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 3rd Nov 2009, 23:24
  #2561 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
That is why Walsh has had very little success closing the deal with IBERIA. He has failed to cement the alliance with American Airilnes. He presided over a disaster with the opening of T5. He has wasted millions on OpenSkies and whilst cutting the product in Club out of LHR, he starts a bespoke service to JFK out of LCY. You couldn't make it up.
Hello PiB, or whatever you now call yourself. Nice to see you back - you can't disguise your writing style.

Iberia is not closed, as market values of the two airlines have fluctuated wildly, making proportionate holdings in the combined company impossible to set in stone. Add a good dose of Spanish pseudo state intervention through the holding companies...

American is tied up in US approvals. The timescale of such is out of WW's hands.

Openskies - perhaps he has wasted a few million - ill advised timing and L'Avion takeover certainly, but could prove a winner in the long-run. None of us can tell without access to the accounts for the route...

LCY - unequivocal success to date. Read Flyertalk and see what the real passengers say.

T5 - better than many other openings, but mired by poor planning certainly. 3 months in and thereafter, has been a roaring success though - are you going to give him credit for that though? Thought not.
Re-Heat is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2009, 23:29
  #2562 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Dublin
Age: 65
Posts: 158
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Re Heat #2642

I actually think BA's process to resolve the strike will be simple and not involve legal action at all. Firstly, I doubt any strike would be "all out". As with the postal dispute, different groups will be called out on different days, and most of the time there will be no strike action at all. The idea will be to cause maximum disruption at minimum cost of lost earnings to strikers.

So, let's say LHR long haul get called out first for, say 3 days just before Christmas. Only those staff rostered those days need strike. Everyone else turns up for work. The idea would be to call out, say LHR short haul over New Year next.

How could/should BA respond? Well, firstly, I would expect they are already contacting those on their CC employment waiting list and offering them short term work. How many CC wannabes does BA have right now? How many experienced redundant CC from other airlines could it recruit quickly? Enough to keep the bulk of flights in the air I'm assuming. Secondly, as the first strikers return after their 2-3 days of action, they could be met from BA's HR (or "People" as I think BA call it) department and asked to sign a paper agreeing to work according to the new working conditions. If they sign it, it would then be very hard to strike legally again. If they don't sign it, they get told to go home on (say) 90 days unpaid leave, with that period covered by the short-term contract staff recruited above. It would be very hard to sue BA for anything. Nobody has been sacked. Everyone is given the opportunity to work according to the new terms. It even gives the "undecideds" or those who don't want a fight but equally have no desire to undermine their Union, a chance to undertake a "symbolic" strike, and then fall into line at little cost to anyone.

There's really no need for BA to go for the confrontational approach everyone, for different reasons, seems to be relishing here. Ultimately, those remaining at BA have to be able to work together, and show a degre of pleasure in doing so to passengers. Crushing the entire CC community isn't a good play for Walsh long term. Crushing the Union diehards undoubtedly is.
JayPee28bpr is offline  
Old 3rd Nov 2009, 23:47
  #2563 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,608
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
There's really no need for BA to go for the confrontational approach everyone, for different reasons, seems to be relishing here. Ultimately, those remaining at BA have to be able to work together, and show a degre of pleasure in doing so to passengers. Crushing the entire CC community isn't a good play for Walsh long term. Crushing the Union diehards undoubtedly is.
I think that if they followed that route though, it would be far more demoralising as a whole, undermine trust, and leave legal channels open that they were selecting solely on the basis of union membership - that would be a clearly illegal route to take.

I agree, that some utter moron in management has failed to take a non-confrontational approach, where clearly this could have been better communicated. But, you are where you are, and I reckon that management would take the short, sharp route simply in order to minimise long-term revenue erosion and implement their will more quickly.

Pity. As I alluded to, if I were representing a group, I would take a more pragmatic and inclusive approach, addressing points such as
- Bidding
- Minimising faff time in uniform
- Sharing allowances more equally on an hourly rate
etc etc.

BA haven't a hope in hell of creating the most motivated workforce on the planet with BASSA diehards, but they haven't a hope in hell of doing so by creating mistrust and crushing all hope the employees have of representation either...
Re-Heat is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 01:07
  #2564 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: West Yorkshire Zone
Posts: 976
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Further to my other post on here,

BA is not going to last another 10 years the way it is being managed!!

Lord King and Sir Colin were the best men at the time for the job, The Airline was ran by precision, maybe too well at times.

But since them a Miserable Aussie (Who decided he didn't like Concorde when everyone else did) and the current Shamrock man have tried to run the World's favourite Airline.

This situation is becoming an embarrasment for all who are involved, And BA Mgt don't seem to realise Industry eyes are watching very closely.

The fare paying pax will only listen to so much 'Drivel' about BA and may take their money elsewhere?

A Professional Airline will run itself, Just like a Professional Football team.

How many other National Flag carriers ask their C Crew to work on a voluntary basis?

Unbelievable.
BYALPHAINDIA is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 07:44
  #2565 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Northants
Posts: 692
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
A Lurker,

Please do not think that some of the posters here who appear anti-cabin crew are in love with the management - they simply see the reality of the situation and have had it clearly explained to them by their union. I, personally, do not trust the management further than I could spit a medium sized rat but I do trust the process which allowed access to the financial records which showed that BA are in big trouble.

I would also appreciate it if you could expand on your statement that "BA are imposing contractual changes". If you have your contract of employment in front of you would you be so helpful as to cut and paste the sections which BA are changing. If you are able to do this it would bring a lot of clarity to the situation.

You would also seem to be appaled at the lack of support for the CC by some weho would seem to be FD. It has been stated many times by many posters on many forums (fora?) that they will bring the company to it's knees and put it out of business to keep what they currently have. If this happens I will lose my job, my pension, my house and too many other things to list. If you think I will support colleagues who will put me at that risk so that they can maintain a life-style which is so divorecd from market realities as to be unbelievable, you are completely mistaken.
Flap62 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 08:44
  #2566 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You have all missed the point I made in an earlier post, that tomorrow's (Thursday) ruling on the injunction brought by UNITE will be a watershed or landmark decision. It will be closely watched by all employers in the UK, and if BA can get away with imposition many other companies will follow suit. Am employment contract will not be worth the paper it is written on.

It is unusual, normally for financial reasons, for an employee or employees to take out an injunction against an employer. Also BASSA/AMICUS are asking BA NOT to do something.

If the injunction goes against Walsh, whose decision it was to impose, he will have no option but to resign. But of course he wont anymore than he should have over T5.

BA have been involved in illegal activity involving cargo and fuel price fixing, if Walsh is also proved to have acted illegally against his staff through imposition, his position is untenable. Also you cannot manage a large body of staff by confrontation. When asked by Len McCluskey to reconsider his impositon, all that Walsh repeated was "I have the right to manage" several times. He may be pugnacious, but this 'bunker mentality' is going to be his achilles heel. As Winston Churchill once said: "a man who cannot change his mind, is of no use"

He has completely the wrong style for British Airways and should really be running a low cost operation, rather than trying to turn BA into one.
Fume Event is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 08:51
  #2567 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The injunction won't be granted because BA aren't breaking any laws. Walsdeskes have a right to manage the company. BASSA do not. The price fixing activity pre-dates Walshs tenure as CEO, but it doesn't help BASSA to point that out so they don't. Walsh is the ideal man to cut costs because he's not afraid to take rentamob on.
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 08:53
  #2568 (permalink)  
Junior trash
 
Join Date: Nov 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,025
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
You have all missed the point I made in an earlier post, that tomorrow's (Thursday) ruling on the injunction brought by UNITE will be a watershed or landmark decision. It will be closely watched by all employers in the UK, and if BA can get away with imposition many other companies will follow suit. Am employment contract will not be worth the paper it is written on.
I dont think you quite get whats happening tomorrow. UNITE have applied for an injunction against the imposition, if granted all this does is put a temporary stop to the Nov 16th changes (no doubt much to the delight of those who'll have their VR, unpaid leave, and part time revoked). There only has to be a reasonable chance that Unite are right for the injunction to be granted, it is not a landmark/watershed or whatever you think it is. There will then be a full hearing which may or may not find in Unites favour. If they find for Unite BA will then know its contractual and can, if they still wish to make the changes, send out 90 termination of contract letters instead. All legal and above board. If they find against Unite, Unite will be liable for all BAs costs and potential punitive damages from any counter claim BA may choose to bring before/during/after the ballot.

The court are not deciding whether BA can reduce crewing levels, they are just deciding if they are going the right way about it.

Suprised BASSA havent told you this really.
Hotel Mode is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 08:55
  #2569 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Location: Northants
Posts: 692
Likes: 0
Received 1 Like on 1 Post
He has completely the wrong style for British Airways and should really be running a low cost operation, rather than trying to turn BA into one
FE - He's not trying to turn it into a low cost operation. Just one that has a similar cost base to its compeditors rather than twice what theirs is!!
Flap62 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 09:00
  #2570 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I guess Flap 62 you mean a similar cost base to Air France/KLM, Lufthansa, Iberia rather than RyanAir?

Carnage: The fuel and cargo price fixing also post dated Walsh's arrival at BA. So you are telling me that he had no idea what all these managers and one senior director were doing?

I agree with ByAlphaIndia that BA management are turning the company into a laughing stock as far industrial relations go. Why would Iberia want to merge with a company that has become a pariah in the way it treats its staff?

Already forward bookings or click throughs on one large travel website are showing a 13% drop to British Airways, compared to before the dispute escalated. If BA is in a fight for survival, we shall see how much damage Walsh will allow besides the strike itself. He has already demonstrated disgraceful conduct in talking the airline down to push his agenda. How long before it dawns on the shareholders that this prize that Walsh is after, is not a prize worth winning. What we are witnessing in industrial terms, is thermo-nuclear conflict and we all know the reason why such an event has never occurred for real.
Fume Event is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 09:18
  #2571 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Dec 1998
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 368
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Please, although I know CF will, don't assume that granting tomorrow's injunction means anything significant in this dispute. It's simply a temporary stoppage on BA's changes until a full court hearing - if it's granted. So a BASSA "win" tomorrow is little of the sort other than a judge deciding it warrants deeper investigation in the courts. If BASSA "win" that one then it's more significant but, even then, all BA have to do then, as far as I'm aware, is give notice of change to contracts over a 90 day period and these changes can come in anyway.

The long and the short of it is that you'll need to negotiate or strike to avoid them - it's most unlikely a court will tell BA they can't change.

MrB
MrBunker is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 09:20
  #2572 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: uk
Posts: 61
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Thank you Mr.B. The voice of reason, for your eloquent explanation of the situation.

Must go now before I am accused of trolling.
Fume Event is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 09:21
  #2573 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 208
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I agree with ByAlphaIndia that BA management are turning the company into a laughing stock as far industrial relations go. Why would Iberia want to merge with a company that has become a pariah in the way it treats its staff?
Would that be the Iberia who has already had one cabin crew strike in the last month, is likely to have another one in the next month, and who is trying to transfer a load of routes to a new airline company with staff on reduced T&Cs?
Lord Bracken is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 09:34
  #2574 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
The fuel and cargo price fixing also post dated Walsh's arrival at BA. So you are telling me that he had no idea what all these managers and one senior director were doing?
All those managers? You seem to forget there were only half a dozen or so, and I doubt the first thing they did when the new boss arrived was say "Hi, welcome to the company and by the way I'm involved in an illegal price fixing cartel with our competitors.". The other fact that BASSA like to turn a blind eye to is that BA premises were raided by the authorities in order to gather evidence of the price fixing. They could take any documents they wanted, and they did, yet there was no evidence Walsh had been involved in any way and he faces no charges. No doubt you'll tell me next that it's all a cover up.

Already forward bookings or click throughs on one large travel website are showing a 13% drop to British Airways, compared to before the dispute escalated.
Been watching Sky News a bit too much have we? You seem to have omitted the the chap had added that he didn't know if it was due to the strike or BA's prices being too high and availability too low.

How long before it dawns on the shareholders that this prize that Walsh is after, is not a prize worth winning.
If your union has bothered to look at BAs finances in detail you'd see if he doesn't win there'll be no BA in three years time.

What we are witnessing in industrial terms, is thermo-nuclear conflict and we all know the reason why such an event has never occurred for real.
Except when the Americans nuked the Japanese. Coincidentally the Japanese also believed they were in the right and would fight to the death to preserve what was theirs. Sayonara PiB!
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 09:51
  #2575 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Planet Earth, mostly
Posts: 467
Received 6 Likes on 3 Posts
Can someone tell me who wins in a fight to the death?
That would be the fighter who doesn't die.
etrang is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 10:00
  #2576 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 459
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Rumour doing the rounds today is all Pay Increments for all staff are to be history, am sure it will not be good news for all, but if it helps in the long term, guess all staff will be happy enough.

I asked the person who told me, "after CC sorted, will Pensions or Increments be next to sort out" they told me time is too short re cash burn and both will make an early showing after the CC changes.
Joetom is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 10:05
  #2577 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 1999
Location: UK
Posts: 1,691
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
I don't think anyone will be surprised to hear pensions are next in the firing line.
Carnage Matey! is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 10:33
  #2578 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: London
Age: 41
Posts: 42
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
If a trade union cannot reach a collective agreement with the employer, an employer can impose changes other than contractual changes providing 90 days notice is given. Did BA not give the 90 days notice? Or will the court be deliberating over whether one cabin crew removed from an aircraft is a contractual change or not?
I thought this 90 day notice had already been served back in July/August time? So BA is perfectly within it's rights to change the contracts aren't they? This is why i'm a little confused over BASSA's attempts to stop them now. They had the warning, and time to react, surely it's too late?
welshboy1982 is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 10:41
  #2579 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Location: House
Posts: 0
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Waiting for thursdays result have the champagne in the fridge ding ding round one.

1-0 to BASSA
Watersidewonker is offline  
Old 4th Nov 2009, 10:58
  #2580 (permalink)  
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: uk
Posts: 4
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes on 0 Posts
Every penny BA loses as a result of BASSA's strike action, or the threat thereof, is cash which is unavailable to the pension fund. What do you think will happen to BA's ability to fund NAPS if BASSA bleeds the company dry in this futile 'fight to the death'?

In case you haven't noticed, this is not BASSA vs Walsh, this is BASSA vs almost everyone else in BA. What on earth are you thinking?

Before responding, please look up the term 'Pyrrhic victory'.
lostintransit 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.