Go Back  PPRuNe Forums > Other Aircrew Forums > Cabin Crew
Reload this Page >

British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations

Wikiposts
Search
Cabin Crew Where professional flight attendants discuss matters that affect our jobs & lives.

British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations

Thread Tools
 
Search this Thread
 
Old 25th Aug 2009, 09:34
  #1361 (permalink)  
Junior trash
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
in my experience of managing the crew on the aircraft, in each set there is both brilliance and mediocrity.
So why would BA want to continue paying high salarys, when in your own words it isnt reflected in crew performance? As Nutjob says, BA proposed no paycuts, BASSA did, and when they did they incorporated an increment freeze that doesnt affect the long servers, only the more junior crew.

New contract LHR crew are still earning very good money for the level of training/skills required. Outside the airlines you'd need pre tax earnings well into the 30,000s to take home what a high pay point new contract crew member does.
Hotel Mode is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2009, 09:53
  #1362 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 864
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Our new crew may start on a lower salary but at present have the option to end up as a 'gold-plated CSD' one day. We'd like them all to still have that to aspire to.
Approximately 60% of the salary bill in IFCE goes to only 25% of the crew, namely the gold-plated CSDs and old contract pursers. Perhaps this has now become untenable in the long term and the aspiration for all to achieve such unsustainable salaries will be one of the casualties of this dispute.
Juan Tugoh is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2009, 12:37
  #1363 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Reading
Posts: 142
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Well Juan, if the HR1 was filed on June 1, with 30 September as the date at which those either taking Voluntary Redundancy or being given Compulsory Redundancy will leave the business, we will see movement very soon.

I suspect that at the meeting on the 27th, Willie will produce the letter that is going to be sent out to those being made redundant, and the criteria being used.

I am disappointed that so many crew seem to have not done any research of their own, and are unaware of what a HR1 is, and what powers an employer has with SOSR.

I feel we have seen BASSA walking the walk......but talking bollocks. We could have done with a little less rhetoric, less bad mouthing the CEO, and less talk of what has occurred in the past, and a lot more fact about SOSR, HR1, and dare I say it, some effective negotiation.

Our Reps have let us down. We have allowed their intransigence and bravado to lose us any control of our destiny. I fear our employer will very shortly impose what it likes, and we will not have a legal method to stop it.

It could have all been so different if a deal had been negotiated by June 30th. How very sad.

Last edited by Andyismyname; 25th Aug 2009 at 14:57.
Andyismyname is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2009, 17:45
  #1364 (permalink)  

PPRuNe Person
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
no-one expects the goal posts to be moved afterwards
Welcome to the real world, you might expect such a thing if you look outside...
overstress is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2009, 18:19
  #1365 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 17
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hopefully this debate will be resolved soon by ACAS
I think you may be confused about what ACAS actually do, it is not their role to resolve anything, that is for BA and BASSA. This isn't my "personal opinion", it's a fact, see the quote below from the ACAS website (www.acas.org.uk)


What is conciliation?
It is a voluntary process of discussion and negotiation by which Acas helps parties in dispute to reach their own agreement. Acas conciliators have no power to impose, or even recommend, settlements.
jackcat is offline  
Old 25th Aug 2009, 22:21
  #1366 (permalink)  
Junior trash
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Hopefully this debate will be resolved soon by ACAS
And anyway, it was BASSA that withdrew from ACAS on the basis that the membership had voted that they wanted no further negotiation beyond BASSAs "very reasonable" offer.
Hotel Mode is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2009, 21:57
  #1367 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 2005
Location: Surrrey
Posts: 44
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The utter nonsense spouted on here is really quite hilarious. Full of speculation without any facts and twaddle which could not be further than the truth.

The representatives are doing a fantastic job they ask people at meetings where they want them to go and even the city analysts are questionning why the proprosals have been disregarded.

There have been positive articles in the media. The telegraph recently for those of you who may have selctively ignored it.

The cabin crew do not have to accept to be shafted in order to prevent redundancies. Nor they need to listen to people from other departments who know nothing and yet still have the temerity to interfere without any facts or knoweldge.
am i bothered is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2009, 22:58
  #1368 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Which City analysts? I've heard a few crew make this claim, yet none can actually provide any evidence to support it. It often goes along with the claim that the City want Walsh and Broughton fired, yet they showed Broughton 99% support at the AGM. I imagine any City analyst worth their salt would be highly numerate and would be able to see that BASSAs proposals didn't add up to anything like the £173M BA required of them, which is the reason BA have disregarded them.

I agree with you that the cabin crew don't have to accept being shafted to avoid redundancies, but you are going to have to deliver the required savings in order to do so. What your solution looks like is anyones guess, given that the extent of consultation by your reps seems to consist of standing in front of the baying mob and saying "Do you want us to say no to more change?".

You don't even have to listen to people from other departments who know nothing. But you'd be well advised to listen to people from other departments who do know something, especially when it's about the thorny subjects of HR1, SOSR and unlawful dismissal, because pretending these things don't exist or couldn't happen to you will only lead to disappointment.
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2009, 23:05
  #1369 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: UK
Age: 54
Posts: 200
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
utter nonsense spouted on here is really quite hilarious
Agreed some of it is

even the city analysts are questionning why the proprosals have been disregarded.
That's their job.

There have been positive articles in the media. The telegraph recently for those of you who may have selctively ignored it.
Please could you provide a link to the story for those of us who have missed it?

The cabin crew do not have to accept to be shafted in order to prevent redundancies.
Depending on your definition of "shafted", IMHO I think there will have to be changes in working practice to mitigate CR. What do you expect?

Nor they need to listen to people from other departments who know nothing and yet still have the temerity to interfere without any facts or knoweldge.
What do you mean by this? IIRC there are many people "from other departments" who have CC as other halves and have evaluated the information they've seen from BASSA and BA.

In all honesty I can't see the point of your post, I don't think it's advanced your case at all. In order to do that you need to refute/disprove/debate facts.

I would like to ask a question to all the CC who describe what's on the table as "insulting", "demeaning", "shafting" and other emotive adjectives.
If BA get 100% of their wish list, and the result is a contract that is "insulting" etc - would you leave BA for another carrier? In other words do you think that with the new Ts and Cs proposed that BA no longer provides the best contract for CC worldwide?

Cheers

BB
Bucking Bronco is offline  
Old 26th Aug 2009, 23:07
  #1370 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
There have been positive articles in the media. The telegraph recently for those of you who may have selctively ignored it.
Can anyone provide a link to said articles, as verification?

..... even the city analysts are questionning why the proprosals have been disregarded.
Which city analysts? When? Where? Just stating it doesn't necessarily make it so!
deeceethree is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2009, 07:18
  #1371 (permalink)  

PPRuNe Person
 
Join Date: Jun 2001
Location: see roster
Posts: 1,268
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Just trying to recap the BASSA position.

BASSA has volunteered a pay cut.

err, that's it, I think.

They also seem to be concentrating on spurious argument, eg Walsh must go, no confidence in the Board, we had to pay £350m in fines, the fuel hedging has cost us money, no-one from other departments has a right to question our agreements, etc etc

Or have I got that wrong?
overstress is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2009, 09:14
  #1372 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Between a rock & a hard place.
Posts: 486
Likes: 0
Received 15 Likes on 7 Posts
You've got that wrong.

It is a misleading generalisation, as generalised as the misleading rumour that pilots have feathered their nests quite nicely with share options and paycuts which will be reversed at the next increment rise.

This thread should be closed. The same misconceptions are recycled page after page, about cabin crew, about pilots, about managers, about BA, that I'm suffering from spells of dizziness.
PC767 is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2009, 09:34
  #1373 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Sandpit
Posts: 366
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
But PC it's a circle that doesn't have to go on and on.

Okay I have a question - because I really can't see where it comes from - where (other than the pay freeze which is genereally accepted by all departments as acceptable at the moment) do BASSA think that Cabin Crew will be losing money from in the BA proposals - I see a lot about working harder but I cannot depsite how often I read it see the line that says there is going to be a pay cut - I only see that in the BASSA proposal!

I appreciate that future earnings are at threat if promotion is only into the new contract - a point that should be negotiated - but surely the rest of it is productivity based, the monthly lump sum in lieu of ETP/BOX/B2B payments (not meal allowances) is optional entirely. If you don't like it don't have it - if you are worried new crew will be doing the lucrative routes then maybe you should work on accepting it at a reasonable level to protect variable pay.

But please tell me where less guranted days off (you can all still only work 900hours FDP and 1200hrs contracted) on EF (10 the current being more than most in the country get) or reduced rest downroute, changes to crew compliments, the CSD rolling up their sleeves, eary day report bought forward etc is going to hit your pocket. It ain't! - It may make you work harder but surely to protect your financial status that is better than BASSA's offer to give all CC a pay cut!

What some fail to get is that most people are on your side so long as you realise that some changes need to be made, the trouble we have is looking at both proposals shows that the BASSA ideas are worse financially for both BA and the Cabin Crew!
Matt101 is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2009, 11:43
  #1374 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Surrey
Posts: 140
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
PC767

You've got that wrong.

It is a misleading generalisation, as generalised as the misleading rumour that pilots have feathered their nests quite nicely with share options and paycuts which will be reversed at the next increment rise.
Excellent to hear. Could you please elaborate as to why the "generalisation" is misleading. I'd really appreciate you detailing the differences in what our union offered and what BA did and point out where BA proposed a paycut (and BASSA didn't). I believe it will be a very valid contribution to the thread and could certainly put the rest of us right in our misinformed views.

I look forward to your reply.
Nutjob is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2009, 12:10
  #1375 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Planet Earth, mostly
Posts: 467
Received 6 Likes on 3 Posts
This is the closest thing to a positive article in the Telegraph that I can find.

Direct talks between Mr Walsh and Mr Woodley would be a re-run of the face-to-face negotiations that narrowly averted a full-blown strike in January 2007. On that occasion the two sides had rowed over BA's demands to cut the number of sick days taken by cabin crew and the different pay scales for workers. The pair thrashed out a solution to these issues and threw a two-year pay deal into the mix.

This time around, the backdrop is what Mr Walsh sees as the worst downturn in aviation history. But analysts have been heartened that the stand-off with the cabin crew has lasted so long that there is no longer any possibility of a strike in the peak holiday season.
Walsh to step in over BA strike talks - Telegraph
etrang is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2009, 16:21
  #1376 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: London
Posts: 115
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
So, I wonder how the meeting went today?

Have the reps kept you all posted?

I think BA is going to have a good go at splitting the vote.

Around 3000 crew are thought to have put in for VR, a similar, if not larger amount are thought to be after part time of some sort or another.

Add those two groups to LGW crew, (who seem to have no interest at all in striking to prevent LHR crew having to work as hard as them) and you have a very sizable chunk of the 14,000 crew who have no interest in striking, in fact, for the VR and part time applicants, it is very much in their interest that a deal does go through.

The people leaving won't care that the remaining crew are working harder, the people getting part time won't care *that* much that they are working a bit harder on the few days they do turn up, because they will be working so few days compared to before.

Once personal interests come in to play, it only goes one way. The way that is best for the individual, no matter how much rabble raising the old-guard attempt!

I see the October rosters are being published in two halves so that the people taking VR are not assigned trips that go over the monthly boundary. (see CC news for details) I guess BA must be pretty damn certain they are going to see increased productivity from the remaining crew; they are hardly going to shell out to pay people off, then have to pay again to replace them.

It looks like BA are very confident they will get their way.
FlexSRS is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2009, 17:32
  #1377 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
If it went in BASSA's favour I'm sure there would be someone over on this forum trumpeting it? Or perhaps WW and TW have agreed something ...... and TW still has to tell BASSA what they will be doing?
deeceethree is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2009, 18:51
  #1378 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Apparently there are more than just today's meeting in the pipeline. We'll just have to wait a bit longer, I suppose.

As an interlude while we're waiting, I thought this would be interesting. It is from another forum (naughty, I know).

"No worries there guys. Our top people were in London to meet with TW either yesterday or Tues (can't remember which!) to spell out to Mr TW exactly where we stand. He (TW) will be left in doubt of the strength of feeling from the BASSA members.
Before anyone starts going on about what happened last time, PLEASE let's move on. That was in the past, it's over, dead & buried. BASSA took steps to ensure that couldn't happen again."

The reason I've posted this is because of some people on here harping on about fines, 97, and other things that are in the past. I thought it was just a bit amusing really, the little snippet above. (My bold)

Gg
Glamgirl is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2009, 18:56
  #1379 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2000
Location: Long Beach
Posts: 349
Likes: 0
Received 2 Likes on 2 Posts
He (TW) will be left in doubt of the strength of feeling from the BASSA members.
Did they really omit the word 'no' there? Or is the error yours GG? If it is BASSA's error, then once again they offer themselves up for ridicule.
deeceethree is offline  
Old 27th Aug 2009, 18:59
  #1380 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
It was the original poster's mistake, which several people pointed out to that person. I forgot to add that bit, sorry!

Gg
Glamgirl is offline  


Contact Us - Archive - Advertising - Cookie Policy - Privacy Statement - Terms of Service

Copyright © 2024 MH Sub I, LLC dba Internet Brands. All rights reserved. Use of this site indicates your consent to the Terms of Use.