British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
poto,
I'm still waiting to hear where you got the 35% loss of earnings from. Did you make it up? You cannot talk about things that may happen in the future. You will have to deal with it as and when that happens. Concentrate on the current proposal.
And I'm an onboard manager, which suits me. I don't do offices...
Gg
I'm still waiting to hear where you got the 35% loss of earnings from. Did you make it up? You cannot talk about things that may happen in the future. You will have to deal with it as and when that happens. Concentrate on the current proposal.
And I'm an onboard manager, which suits me. I don't do offices...
Gg
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 386
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
You've completely missed the thrust of my post.
Your initial savings target could have been reached before the 31st of June with very little change to any bottom line. Merely doing away with some ancient old agreements that hardly affect your day to day life or paypacket could have given you enough savings to make the overall impact on your pay/lifestyle relatively small.
AT NO POINT HAS A PAYCUT BEEN TABLED!!
added for info:
With a sensible hourly rate your Post 97 crew would be far less dependent on premium trips.
(and do read SENSIBLE as it's intended). The impact of sickness over your ''premium'' trips on your pay would be vastly reduced and financial planning made a lot easier.
Your initial savings target could have been reached before the 31st of June with very little change to any bottom line. Merely doing away with some ancient old agreements that hardly affect your day to day life or paypacket could have given you enough savings to make the overall impact on your pay/lifestyle relatively small.
AT NO POINT HAS A PAYCUT BEEN TABLED!!
added for info:
With a sensible hourly rate your Post 97 crew would be far less dependent on premium trips.
(and do read SENSIBLE as it's intended). The impact of sickness over your ''premium'' trips on your pay would be vastly reduced and financial planning made a lot easier.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: uk
Age: 46
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
9 days is not ideal?? Too right it is utterly disgusting. 
I have to say i have yet to fly with a LGW crew who want to go back to LGW after being at LHR. I'm slightly confused there.
Some of have said how they miss the crew etc and the fun but certainly not the lack of money and T & C.
I have to say i have yet to fly with a LGW crew who want to go back to LGW after being at LHR. I'm slightly confused there.Some of have said how they miss the crew etc and the fun but certainly not the lack of money and T & C.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Sussex,UK
Posts: 469
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by flying chick
one nightstop on worldwide??? 9 days off a month on Eurofleet? One day more than office workers in healthy environment!!! One in charge on the 767?? Late finish on your last day? 10pm?? Disgusting!! 
Actually BA wanted midnight but the union was the one that come with 10pm which is fine, they had no choice.
So don't you dare tell me as cabin crew that these things are acceptable. If you have them at LGW that is your problem not ours and all the crew who transfered from LGW who are wonderful by the way, are totally up for a good fight too. After the stories I have heard I don't blame them. Bring it on!!!
Actually BA wanted midnight but the union was the one that come with 10pm which is fine, they had no choice. So don't you dare tell me as cabin crew that these things are acceptable. If you have them at LGW that is your problem not ours and all the crew who transfered from LGW who are wonderful by the way, are totally up for a good fight too. After the stories I have heard I don't blame them. Bring it on!!!
The sad thing is, up until now, I've had some sympathy for the crew up at LHR. I know it's not great to have to change your work practices. It was no picnic when SF came in at LGW, but without it, I very much doubt BA LGW would even exist anymore and, hard though this may be for you to believe, not everyone wants to work at LHR. Yep, even some of those secondee's want to come back! You obviously haven't met them yet. Or maybe they think it's easier to keep quiet rather than risk the discussion which will, undoubtedly, follow.
Can you not understand that this is happening, whether you like it or not? You can threaten all you like, but as many, many people have already stated, in this economy, the company are the ones holding the all the cards. BASSA had the chance to minimise the damage, but they failed. It may now be too late. I hope, for everyones sake, it isn't.
But you don't want to hear any of this, do you? You aren't interested unless a post conforms to your idea of what should happen. If it doesn't, it gets filed under anti-crew or crew bashing.
Jsl
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: London
Posts: 276
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I still think if BASSA had negotiated properly in the first place we could have avoided the one night suggestion. It won't include every destination as many destinations are not a daily service. MEX, MRU, PHX and PVG are a few of them that wil be longer than a nightstop.
It's the same with the pay cut and pay freeze. All suggested by BASSA and I can't think about it without getting upset.
BASSA has placed us in this situation and they are to blame for this mess and now you are placing your future in their hands? It's unfortunate that some crew are far too naive to realise it.
It's the same with the pay cut and pay freeze. All suggested by BASSA and I can't think about it without getting upset.
BASSA has placed us in this situation and they are to blame for this mess and now you are placing your future in their hands? It's unfortunate that some crew are far too naive to realise it.
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: uk
Age: 46
Posts: 71
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Money doesn't make you happy. I am the first to admit that. I just want enough to pay my mortgage, food, bills, you know the usual and save some at the end of the month. I am not greedy.
I am willing do Worldwide flights, mixed flying. I am willing to operate with less crew but obviouly the service will never be the same again. I am not willing to have one day less off a month, do fixed links etc. I believe all crew should have the chance to sit at a table, eat and digest something before doing another flight.
I am willing do Worldwide flights, mixed flying. I am willing to operate with less crew but obviouly the service will never be the same again. I am not willing to have one day less off a month, do fixed links etc. I believe all crew should have the chance to sit at a table, eat and digest something before doing another flight.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
FC,
So the only thing you're willing to change to save money is to work with less crew. Would this be LGW crewing levels? Or is that too much work for you?
Mixed flying at LHR at present t&cs would actually increase costs, as far as I'm concerned, so no saving there.
What about the 18 hour rule during disruption? Any willingness there or is that "disgusting" as well?
I'm afraid you will have to change more than what you've said you're willing to change.
Gg
So the only thing you're willing to change to save money is to work with less crew. Would this be LGW crewing levels? Or is that too much work for you?
Mixed flying at LHR at present t&cs would actually increase costs, as far as I'm concerned, so no saving there.
What about the 18 hour rule during disruption? Any willingness there or is that "disgusting" as well?
I'm afraid you will have to change more than what you've said you're willing to change.
Gg
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Shaka Zulu
2 points really.
Firstly. Bill Francsis's proposals were unacceptable even at face value. We could debate the details of that proposal but I fear we would never agree. You may consider the monetary sacrifice to be minimal...we did not. But lets put aside the cash side of things for a moment. Its the operational elements of the proposal that horrified us all. Crewing levels,MBTs, losing 14 double nightstop trips and most of all the disruption agreement. BA want full control of the operation during any disruption. They would retain the right to interpret any situation as disruption, unilaterally. They could call us back to work on our rest days.part time week holidays....any time the dammed please. We could check in for a Hong Kong at 7pm to be told we were not need and to come back the next day for a Miami.....the potential horror stories are endless.
Secondly. This is phase one. Once the company minimised the influence of BASSA they would enforce their next agenda. Don't want to even think what that would be.
With good cause, we do not trust this LT...give them full control...anything is possible.
Now you make think this is just neurotic ramblings yaddah yaddah. I'm not sure what role you play in the company...pilot, cc whatever...This is real. Walsh wants career cabin crew gone.....thats 14000 guys who have got homes and families. One of the reasons I get so bleedin angry on this forum is the complete disregard most posters have for the livelihoods of their cabin crew colleagues.
Glamgirl.....Why do I have to focus on this current proposal. Are you mad? You're asking me to look at the watch while my pockets are picked,car repossesed and made homeless....you're either unbelievably niaive or you've got a photo of Walsh on your mantlepeice
2 points really.
Firstly. Bill Francsis's proposals were unacceptable even at face value. We could debate the details of that proposal but I fear we would never agree. You may consider the monetary sacrifice to be minimal...we did not. But lets put aside the cash side of things for a moment. Its the operational elements of the proposal that horrified us all. Crewing levels,MBTs, losing 14 double nightstop trips and most of all the disruption agreement. BA want full control of the operation during any disruption. They would retain the right to interpret any situation as disruption, unilaterally. They could call us back to work on our rest days.part time week holidays....any time the dammed please. We could check in for a Hong Kong at 7pm to be told we were not need and to come back the next day for a Miami.....the potential horror stories are endless.
Secondly. This is phase one. Once the company minimised the influence of BASSA they would enforce their next agenda. Don't want to even think what that would be.
With good cause, we do not trust this LT...give them full control...anything is possible.
Now you make think this is just neurotic ramblings yaddah yaddah. I'm not sure what role you play in the company...pilot, cc whatever...This is real. Walsh wants career cabin crew gone.....thats 14000 guys who have got homes and families. One of the reasons I get so bleedin angry on this forum is the complete disregard most posters have for the livelihoods of their cabin crew colleagues.
Glamgirl.....Why do I have to focus on this current proposal. Are you mad? You're asking me to look at the watch while my pockets are picked,car repossesed and made homeless....you're either unbelievably niaive or you've got a photo of Walsh on your mantlepeice
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Potopilot,
I will ask you the same question as I asked Flying chick.
What (from the current proposal) are you willing to change?
I'm not naive, by the way, but there is no point speculating about what MIGHT happen in the future whilst watching the company losing millions right now.
Gg
And I don't have a mantel piece.
I will ask you the same question as I asked Flying chick.
What (from the current proposal) are you willing to change?
I'm not naive, by the way, but there is no point speculating about what MIGHT happen in the future whilst watching the company losing millions right now.
Gg
And I don't have a mantel piece.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your proposal is off the table? That's not what I asked...
Let me rephrase it then:
What part of the current BA proposals are you willing to agree to? As in which changes are you willing to live with?
Gg
Let me rephrase it then:
What part of the current BA proposals are you willing to agree to? As in which changes are you willing to live with?
Gg
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Poto,
So I take it you're not willing to change anything in your t&cs?
Let me rephrase again: What in your current t&cs would you be willing to change? Pick anything you like, whether it's been in a proposal or not.
How's that? Better?
Gg
So I take it you're not willing to change anything in your t&cs?
Let me rephrase again: What in your current t&cs would you be willing to change? Pick anything you like, whether it's been in a proposal or not.
How's that? Better?
Gg
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 15
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
If you are asking me Re the proposals that BA tabled 3 weeks ago....thats a bit different. What would I accept....anything on it that didn't differ from our proposal document...you have to realise that BA presented their proposal as an all or nothing document....so you your question is accademic.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Poto,
I'll say it once again: I take it you're not willing to change anything then?
I'm trying to figure out what you as a person would be willing to change in order to save money for the company.
Flying chick did at least answer. I might not agree with what she/he said, but at least my question was answered.
Simple, really.
Gg
I'll say it once again: I take it you're not willing to change anything then?
I'm trying to figure out what you as a person would be willing to change in order to save money for the company.
Flying chick did at least answer. I might not agree with what she/he said, but at least my question was answered.
Simple, really.
Gg
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Poto,
Well if you'd answered my question in the first place this wouldn't have been so lengthy.
You have showed us you have no individual opinion, good for you if that's what you're happy with. May I remind you that Bassa proposed a pay cut the company asked for and by your last reply this means you agree with a pay cut. Well done.
Gg
Well if you'd answered my question in the first place this wouldn't have been so lengthy.
You have showed us you have no individual opinion, good for you if that's what you're happy with. May I remind you that Bassa proposed a pay cut the company asked for and by your last reply this means you agree with a pay cut. Well done.
Gg
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Age: 41
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
This thread and it's arguments never cease to amaze me!
For what it's worth, I don't understand how BASSA will ever win this fight. If BA are so intent to change the T&C's so they are similar to LGW, then how can BASSA ever appose these changes as they have already allowed them to happen at another base?
As an ex-temp, I feel that the amount of crew who have no desire to do that job or be on that aircraft is quite astonishing - I've done trips to Hong Kong, Sydney and New York where, out of 15 crew members, I was the only person interested in doing anything down route, flown with crew that can't be bothered to do anything onboard, saying no to the simplest of requests but because they are senior enough they are also lucky enough to choose a position where they can hide down the back of the aircraft and seemingly get away with it.
I've got a couple of friends that work at LGW and having seen the good times they have on trips, the social side of the crew etc., I would give anything to work at the LGW fleet. Money certainly doesn't buy you happiness but at LHR it buys you a workforce that don't really want to be there.
Of course i'm not speaking for everyone, i've had some great trips and met some great crew, but sadly those that tarnish the bunch seem to be the ones who get their voices heard.
For what it's worth, I don't understand how BASSA will ever win this fight. If BA are so intent to change the T&C's so they are similar to LGW, then how can BASSA ever appose these changes as they have already allowed them to happen at another base?
As an ex-temp, I feel that the amount of crew who have no desire to do that job or be on that aircraft is quite astonishing - I've done trips to Hong Kong, Sydney and New York where, out of 15 crew members, I was the only person interested in doing anything down route, flown with crew that can't be bothered to do anything onboard, saying no to the simplest of requests but because they are senior enough they are also lucky enough to choose a position where they can hide down the back of the aircraft and seemingly get away with it.
I've got a couple of friends that work at LGW and having seen the good times they have on trips, the social side of the crew etc., I would give anything to work at the LGW fleet. Money certainly doesn't buy you happiness but at LHR it buys you a workforce that don't really want to be there.
Of course i'm not speaking for everyone, i've had some great trips and met some great crew, but sadly those that tarnish the bunch seem to be the ones who get their voices heard.