddy Flash; 19th Dec 2009 at 20:09. Reason: spelling
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: London
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Hi SideBustle, I don't consider myself a militant but I am curious to see where you got those figures from.
Is this a galley FM rumour, I think I am pretty much up to date with both the company and the union bulletins but I can honestly say that I have never seen that anywhere.
I believe that anything that we do has to be negotiated with our trade Union, I don't agree with you when u say the company gave us deadlines.
The company made it it impossible for us to negotiate and when they said we give untill, whenever it was, to think about it, it was done fully knowing that we couldn't possibly agree with what they were asking.
I agree with you though, when u say that there is room for improvement on how we are used, however that would need to be negotiating.
I voted yes because I believe in protecting my future and will vote yes again because I don't support dictatorship.
Is this a galley FM rumour, I think I am pretty much up to date with both the company and the union bulletins but I can honestly say that I have never seen that anywhere.
I believe that anything that we do has to be negotiated with our trade Union, I don't agree with you when u say the company gave us deadlines.
The company made it it impossible for us to negotiate and when they said we give untill, whenever it was, to think about it, it was done fully knowing that we couldn't possibly agree with what they were asking.
I agree with you though, when u say that there is room for improvement on how we are used, however that would need to be negotiating.
I voted yes because I believe in protecting my future and will vote yes again because I don't support dictatorship.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 164
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you serious? Please tell me that you were only joking!
We have offered pay cuts but it simply wasn't good enough and if I may say, the reason why that is, is because you can always get money back once bussiness is back but you can't get your T&C once they have gone.
A company that pays 64.000 pounds a month for the top job( not including bonouses) does not look like a company about to callapse.
I am not denying for a second that we are facing financial troubles but I don't thnk that CC should be held responsible.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Netherlands
Age: 58
Posts: 195
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I think we all agree that neither I nor the cabin crew nor the union leaders are experts at balancing the checkbook of a multi-billion pound enterprise with as complex a structure as BA.
If you don't trust BA Management's accountants, maybe you should hire an independent one to explain what is needed. BA Management hired PWC so they are now also mistrusted, but I am sure we could hire Accenture or someone else. Would any of you accept such a step?
By the way: if any of you is working the BA9 Monday, I would love to discuss this in person.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: England
Posts: 114
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Alexandraa, you said the following.
A while ago I made the post below. Although some of it may be difficult to implement, some of it is reasonable and I think grounds to explore to enable a combined fleet.
The first step though is to talk!
I'm not one to make a fuss over working harder but nighstops on some of our WW destinations would be extremely tiring!
Reaching your 900 hour quicker will happen if you still get the same amount of MBT at base and they will roster you as they do nowadays. A 4 day LAX trip is total 7 days with days off included. If it goes down to a nightstop, it would be 6 days in total. If BA would roster you as previously and give you a trip after a nightstop LAX, you would reach your 900 hours before you know it.
Reaching your 900 hour quicker will happen if you still get the same amount of MBT at base and they will roster you as they do nowadays. A 4 day LAX trip is total 7 days with days off included. If it goes down to a nightstop, it would be 6 days in total. If BA would roster you as previously and give you a trip after a nightstop LAX, you would reach your 900 hours before you know it.
A while ago I made the post below. Although some of it may be difficult to implement, some of it is reasonable and I think grounds to explore to enable a combined fleet.
The first step though is to talk!
Well how about this for starters!
Stop the ballot and get around the table to negotiate the following ideas.
Accept that everyone in our company needs to save a lot of money.
Ask for new fleet to be integrated, with current crew.
To achieve this we have to have the same slip patterns, you can’t have half the crew on a night stop with the other half on 2 local nights rest in SFO for example.
Maintain all long range services (over 12.30 hour duty) which involve an 8 hour time change at 2 local nights rest. Give a reduction on all other flights.
This would keep West Coast services inc. PHX/LAS as they are and also protect ALL Far East services. South America, India and MRU would reduce but our services are not daily to most of those,
CPT/JNB trip lengths would decrease, however there is little time change in that part of the world.
Accept the monthly travel payment but negotiate a condition that it is reviewed annually to account for any increase in long range flying. (The downside is that it could also reduce).
Accept the changes to crewing levels.
On Eurofleet negotiate to keep last day finish times and 10 days off per month for existing crew. (New contracts would only have 9).
In return allow short turnarounds/fix links on all services. Remember our hours are governed by scheme/industrial limitations so there is only so much flying we can do. Also the nature of our schedule allows for a lot of night stopping, again helping with lifestyle/work load.
There is some pain in my suggestion, we all have to give a bit.
The benefits for us would be an integrated fleet, current crew being able to move between fleets and main crew looking forward to promotion etc. (Our fleets have growth planned in the medium term, A380 B787 etc. Despite the crewing level changes, promotion opportunities should be available).
We would keep ALL our pay at current levels. Meal allowances would remain unchanged and trip lengths to some of our favourite destinations would be protected.
The company would save on future contracts, (market rate, hourly rate, productivity, increment scales etc). It would save on crewing levels. It would have improved utilisation of aircraft and crew on all fleets.
As an ‘old contract’ leaves the business the company would save again as their replacement would be a lot cheaper to employ.
What ever happens a NEGOTIATION will be required at some stage.
The sooner that happens the sooner we can look forward to our futures rather than staring into the abyss.
Hope this helps.
(I am cabin crew at LHR, these comments are my personal ideas. They do not represent my employer’s view or any other party).
Stop the ballot and get around the table to negotiate the following ideas.
Accept that everyone in our company needs to save a lot of money.
Ask for new fleet to be integrated, with current crew.
To achieve this we have to have the same slip patterns, you can’t have half the crew on a night stop with the other half on 2 local nights rest in SFO for example.
Maintain all long range services (over 12.30 hour duty) which involve an 8 hour time change at 2 local nights rest. Give a reduction on all other flights.
This would keep West Coast services inc. PHX/LAS as they are and also protect ALL Far East services. South America, India and MRU would reduce but our services are not daily to most of those,
CPT/JNB trip lengths would decrease, however there is little time change in that part of the world.
Accept the monthly travel payment but negotiate a condition that it is reviewed annually to account for any increase in long range flying. (The downside is that it could also reduce).
Accept the changes to crewing levels.
On Eurofleet negotiate to keep last day finish times and 10 days off per month for existing crew. (New contracts would only have 9).
In return allow short turnarounds/fix links on all services. Remember our hours are governed by scheme/industrial limitations so there is only so much flying we can do. Also the nature of our schedule allows for a lot of night stopping, again helping with lifestyle/work load.
There is some pain in my suggestion, we all have to give a bit.
The benefits for us would be an integrated fleet, current crew being able to move between fleets and main crew looking forward to promotion etc. (Our fleets have growth planned in the medium term, A380 B787 etc. Despite the crewing level changes, promotion opportunities should be available).
We would keep ALL our pay at current levels. Meal allowances would remain unchanged and trip lengths to some of our favourite destinations would be protected.
The company would save on future contracts, (market rate, hourly rate, productivity, increment scales etc). It would save on crewing levels. It would have improved utilisation of aircraft and crew on all fleets.
As an ‘old contract’ leaves the business the company would save again as their replacement would be a lot cheaper to employ.
What ever happens a NEGOTIATION will be required at some stage.
The sooner that happens the sooner we can look forward to our futures rather than staring into the abyss.
Hope this helps.
(I am cabin crew at LHR, these comments are my personal ideas. They do not represent my employer’s view or any other party).