British Airways - CC Industrial Relations & Negotiations
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Depends who scoped and contracted with the auditor-the company I expect. Having done such a role in a past life, they will write whatever they believe and not what management tell then. Such is the point if an independent fiancial auditor.
I derailed a takeover as the result of one of my reports in a different industry in the past. The firm who employed us might have benefitted from the takeover, but the numbers did not stack up on the day.
I would be personally offended if you were to suggest any further that PWC are not independent of BA management.
I derailed a takeover as the result of one of my reports in a different industry in the past. The firm who employed us might have benefitted from the takeover, but the numbers did not stack up on the day.
I would be personally offended if you were to suggest any further that PWC are not independent of BA management.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I would be personally offended in the same way that you would be if someone were to suggest to you that BA Cabin Crew were a bunch of unprofessional muppets.
I am not suggesting that, and suggest that you also don't tar all accountants with your uninformed assumptions as well please. It was a career that set me up for life and was the most professional place I worked before I moved on.
I suggest you have a little more respect for others in other professions if you wish those in the wider aviation fraternity to have respect for you as well.
I presently have a great deal of respect for the many professional crew among you, but your attitude towards finance professionald, coupled with an indication that you would not be prepared to listen to any contrary view than your own, does you and your colleagues a great disservice.
If the firm has any professionalism (which PWC does), they will only accept a scope of work that produces a productive result, and not one that spins a story.
I would be interested to hear whether BASSA or CC89 had any involvement (or indeed requested any involvement) in at least scoping the services requested, such that at least this point of contention that you bring up could at least have been nipped in the bud. If not, the question is why.
I am not suggesting that, and suggest that you also don't tar all accountants with your uninformed assumptions as well please. It was a career that set me up for life and was the most professional place I worked before I moved on.
I suggest you have a little more respect for others in other professions if you wish those in the wider aviation fraternity to have respect for you as well.
I presently have a great deal of respect for the many professional crew among you, but your attitude towards finance professionald, coupled with an indication that you would not be prepared to listen to any contrary view than your own, does you and your colleagues a great disservice.
If the firm has any professionalism (which PWC does), they will only accept a scope of work that produces a productive result, and not one that spins a story.
I would be interested to hear whether BASSA or CC89 had any involvement (or indeed requested any involvement) in at least scoping the services requested, such that at least this point of contention that you bring up could at least have been nipped in the bud. If not, the question is why.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
As I said, I am sure that whoever BA choose to pay to audit their accounts, will give value for money for their services. That is what you would expect from a professional business. I would never say that they would be muppets either and I am glad that you feel the same about BASSA, who is the sum of its membership.
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: LGW
Posts: 595
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It has been posted here several times that the union(s) refused to sign the confidentiality agreement regarding the accounts and therefore did not gain access to them.
Some people keep going on about the accounts being "made up" and that they want access to the "real" accounts. I think they need to realise what goes on in the real world.
Litebulbs, it seems to me that you're insinuating that whoever paid for the audit will have some hand in it to juggle the books. I find that rather ridiculous, to be honest, as you're then insinuating the integrity and professionalism of a major auditing company.
Please do explain why you have come to the conclusions you have. In your own words, please, and not what the union has told you. I'm just looking for your opinion, not somebody else's. It's perfectly fine to have an opinion that differs from other's, but you should be able (and willing) to explain why you have the opinions you have. If you can do that, you would gain more respect from others.
Gg
Some people keep going on about the accounts being "made up" and that they want access to the "real" accounts. I think they need to realise what goes on in the real world.
Litebulbs, it seems to me that you're insinuating that whoever paid for the audit will have some hand in it to juggle the books. I find that rather ridiculous, to be honest, as you're then insinuating the integrity and professionalism of a major auditing company.
Please do explain why you have come to the conclusions you have. In your own words, please, and not what the union has told you. I'm just looking for your opinion, not somebody else's. It's perfectly fine to have an opinion that differs from other's, but you should be able (and willing) to explain why you have the opinions you have. If you can do that, you would gain more respect from others.
Gg
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Well, Litebulbs, you actually did say:
That does not square with:
For utter clarity, I never extended the extent of my respect for the BA crews' professionalism to the actions and activities of their union reps and the union employees above them, as a result of the evidence of their actions and the disservice that their memos do to those professional crew (which are all in the public domain).
A commentary on BASSA rep and employees activities is most certainly not any reflection of the employee group whom they represent.
Just to make that point utterly clear.
Hi PWC, have some cash, look at our books and make us look good
I am sure that whoever BA choose to pay to audit their accounts, will give value for money for their services. That is what you would expect from a professional business.
A commentary on BASSA rep and employees activities is most certainly not any reflection of the employee group whom they represent.
Just to make that point utterly clear.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
GG,
It is not about gaining respect from others. I have my "lefty" opinions on anything financial. I did this for a reason, so that you, or anyone else could disregard any of my thoughts on business.
It is all part of the debate. I will always have more faith in my General Secretary's, than a financial house, or the BA Board. That is ingrained into me and I cannot change it. If that offends, then I apologise.
It is not about gaining respect from others. I have my "lefty" opinions on anything financial. I did this for a reason, so that you, or anyone else could disregard any of my thoughts on business.
It is all part of the debate. I will always have more faith in my General Secretary's, than a financial house, or the BA Board. That is ingrained into me and I cannot change it. If that offends, then I apologise.
Join Date: Oct 2001
Location: Gatwick
Posts: 1,980
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Have I ever said that PWC would be anything other than honest?
BASSA are BA staff members, elected by BA staff members. So somewhere, you are suggesting that there may be a problem with BA staff members.
BASSA are BA staff members, elected by BA staff members. So somewhere, you are suggesting that there may be a problem with BA staff members.
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Sorry, I was not aware that Tony Woodley was BA staff as well. His actions have, it seems, become quite important in this particular dispute.
It would always be somewhat fanciful to suggest that every single one of your colleagues is the model employee. As I said, I have utmost respect for the many professional BA crew among you. It is not in the realms of reality to suggest that every single employee is a consumate professional, as the Change for Good-thieving colleague of yours at Gatwick so clearly proves.
I respect your right to have faith in your union, and it absolutely does not offend me one iota for you to disagree with me, disrespect me, or even insult me on any point whatsoever (though that is beyond the remit of this bulletin board). That is your right, and a right in which I deeply believe everyone to have in my politics.
In exercising that right, you must be aware of the ability of other parties to hold you to account for points that you make, which may be libellous. Outright threats and threatening behaviour demonstrated by some of your colleauges on other forums are not, however, appropriate.
Thus, within your grouping in BASSA, to achieve educated and informed decisions - whatever they may be - you need a culture of debate and the ability to raise your points, whatever they are. I am here as I read things that educate me, and it provides a forum for debate. My views change, and I have no interest in "winning" an argument per se.
It is that which appears to me to be sorely lacking, and it escapes me why you would not want that to be the case, as without it, BA is stronger than you.
To suggest that an attach on BASSA is an attack on all members is ludicrous. BA crew are a wide and diverse group with different opinions on a range of issues. Of course, the union presents (ideally) a coherent set of points to achieve the best for the membership, but challenging those points does not give rise to a personal attack on each and every single member. To suggest that is at best, misguided, and at worst, the work of senior BASSA members in a most vile attempt to quell any dissenting view.
I think that goes to the point of what some people such as GG suggest. It is quite different from a management apologist who wishes to have everyone working at minimum wage.
It would always be somewhat fanciful to suggest that every single one of your colleagues is the model employee. As I said, I have utmost respect for the many professional BA crew among you. It is not in the realms of reality to suggest that every single employee is a consumate professional, as the Change for Good-thieving colleague of yours at Gatwick so clearly proves.
I respect your right to have faith in your union, and it absolutely does not offend me one iota for you to disagree with me, disrespect me, or even insult me on any point whatsoever (though that is beyond the remit of this bulletin board). That is your right, and a right in which I deeply believe everyone to have in my politics.
In exercising that right, you must be aware of the ability of other parties to hold you to account for points that you make, which may be libellous. Outright threats and threatening behaviour demonstrated by some of your colleauges on other forums are not, however, appropriate.
Thus, within your grouping in BASSA, to achieve educated and informed decisions - whatever they may be - you need a culture of debate and the ability to raise your points, whatever they are. I am here as I read things that educate me, and it provides a forum for debate. My views change, and I have no interest in "winning" an argument per se.
It is that which appears to me to be sorely lacking, and it escapes me why you would not want that to be the case, as without it, BA is stronger than you.
To suggest that an attach on BASSA is an attack on all members is ludicrous. BA crew are a wide and diverse group with different opinions on a range of issues. Of course, the union presents (ideally) a coherent set of points to achieve the best for the membership, but challenging those points does not give rise to a personal attack on each and every single member. To suggest that is at best, misguided, and at worst, the work of senior BASSA members in a most vile attempt to quell any dissenting view.
I think that goes to the point of what some people such as GG suggest. It is quite different from a management apologist who wishes to have everyone working at minimum wage.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Originally Posted by Litebulbs
I really do not think the moral high ground on honesty, lies with the management team.
Litebulbs,
Well you clearly implied it with:
And then you firmed up on your position of not believing the professional word of an outside agency by stating:
And as for the supposed 'integrity' of BASSA:
and:
It is well known that BASSA are anything but honest with their membership. BASSA itself continually peddles untruths, half-truths and distortions of any and everything that doesn't fit with it's incredibly narrow-minded and selfish views. If you really feel that BASSA
then that membership are in for a big fall!
Have I ever said that PWC would be anything other than honest?
Hi PWC, have some cash, look at our books and make us look good, when we are attacking terms and conditions of a group of our employees. Hmm.
And I am a committed "lefty" anyway, so believing the money men ain't gonna happen!
I really do not think the moral high ground on honesty, lies with the management team.
I am sure that BASSA and PWC are honest bodies, who do the best for the people who pay for their services.
..... is the sum of its membership.
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Nicely contradicting yourself there. You believe PWC are honest but you think BA may have asked them to do something dishonest? So the results of their audit honest, or dishonest? Which one is it?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Are you honestly suggesting that a FTSE-100 company - chaired by the President of the CBI and who's Chair of its Audit Committee is the former group finance director of another two FTSE-100 companies - asked one of the world's 'big four' professional services firms to cook its books?
Suggest you ring the Sun. It'll make a great story.
Suggest you ring the Sun. It'll make a great story.
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Ask OPS!
Posts: 1,078
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Litebulbs,
You are digging a deep hole here that even you can't light!
Is on the same innuendo level as 'Someone slipped the policeman some money and the charge went away'. Hence some peoples annoyance.
The remit of PWC is to provide an unbiased appraisal of the target companies performance, not to 'do the best' for whoever pays them.
Wraps it up neatly by stating that whatever anyone says about the integrity of any financial auditing house you won't believe them due to your political leanings. This after your 'lefty' Government has managed to engineer the UK economy over the last 12 years to be in one of the worst financial positions of any European nation!
The question of honesty is a moot one as, if it gets to the courts for the purposes of serving an injunction then, it will become patently transparent who has followed the correct path.
Unfortunately I don't think that will be on the side of BASSA as the BA legal team will have been ticking off a checklist throughout the whole process and wouldn't take it to court without a solid case.
You are digging a deep hole here that even you can't light!
Hi PWC, have some cash, look at our books and make us look good, when we are attacking terms and conditions of a group of our employees. Hmm.
I am sure that BASSA and PWC are honest bodies, who do the best for the people who pay for their services.
And I am a committed "lefty" anyway, so believing the money men ain't gonna happen!
The question of honesty is a moot one as, if it gets to the courts for the purposes of serving an injunction then, it will become patently transparent who has followed the correct path.
Unfortunately I don't think that will be on the side of BASSA as the BA legal team will have been ticking off a checklist throughout the whole process and wouldn't take it to court without a solid case.