British Airways - CC Industrial Relations Mk V
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
draglift,
Concering my door problem is that BA has always said not to ever leave doors unmanned!
All of the sudden when BA needs to save money they decide to remove a crew member and say it's fine to leave doors unmanned because passengers would remain seated and know how to operate a door. Wouldn't they have remained seated before and didn't they know how to operate a door before? Isn't that amusing?
I do my job as told but many of us do wonder why BA has changed their mind about leaving doors unmanned when they've been telling us otherwise for many years on.
"More cabin crew on the aircraft means less work and greater promotional prospects"
It means less work but also improved service. Promotional aspects may be important to some and especially on WW where there haven't been any for years but I wouldn't want to be either CSD or Purser and have never applied, or probably never will apply, for promotion.
Concering my door problem is that BA has always said not to ever leave doors unmanned!
All of the sudden when BA needs to save money they decide to remove a crew member and say it's fine to leave doors unmanned because passengers would remain seated and know how to operate a door. Wouldn't they have remained seated before and didn't they know how to operate a door before? Isn't that amusing?
I do my job as told but many of us do wonder why BA has changed their mind about leaving doors unmanned when they've been telling us otherwise for many years on.
"More cabin crew on the aircraft means less work and greater promotional prospects"
It means less work but also improved service. Promotional aspects may be important to some and especially on WW where there haven't been any for years but I wouldn't want to be either CSD or Purser and have never applied, or probably never will apply, for promotion.
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Hants
Posts: 2,295
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
A week and a half ago people were furious over crew and three days ago BA did CDG and GVA with chock-a-block 747 and 777.
Your post infers that people have already started trusting BA again. You don't need to know the exact figures, but how many people do you actually think booked these flights in the time frame you mention i.e. within the seven days between being 'furious with BA' and the flights taking place?
I'd hazard a guess at a handful at the most. People who had booked wouldn't cancel those flights as they would lose all their money!!!
Some CC and BASSA need to get a grip on reality as they are seriously delusional!!!
As for BA not being allowed to go under - get a grip. This governement is seriously short of cash - losing banks would destroy the economy even more - therefore the bail out that happened.
Losing BA would not affect the UK economy. Hell, HMG are allegedly contemplating selling even more of the UKs main ATC provider to raise cash. That has economy, sovereign airspace and security implications... do you honestly think BA is 'unsinkable'?
Someday pass out the Nescafe.
MissM
I'm not clear...Dave 747436 asked: "Are you saying you stay on the aircraft until the legal limit at base"
You replied:
I can't speak for all but as long as you are able to operate your flight according to your collective agreement you'd stay on the aircraft
Can you clarify what you mean by "collective agreement"? Do you mean the Industrial agreement negotiated between BASSA and BA or "Scheme", which lays down what the CAA allows you to legally do and is laid out in the Joint Procedures Manual?....
You replied:
I can't speak for all but as long as you are able to operate your flight according to your collective agreement you'd stay on the aircraft
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: UK
Age: 65
Posts: 138
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Golden Ticket
You said: "Draglift, I see no problems in staff querying a safety matter or something about their way of working. It may mean the reasons for it are much clearer following further explanation."
I do agree with you. But the appropriate way to do this would be within the company and not on a forum open to anybody.
So many cabin crew have been highlighting so many gripes and perceived injustices throught these BA cabin crew threads that they are giving the opinion to the general population that BA cabin crew are just a bunch of whinging moaners when in fact the majority work hard and do a very good job.
MissM. I suspect that BA have decided that if other airlines do not have sufficient cabin crew to man all doors then maybe BA need to rethink their policy to remain competitive. I appreciate your sensible and well reasoned reply to my post.
You said: "Draglift, I see no problems in staff querying a safety matter or something about their way of working. It may mean the reasons for it are much clearer following further explanation."
I do agree with you. But the appropriate way to do this would be within the company and not on a forum open to anybody.
So many cabin crew have been highlighting so many gripes and perceived injustices throught these BA cabin crew threads that they are giving the opinion to the general population that BA cabin crew are just a bunch of whinging moaners when in fact the majority work hard and do a very good job.
MissM. I suspect that BA have decided that if other airlines do not have sufficient cabin crew to man all doors then maybe BA need to rethink their policy to remain competitive. I appreciate your sensible and well reasoned reply to my post.
Last edited by draglift; 26th Dec 2009 at 14:25.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Your post infers that people have already started trusting BA again. You don't need to know the exact figures, but how many people do you actually think booked these flights in the time frame you mention i.e. within the seven days between being 'furious with BA' and the flights taking place?
Do you honestly think BA is unsinkable? No company is safe but I don't think BA will go bankrupt.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Can you clarify what you mean by "collective agreement"? Do you mean the Industrial agreement negotiated between BASSA and BA or "Scheme", which lays down what the CAA allows you to legally do and is laid out in the Joint Procedures Manual
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Age: 53
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM.
OK, one last try but I'm close to giving up - life's too short.
I am a pilot.
I am rostered to agreements that are more restrictive than the absolute legal limits.
"On the day" I will stay with the operation until I reach the legal limit, as long as it is safe to do so.
You are cabin crew (I presume)
You are rostered to agreements that are more restrictive than the absolute legal limits.
"On the day" you will:
a) Stick to your industrial agreements and get off, even though it is legal to continue
or
b) Continue past your industrially agreed limit until you reach the legal limit (as long as it is safe to do so)
(a) or (b)?
Since you bring this up - what do you mean exactly by "out of hours".
Industrial or Legal (scheme)?
OK, one last try but I'm close to giving up - life's too short.
I am a pilot.
I am rostered to agreements that are more restrictive than the absolute legal limits.
"On the day" I will stay with the operation until I reach the legal limit, as long as it is safe to do so.
You are cabin crew (I presume)
You are rostered to agreements that are more restrictive than the absolute legal limits.
"On the day" you will:
a) Stick to your industrial agreements and get off, even though it is legal to continue
or
b) Continue past your industrially agreed limit until you reach the legal limit (as long as it is safe to do so)
(a) or (b)?
There's no point leaving base knowing you're going to have to divert somewhere because crew will be out of hours.
Industrial or Legal (scheme)?
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Age: 53
Posts: 90
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM.
If we continue with this line of argument, you are going to end up having to justify stranding passengers....... or even worse, diverting an aircraft in flight just to avoid exceeding CC industrial agreements, even though the flight could legally continue to its destination.
You're avoiding saying it, but you can't avoid saying it forever.
I don't want to box you into this humiliating corner, I just wish to highlight how frustrating these archaic agreements must be to BA, the incredible cost (and for what?) and how disruptive they are to our passengers.
Items like this are an easy 'give', zero cost to you.
Why don't you suggest to BASSA to table some of these items for negotiation - there might just be a way forward.
I've posted before on the pilots "Scope" agreement (all BA aircraft over 100 seats, out of the UK, must be flown by BA mainline pilots)
A similar agreement for CC would ease your (justified) fears for the future - perhaps it could be bought for the price of some of the current agreements that you would not really miss if they were gone?
If we continue with this line of argument, you are going to end up having to justify stranding passengers....... or even worse, diverting an aircraft in flight just to avoid exceeding CC industrial agreements, even though the flight could legally continue to its destination.
You're avoiding saying it, but you can't avoid saying it forever.
I don't want to box you into this humiliating corner, I just wish to highlight how frustrating these archaic agreements must be to BA, the incredible cost (and for what?) and how disruptive they are to our passengers.
Items like this are an easy 'give', zero cost to you.
Why don't you suggest to BASSA to table some of these items for negotiation - there might just be a way forward.
I've posted before on the pilots "Scope" agreement (all BA aircraft over 100 seats, out of the UK, must be flown by BA mainline pilots)
A similar agreement for CC would ease your (justified) fears for the future - perhaps it could be bought for the price of some of the current agreements that you would not really miss if they were gone?
OK this is beginning to beg the question how many of our Cabin Crew colleagues are really aware that there is such a thing as "scheme" in the Blue book, and do they realise on many occasions they can legally work beyond the hours laid down in their BASSA documents?
I'd have thought working to scheme after report would be a sensible tactical "give" in the current enviroment - I'm sure it can be costed....
I'd have thought working to scheme after report would be a sensible tactical "give" in the current enviroment - I'm sure it can be costed....
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 219
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
On the subject of volume vs yield, short-haul Band 1-3 flights were declassified to a one class EuroTraveller configuration on (I think) 23-24 December to accommodate displaced pax due to cancellations.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
OK, one last try but I'm close to giving up - life's too short.
a) Stick to your industrial agreements and get off, even though it is legal to continue
or
b) Continue past your industrially agreed limit until you reach the legal limit (as long as it is safe to do so)
(a) or (b)?
or
b) Continue past your industrially agreed limit until you reach the legal limit (as long as it is safe to do so)
(a) or (b)?
Do you think that all cabin crew are selfish twats who enjoy doing a diversion and leaving passengers stranded?
The principle is that agreements should be followed. Why otherwise are they there for? I don't agree with everything BASSA says or does. There have been times in the past when my flight has been stuck at LHR banned to leave with one crew down and I have been furious about it. I don't enjoy spending two nights in Prestwick but that's in our agreement. If, or when, it changes I will work to the new rules whether it says to have minimum rest or 23 local nights before we can continue.
Since you bring this up - what do you mean exactly by "out of hours". Industrial or Legal (scheme)?
Having said that we can extend scheme for long-range as long as enough crew rest is given. 3 hrs minimum to extend the scheme limit, usually around 13 to 15 hrs, but we always have to work to the more restrictive agreement. Non long-range limit is 16:15 hrs.
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miss M,
Thanks for clarifying the your answers to people's questions about the Bassa 'mindset'.
The problem you are facing, is that these responses that you give in answer to various situations, represents to most people a very old fashioned and intransigent attitude to their working environment.
It comes across as your loyalty should be to your union, they are the ones to whom you feel responsible, and the company is an entity divorced from your own interests, whose requirements and problems are their own to try and solve themselves. You appear to feel a level of responsibility to the customer, but that is your own professional approach that drives you to care for the customer, not from being a representative of British Airways PLC.
I'm not sure if you appreciate this, but to outsiders, your replies smack of a bygone age approach to employee/employer relations. Your need to work to union limits just simply doesn't register with the vast majority of the population in the 21st century, even those who work for PLCs in the UK. The workforce of the country and of this industry in particular has changed to a flexible, low cost, highly efficient and technology based workforce, in order to compete with the global trading environment, but some parties in BA seem reluctant to recognise this.
I would ask you to step back from your argument, and review your relationship with the company. They are your employer, not your enemy, and they deserve to be respected as such.
Perhaps then you might start to view your posts in the same way as most of us who sit back and read them in open jawed astonishment.
Thanks for clarifying the your answers to people's questions about the Bassa 'mindset'.
The problem you are facing, is that these responses that you give in answer to various situations, represents to most people a very old fashioned and intransigent attitude to their working environment.
It comes across as your loyalty should be to your union, they are the ones to whom you feel responsible, and the company is an entity divorced from your own interests, whose requirements and problems are their own to try and solve themselves. You appear to feel a level of responsibility to the customer, but that is your own professional approach that drives you to care for the customer, not from being a representative of British Airways PLC.
I'm not sure if you appreciate this, but to outsiders, your replies smack of a bygone age approach to employee/employer relations. Your need to work to union limits just simply doesn't register with the vast majority of the population in the 21st century, even those who work for PLCs in the UK. The workforce of the country and of this industry in particular has changed to a flexible, low cost, highly efficient and technology based workforce, in order to compete with the global trading environment, but some parties in BA seem reluctant to recognise this.
I would ask you to step back from your argument, and review your relationship with the company. They are your employer, not your enemy, and they deserve to be respected as such.
Perhaps then you might start to view your posts in the same way as most of us who sit back and read them in open jawed astonishment.
Join Date: Mar 2008
Location: Outside the EU on a small Island
Age: 79
Posts: 529
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
@ midman - nicely put.
And it is becoming clear that for some people their loyalty to "The Union" also supercedes service to the paying customer, which is of course where I came in.
I wonder how MissM would perform as an HSW advisor in Afghanistan?
And it is becoming clear that for some people their loyalty to "The Union" also supercedes service to the paying customer, which is of course where I came in.
I wonder how MissM would perform as an HSW advisor in Afghanistan?
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Jersey, CI
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM: #506
"I never said that people booked their tickets between that specific time frame and if you think that I meant that people are trusting BA again you are way out of line. After reading the newspapers many people would change their bookings because they wanted to make sure they'd get to their destinations". Dead right. My company immediately cancelled 8 round trips (J-class) LHR-LAX and LHR-JFK. We cannot place an confidence in CC not being on strike, so we have gone elsewhere. The world does not revolve around BASSA's omphalos, no matter how much you think it does.
Do you honestly think BA is unsinkable? No, but BASSA and its acolytes seem to think so.
No company is safe but I don't think BA will go bankrupt." Don't kid yourself,MissM. If companies like mine continue to divert their entire travel budgets away from BA to other, more reliable, airlines BA will soon end up in Carey Street and you, MissM, will be queuing up in the rain outside your local Job Centre.
It's a really attractive prospect for you, isn't it?
Do you honestly think BA is unsinkable? No, but BASSA and its acolytes seem to think so.
No company is safe but I don't think BA will go bankrupt." Don't kid yourself,MissM. If companies like mine continue to divert their entire travel budgets away from BA to other, more reliable, airlines BA will soon end up in Carey Street and you, MissM, will be queuing up in the rain outside your local Job Centre.
It's a really attractive prospect for you, isn't it?
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 289
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
TTB,
Thanks, your reply leads me to ask MissM (or similar) a few questions.
1. Would you consider putting the customers' needs ahead of your own interests?
2. Would you consider putting the customers' needs ahead of the union's interests?
3. Would you consider putting the company's needs ahead of the union's?
I genuinely am at a loss to your mindset - answers to these questions might help me, and others, understand your position.
Thanks, your reply leads me to ask MissM (or similar) a few questions.
1. Would you consider putting the customers' needs ahead of your own interests?
2. Would you consider putting the customers' needs ahead of the union's interests?
3. Would you consider putting the company's needs ahead of the union's?
I genuinely am at a loss to your mindset - answers to these questions might help me, and others, understand your position.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: London
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
MissM, I agree that New Fleet is a worry, but first of all BA and the union can ensure that either they make the savings another way - or New Fleet is introduced and why not have some sort of AGREEMENT that routes will be fairly distributed and we will not be starved of work. I know alot of crew do not trust management, but you can't speculate or strike based on speculation.
Bassa rejected New Fleet out of hand, had a few months to talk about alternatives, spent a lot of that time whinging about ''fat cats'' and why we had to make the most savings, why pilots are paid £100m a year, why changes were permenent, started mantra of ''TEMPORARY SOLUTIONS TO TEMPORARY PROBLEMS'' etc etc... then BA offered a few proposals to protect current fleets Travel Payment (yes I hear wht you mean about them taking it, hence why someone earlier suggested including this in our basic!) and also a ''matrix of routes'' was suggested to ensure an even distrubution. Then BA still realised crew didn't like it so offered to recruit new recruits and promote existing and new crew on a new contract but on EF and WW, with just a few amendments to the agreements. Sure, some of the agreements I did not like, but some were more than reasonable and negotiable. BASSA just rejected it and counted around 2000 peoples hands, no to further negotiations.
BA rejected BASSAs proposal around this time, which is another reason why BASSA didn't want to play anymore. Why? BASSA ''claimed'' it saved £170 million, it was actually calculated to be £52m by PWC and BA! Why some crew still think BASSA are whiter than white it baffles me!! Thmpre proposal let's face it only had a few savings in, which hardly made any changes so you could tell it wouldn't save enough. Alot of the savings were temporary.
Then there was a few more rants from BASSA, BASSA walked out of meetings etc... didn't want to listen to presentation, BA was bleeding cash so needed to put an IMMEDIATE plug on it, so to speak, hence the ''imposition''. Which BA believed was noncontractual. WW stated he would consider alternatives to NF, Unite did not want to know, threw toys out of the pram and balloted to destroy the airli... I mean strike! The strike would have been illegal so now they are intending to ballot again.... Time for a reality check.
I agree, we have to be careful as to what is implemented but we have to get rid of this aversion to change so many people have. We are in a global recession, the company is losing around £1m A DAY, other airlines are finding it hard, some are going bust and there are many people willing to do the job on New Fleet, which probably would be better than some of the T&Cs they used to work on anyway. So many crew hate change, but air travel has changed and changed a long time ago, and continues to do so, our T&Cs have not, so that's why BA are after them big time. I agree we should protect our pay as much as possible etc.. but BA has said they are not after our pay, they want us to work harder and introduce a new contract for future crew... is it a reason to strike for especially in these times. Also, consider this; would you rather be out of a job, on the dole, or on New Fleet?? If you applied to any other airline would it be better than New Fleet??
I know alot of what I have stated has been stated many times on this thread but it seems to be forgotten by many people.
Bassa rejected New Fleet out of hand, had a few months to talk about alternatives, spent a lot of that time whinging about ''fat cats'' and why we had to make the most savings, why pilots are paid £100m a year, why changes were permenent, started mantra of ''TEMPORARY SOLUTIONS TO TEMPORARY PROBLEMS'' etc etc... then BA offered a few proposals to protect current fleets Travel Payment (yes I hear wht you mean about them taking it, hence why someone earlier suggested including this in our basic!) and also a ''matrix of routes'' was suggested to ensure an even distrubution. Then BA still realised crew didn't like it so offered to recruit new recruits and promote existing and new crew on a new contract but on EF and WW, with just a few amendments to the agreements. Sure, some of the agreements I did not like, but some were more than reasonable and negotiable. BASSA just rejected it and counted around 2000 peoples hands, no to further negotiations.
BA rejected BASSAs proposal around this time, which is another reason why BASSA didn't want to play anymore. Why? BASSA ''claimed'' it saved £170 million, it was actually calculated to be £52m by PWC and BA! Why some crew still think BASSA are whiter than white it baffles me!! Thmpre proposal let's face it only had a few savings in, which hardly made any changes so you could tell it wouldn't save enough. Alot of the savings were temporary.
Then there was a few more rants from BASSA, BASSA walked out of meetings etc... didn't want to listen to presentation, BA was bleeding cash so needed to put an IMMEDIATE plug on it, so to speak, hence the ''imposition''. Which BA believed was noncontractual. WW stated he would consider alternatives to NF, Unite did not want to know, threw toys out of the pram and balloted to destroy the airli... I mean strike! The strike would have been illegal so now they are intending to ballot again.... Time for a reality check.
I agree, we have to be careful as to what is implemented but we have to get rid of this aversion to change so many people have. We are in a global recession, the company is losing around £1m A DAY, other airlines are finding it hard, some are going bust and there are many people willing to do the job on New Fleet, which probably would be better than some of the T&Cs they used to work on anyway. So many crew hate change, but air travel has changed and changed a long time ago, and continues to do so, our T&Cs have not, so that's why BA are after them big time. I agree we should protect our pay as much as possible etc.. but BA has said they are not after our pay, they want us to work harder and introduce a new contract for future crew... is it a reason to strike for especially in these times. Also, consider this; would you rather be out of a job, on the dole, or on New Fleet?? If you applied to any other airline would it be better than New Fleet??
I know alot of what I have stated has been stated many times on this thread but it seems to be forgotten by many people.
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: Epsom
Age: 65
Posts: 25
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Miss M
Doors 5
Would a simple solution be for a cabin crew member or two to stand by doors 5 whilst the pre flight safety briefing is being shown? You now have 14 crew. 8 to man doors 1,2,3,4 + 2 on the upper deck You presumably have several crew who are not pointing out exits who are working towards the front of the aircraft. If the video is not working and you do a manual demonstration, the person talking could do so from doors 5.
I realise that with half the club seats facing backwards you need 2 extra crew to point out the exits to the rear facing passengers and one at the dront of First where there is no door but still think you have enough crew to position two at doors 5 for a few miniutes, It matters not which cabin they are working in.
I stand to be corrected on the above because I am not crew
Doors 5
Would a simple solution be for a cabin crew member or two to stand by doors 5 whilst the pre flight safety briefing is being shown? You now have 14 crew. 8 to man doors 1,2,3,4 + 2 on the upper deck You presumably have several crew who are not pointing out exits who are working towards the front of the aircraft. If the video is not working and you do a manual demonstration, the person talking could do so from doors 5.
I realise that with half the club seats facing backwards you need 2 extra crew to point out the exits to the rear facing passengers and one at the dront of First where there is no door but still think you have enough crew to position two at doors 5 for a few miniutes, It matters not which cabin they are working in.
I stand to be corrected on the above because I am not crew
Join Date: Nov 2009
Location: London
Posts: 252
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
With regards to the unmanned doors 5 issue it definately is not ideal HOWEVER it is NOT BA making up the rules as they go along compromising safety.... It is true we are trained in SEP and intructed in JPMs that during boarding we should remain by each pair of door and whilst taxiing after landing remain in our seats with harnesses fastened until doors to manual is called but there is some wording in there ''unless performing a safety related duty.'' Also once we have completed cabin and galley secure we should report it to the SCCM who reports to flight crew. We should then take our seats in time for take off, not wait the ding ding call for imminent take off
If you read CHIRP and CAA you will see that BA is still within the regulations. The rules are stand in vicinity of the doors unless completing a safety related task. I think it's also more for boarding aswell as if there was an emergency they would rush for the nearest door which would be in manual meaning they would find a rather lovely drop of a few meters! Obviously it is preferable to be near doors and strapped in for as much as the taxi as possible for our safety and so we are near the doors to operate them in an emergency but as it is a safety related task we do not need to. I do not fly on 747s, however if you feel it is unsafe then really it needs to be fed back to CAA who make these regulations up... not BA who does adhere to them.
Just as an aside, as there is now only 3 crew on LHR 319s and 7 on 767s the rear doors on these aircraft if carrying minimum crew are uncovered during the demo. I personally prefer to go no more than 7 rows in as I can on these aircraft.... I personally would feel uneasy leaving doors 5 up to 15 rows away if I operated 747s but like I said feed it back to the CAA not safety services as then who knows they may change the rules which would mean that BA would need to do a ''reshuffle''of crew distribution onboard.
If you read CHIRP and CAA you will see that BA is still within the regulations. The rules are stand in vicinity of the doors unless completing a safety related task. I think it's also more for boarding aswell as if there was an emergency they would rush for the nearest door which would be in manual meaning they would find a rather lovely drop of a few meters! Obviously it is preferable to be near doors and strapped in for as much as the taxi as possible for our safety and so we are near the doors to operate them in an emergency but as it is a safety related task we do not need to. I do not fly on 747s, however if you feel it is unsafe then really it needs to be fed back to CAA who make these regulations up... not BA who does adhere to them.
Just as an aside, as there is now only 3 crew on LHR 319s and 7 on 767s the rear doors on these aircraft if carrying minimum crew are uncovered during the demo. I personally prefer to go no more than 7 rows in as I can on these aircraft.... I personally would feel uneasy leaving doors 5 up to 15 rows away if I operated 747s but like I said feed it back to the CAA not safety services as then who knows they may change the rules which would mean that BA would need to do a ''reshuffle''of crew distribution onboard.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Jersey, CI
Posts: 60
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
"Am I not?
Doors 5 on 747 refers to 5L and 5R on that aircraft! If you know what that means..."
No, you aren't.
I am just a person who contributes to your wages - sorry, a paying passenger, and no I don't "know what that means", with or without MissM's sarcastic ellipsis.
Doors 5 on 747 refers to 5L and 5R on that aircraft! If you know what that means..."
No, you aren't.
I am just a person who contributes to your wages - sorry, a paying passenger, and no I don't "know what that means", with or without MissM's sarcastic ellipsis.
Join Date: Dec 2009
Location: Canterbury
Posts: 420
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
midman,
I don't feel that my loyalty needs to belong with BASSA. As I have pointed out I don't always agree with what they say or what they do but I won't deny that I work to our agreements because they are in place. If they are re-negotiated I will of course work accordingly. Maybe that could come across as some sort of loyalty, I don't know. At the same time I have a responsibility towards BA. I report for duty when rostered and do my work as I have taught by them.
I have also pointed out that I don't mind to have our agreement re-negotiated as long as it is acceptable.
I think I do every time I come to work.
I could tell you a secret that I gave out hot towels to pax in World Traveller Plus on a few flights. Mum's the word. So, I suppose I would. Apparently I don't always listen to what BASSA says.
If you are talking about disruption and operational agreements. Again, I don't always agree to what they say but I work along with them because they are there. Yet, feel free to re-negotiate them. I don't want to have 2 local nights after a disruption.
I'm not against negotiations and would prefer to see that BA and UNITE came to a solution today. I don't want to strike and I almost dare to say that most crew don't want to strik either. Of course I want BA to make these savings but it has to be under acceptable conditions.
I don't feel that my loyalty needs to belong with BASSA. As I have pointed out I don't always agree with what they say or what they do but I won't deny that I work to our agreements because they are in place. If they are re-negotiated I will of course work accordingly. Maybe that could come across as some sort of loyalty, I don't know. At the same time I have a responsibility towards BA. I report for duty when rostered and do my work as I have taught by them.
I have also pointed out that I don't mind to have our agreement re-negotiated as long as it is acceptable.
1. Would you consider putting the customers' needs ahead of your own interests?
2. Would you consider putting the customers' needs ahead of the union's interests?
If you are talking about disruption and operational agreements. Again, I don't always agree to what they say but I work along with them because they are there. Yet, feel free to re-negotiate them. I don't want to have 2 local nights after a disruption.
3. Would you consider putting the company's needs ahead of the union's?